Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on October 20, 2012, 03:26:02 PM
-
LOL
DESPERATE!!!!!!
-
LOL
DESPERATE!!!!!!
Following in Reagans footsteps
I like Reagan dont you?
-
Following in Reagans footsteps
I like Reagan dont you?
Iran - like russia - are playing obama for a sucker
-
Following in Reagans footsteps
I like Reagan dont you?
Reagan did this 21/2 weeks before the '84 election?
-
Reagan did this 21/2 weeks before the '84 election?
I was 3 no idea
-
Report: US, Iran to hold one-on-one talks about Tehran's nuclear program
Fox News.Com ^ | October 20, 2012 | Staff Fox News, Breaking News
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:29:48 PM by WmShirerAdmirer
Report: US, Iran to hold one-on-one talks about Tehran's nuclear program
The United States and Iran have reportedly agreed to one-on-one negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program.
The talks -- reported first by The New York Times and based on discussions with Obama administration officials -- come as Iran is believed to be building a nuclear weapon and as a result is under heavy economic sanctions.
Israel is warned that Iran is close to achieving nuclear capability and has pushed for the United State vow to take military action if needed.
State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland said Saturday night she has no information to report as of yet. And the Defense Department referred questions to the White House.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has the last word on whether the firs-ever talks should occur, according to The Times.
Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election.
Election Day is less than three weeks away. And the final debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, on Monday, is about foreign policy.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/20/report-us-iran-to-hold-one-on-one-talks-about-tehran-nuclear-program/#ixzz29suMZ0GU
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
-
a campaign promise he should have followed through with years ago. I agree, it's lame to wait until now. But I don't see how this helps him. The right will fry him over this. Maybe he'll get a few more votes from the portion of his base that he pissed off but I doubt much.
-
White House denies agreement on U.S., Iran nuclear talks (Confusion Reigns)
Politico ^ | 10/20/2012 | JENNIFER EPSTEIN
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:48:39 PM by nhwingut
The Obama administration is denying a report that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks that could be a last-chance opportunity to avoid war over Iran's nuclear program.
Citing senior administration officials, The New York Times reported Sunday that Iranian officials have agreed to negotiations, but not until after the presidential election, so that they know whether they're negotiating with President Obama or Mitt Romney.
But National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor pushed back against the Times's story.
"It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections," he said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
-
probably hurt obama at this point
as much as republicans and neocons will flip out over this, I think you're right. It gives them a lot of fuel to burn. I don't see anything wrong with it but neocons will.
-
Dick Morris predicts an Obama-Iran 'October surprise'
The Washington Times ^ | 10/20/12 | David Eldridge
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:00:54 PM by Evil Slayer
Political guru Dick Morris predicted Saturday that the White House will announce an "October surprise" — a deal with Iran over nuclear inspections before the Nov. 6 election.
Citing an Internet report on WorldNetDaily, a conservative website, Mr. Morris said a deal between the White House and the Iranian regime is in the works to ease sanctions on Iran in return for concessions on the Iranian nuclear program.
Such an agreement, announced before the election, would represent a big foreign policy victory for the president, who has been under pressure from Israel to take a more robust stand against Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The Iranians, Mr. Morris said, may prefer another four years of Mr. Obama to the possibility of a Mitt Romney presidency.
"I think they feel that Romney would assist Israel in attacking them," Mr. Morris said.
"The Iranians have a real history of intervening in U.S. elections," Mr. Morris said in an appearance Saturday on Fox News. "Bear in mind that in 1980, they did not release the hostages until after the election because they wanted to defeat [President Carter]."
Mr. Morris, a political commentator and author, worked as a pollster and campaign adviser to former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
-
Dick Morris predicts an Obama-Iran 'October surprise'
The Washington Times ^ | 10/20/12 | David Eldridge
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:00:54 PM by Evil Slayer
Political guru Dick Morris predicted Saturday that the White House will announce an "October surprise" — a deal with Iran over nuclear inspections before the Nov. 6 election.
Citing an Internet report on WorldNetDaily, a conservative website, Mr. Morris said a deal between the White House and the Iranian regime is in the works to ease sanctions on Iran in return for concessions on the Iranian nuclear program.
Such an agreement, announced before the election, would represent a big foreign policy victory for the president, who has been under pressure from Israel to take a more robust stand against Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The Iranians, Mr. Morris said, may prefer another four years of Mr. Obama to the possibility of a Mitt Romney presidency.
"I think they feel that Romney would assist Israel in attacking them," Mr. Morris said.
"The Iranians have a real history of intervening in U.S. elections," Mr. Morris said in an appearance Saturday on Fox News. "Bear in mind that in 1980, they did not release the hostages until after the election because they wanted to defeat [President Carter]."
Mr. Morris, a political commentator and author, worked as a pollster and campaign adviser to former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
this is just for the purpose of raising expectations. No deal will be made and certainly not even possible before the election.
-
actually this might pull the anti-war voters out of their sadness and get them to the polls for Obama. They know Romney with his train of neocon advisors wouldn't follow through with anything brought about by talks. I don't see how anyone could trust Obama on this anymore, but that might be the purpose of this and could work i guess.
-
actually this might pull the anti-war voters out of their sadness and get them to the polls for Obama. They know Romney with his train of neocon advisors wouldn't follow through with anything brought about by talks. I don't see how anyone could trust Obama on this anymore, but that might be the purpose of this and could work i guess.
Hugo - Jill Stein. Look her up. ;D
-
Hugo - Jill Stein. Look her up. ;D
ok, and?
-
ok, and?
A lot of pissed off libs are voting for her
-
A lot of pissed off libs are voting for her
If that's true you should have no problem showing the green party is up in polling from previous elections. Is it?
-
If that's true you should have no problem showing the green party is up in polling from previous elections. Is it?
Dont know - all i know is NYC has nothing at all for either Rob-me or o-THUG
-
Dont know - all i know is NYC has nothing at all for either Rob-me or o-THUG
if you don't know why bring it up? ::)
-
if you don't know why bring it up? ::)
Because she was arrested a the debate and hear a few people voting for her ovr O-94er
-
Because she was arrested a the debate and hear a few people voting for her ovr O-94er
The green party always gets some votes. They always get a little drama too. They actually got more play with Nader than I bet they are now. I doubt they have more votes now than they had in previous years. In the Nader years he got regular media coverage. Nobody even knows who this chick is without stunts like this.
-
The green party always gets some votes. They always get a little drama too. They actually got more play with Nader than I bet they are now. I doubt they have more votes now than they had in previous years.
I'm seeing a lot of lover for her on facebook
-
They should have had at least one debate where they included the top two cadidates beyond Obama and Romeny, but both of these fuckhole parties are so scared of how pissed off the people are, there is no coverage of the other candidates at all, their names don't even show up in the polling like they have in the past. Dems and republicans want to make sure it stays just that.
-
They should have had at least one debate where they included the top two cadidates beyond Obama and Romeny, but both of these fuckhole parties are so scared of how pissed off the people are, there is no coverage of the other candidates at all, their names don't even show up in the polling like they have in the past. Dems and republicans want to make sure it stays just that.
AGREED!
Hugo - i agree w gary johnson on almost everything. Hlwever - he cant oust obama. I hate obama so much i would have to be shot dead to not vote for romney at this point since romney can pust OTHUG - johndon cant
-
Skip to comments.
What Happened to the October Surprise? (Who knows what dirt Gloria Allred is digging?)
Pajamas Media ^ | 10/20/2012 | Roger Kimball
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:53:03 PM by SeekAndFind
Every now and then this past Spring and Summer, someone would bring up the specter of an “October Surprise.” There we’d be in the last weeks of the election cycle and bang! out would come some startling revelation about Mitt Romney. Maybe he sacrificed that dog he carried on the roof of his car in some hitherto unknown religious ceremony. Maybe, as was revealed about George Bush early in November 2000, he was caught driving suspiciously slowly after a few too many beers. Who knows?
But as the weeks and months have worn on talk of an October Surprise seems to have subsided.
Until today.
By one of those cosmic conjunctions the sage Carl Jung would doubtless make a lot of, I had not one but two encounters with the idea of an October surprise. The first was while chatting with a politically mature friend this morning. I pointed out that Obama’s campaign seemed to be visibly disintegrating by the day. He acknowledged the remarkable sea change in the fortunes of the campaigns and even allowed that my long-standing prediction that Romney would win (and win big [1]!) might after all turn out to be correct. “But,” he added, “if things look really bad for Obama going into the final week or so, they will think of something to spring.”
Spring what, exactly?
That of course remains to be seen, but it was was just an hour or two later that my friend sent me a link from The Daily Caller [2], based on a Tweet from the Drudge Report, speculating that Gloria Allred “will soon ‘make a move’ to affect the presidential election.” It was Ms. Allred, recall, who dug up news of Herman Cain’s amatory indiscretion, a revelation that pushed him out of the Presidential race last Spring, just as it was Ms. Allred who discovered and publicized the news that Meg Whitman, then running for Governor of California, had an illegal immigrant housekeeper in her past. Bye, bye, Meg!
Who knows what sordid stories Gloria Allred has been attempting to conjure? She remained coy. “I have no comment at this time,” she said. “I don’t discuss meetings with potential clients.” Well, well. How… discreet of her. Maybe she’s been re-reading Conan Doyle’s A Study in Scarlet hoping to find a Romney connection to the grisly Mormons recounted in that early Sherlock Holmes caper.
Who knows what dirt Gloria Allred is running her hands through. I suspect that neither Mitt Romney nor Paul Ryan provides a profitable hunting ground for scandal, but who knows? Maybe Paul Ryan was mean to a high school chum? Maybe Mitt Romney forgot to take out the trash? Whatever Gloria Allred comes up with, I’d wager it won’t be anymore scandalous than Bardwell v Pickwick.
Which is not to say that Team Obama — with or without the collaboration of a surrogate like la Allred — won’t spring an October Surprise of some sort. My friend thought, and I am inclined to agree, that if a surprise is sprung, it will not revolve around any foibles Messrs. Romney or Ryan may exhibit. Nor will it, at this late stage, be likely to have anything to do with the economy. No, the most likely scenario is a foreign adventure of some sort — and something more dramatic than another drone attack. Maybe the administration will suddenly discover some plausible culprits for the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his three colleagues in Libya. Maybe Obama will decide to bomb or invade Syria. Or maybe Iran will be the recipient of what the administration a year or so back was calling “kinetic activity.” Who knows?
If Romney’s momentum stalls — which I doubt, but if it does — nothing will happen. But if after Monday’s debate there is further disintegration of our Potemkin President and Ohio and Pennsylvania (to say nothing of New Hampshire, Colorado, Nevada, and Pennsylvania) edge further into the Romney camp, then watch out. The game is up for Obama.
It’s up, that is, short of a deus ex machina in the shape of some manufactured surprise, be it in late October or early November (when many October surprises seem to happen). When I ask myself what an effective surprise might be, I confess I am stumped. I would have said that things had gone too far, that Obama’s record, foreign as well as domestic, was such an unrelieved litany of failure that competent, dynamic, and ostentatiously decent men like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would just sail into the White House.
That, in fact, is what I’ve thought would happen for months. I am all the more confident about it now. I freely confess, however, that my experience of Alinskyite treachery is minimal. I continue to believe that Mitt Romney will win, but I think my friend is right that Team Obama will go to virtually any lengths to seize the election. I am trying to think low. I just hope that I am thinking low enough to account for the Chicago, you-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-I-bring-a-gun [3] tactics that Obama has bragged about pursuing. He means to win, I have no doubt about that. As of this writing, however, I believe that the United States has not yet descended to full banana-republic. Elections are not that easy to corrupt, at least on the scale necessary to throw a presidential election.
Don’t get me wrong: I’d put nothing past the Obama administration. The question is, what can they put past us? Not enough to win, I think. Let’s see if I’m right.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from Roger’s Rules: http://pjmedia.com/rogerkimball
URL to article: http://pjmedia.com/rogerkimball/2012/10/20/what-happened-to-the-october-surprise/
URLs in this post:
[1] win big: http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/no-one-should-be-fooled-by-the-myth-of-obama-8139229.html
[2] a link from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/19/gloria-allred-mum-on-drudge-october-surprise-speculation/
[3] you-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-I-bring-a-gun: http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/10/obama-flashback-if-they-bring-knife-fight-we-bring-gun
-
They should have had at least one debate where they included the top two cadidates beyond Obama and Romeny, but both of these fuckhole parties are so scared of how pissed off the people are, there is no coverage of the other candidates at all, their names don't even show up in the polling like they have in the past. Dems and republicans want to make sure it stays just that.
Agreed. As someone said in another thread, if our votes could actually change the system, we probably wouldn't be allowed to vote. :D
-
Dick Morris predicts an Obama-Iran 'October surprise'
The Washington Times ^ | 10/20/12 | David Eldridge
Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:00:54 PM by Evil Slayer
Political guru Dick Morris predicted Saturday that the White House will announce an "October surprise" — a deal with Iran over nuclear inspections before the Nov. 6 election.
Citing an Internet report on WorldNetDaily, a conservative website, Mr. Morris said a deal between the White House and the Iranian regime is in the works to ease sanctions on Iran in return for concessions on the Iranian nuclear program.
Such an agreement, announced before the election, would represent a big foreign policy victory for the president, who has been under pressure from Israel to take a more robust stand against Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The Iranians, Mr. Morris said, may prefer another four years of Mr. Obama to the possibility of a Mitt Romney presidency.
"I think they feel that Romney would assist Israel in attacking them," Mr. Morris said.
"The Iranians have a real history of intervening in U.S. elections," Mr. Morris said in an appearance Saturday on Fox News. "Bear in mind that in 1980, they did not release the hostages until after the election because they wanted to defeat [President Carter]."
Mr. Morris, a political commentator and author, worked as a pollster and campaign adviser to former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
It would take away a Romney talking point in their Monday foreign policy debate - to leak this shit 5 minutes before the sunday morning talk shows.
Obama at debates "I've said I'll be meeting with iran to solve this problem in the coming weeks"...
It'll take away the romney point that obama isn't doing anything. He's opening talks. Kinda like the way Obama took away the amnesty/DREAM thing and make Rubio irrelevant in about 3 minutes with his bullshit exec order on amnesty.
He's removing this weapon from romney's spank bank, 1 day before the foreign policy debate - and he's finally looking proactive, on SOMETHING.
-
It would take away a Romney talking point in their Monday foreign policy debate - to leak this shit 5 minutes before the sunday morning talk shows.
Obama at debates "I've said I'll be meeting with iran to solve this problem in the coming weeks"...
It'll take away the romney point that obama isn't doing anything. He's opening talks. Kinda like the way Obama took away the amnesty/DREAM thing and make Rubio irrelevant in about 3 minutes with his bullshit exec order on amnesty.
He's removing this weapon from romney's spank bank, 1 day before the foreign policy debate - and he's finally looking proactive, on SOMETHING.
nope, the argument will be that Obama is negotiating with terrorists. They hit him hard on this point for the 08 election, in the next days they're really going to lay it on.
-
nope, the argument will be that Obama is negotiating with terrorists. They hit him hard on this point for the 08 election, in the next days they're really going to lay it on.
I think Obama would point out the list of US presidents (I'm pretty sure every one in recent memory has negotiated with terrorists- Bush2 negotiated with kadaffi, reagan sold weapons to terrorists to get hostages freed, or something like that?) who have done it.
I think romney would not be naive enough to say 'we don't negotiate with terrorists' - Obama would quickly embarass him with a list of great presidents who have done it - and obama would look like the grownup.
-
nope, the argument will be that Obama is negotiating with terrorists. They hit him hard on this point for the 08 election, in the next days they're really going to lay it on.
you are right - that would be the argument of republican pundits. Rush would say it. Hannity and ann coulter, etc.
But logical people know you DO have to negotiate with terrorists. It's funny - we negotiate oil prices with these terror states all the time ;) But when we try to deal with their weapons programs with talks, it's caving.
We negotiated with USSR for decades as they threatened to nuke the shit out of us.