lost highway

I contributed five bucks to a couple of entertainment pundits so I could watch the Bill O'Reilly/ Jon Stewart debate. It was pretty good. Kind of encapsulated several reocurring arguments in this thread about the responsibility of the government vs. individual, social programs vs private ones etc. Ol' Bill actually admitted that we shouldn't have gone to war with Iraq.

Implant chips for welfare mothers, your freedom depends on it. More curiously: What the hell is going to happen when Biden debates Ryan? For my money that is a candidate who comes off like a dumbass, who is actually really smart, debating someone who is known to be smart, and might actually be a dumbass. I'm excited to watch it play out.

Annnnnd Romney starts backing up certain claims made in the debate: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/10/06/162404662/romney-health-care-debate-claim-gets-corrected-by-his-own-staff

I agree that the number can be interpreted in several different ways. I don't see it as a windfall for Obama, it's really a fairly modest growth following a fairly linear trend for the last year. Modestly good news? Sure. Statistically interpretable? Of course. Big fat lie to get elected? You could do better.

That is a rude and detailess rebuttal. Stick your neck out and back your opinion up please. This is the respector edition. You can open a 'play the dozens' edition if you like elsewhere, but it will likely be closed.

I'm not sure it's true, I can't be. But I can imagine how it works. This is the shaping of a narrative, not a series of baseball games. Pacing could be an intentional part of it.

I can't help but wonder if Obama is pacing this thing between the three debates to give it an arc. I know that sounds like a disingenuous idea, but it could be an effective strategy. Ryan versus Biden is going to be fascinating. I have no prediction for how that will play out.

Romney won as far as theater goes. Obama won as far as facts go. The public votes on theater for the most part. Romney had a better show by far.

Interestingly, a quick swing by msnbc, and Foxnews show that based on headlines alone neither biased media source seems to be showing much of a bias as far as who came out on top with the debate. We'll see how much that changes by tomorrow.

That debate was way better than I expected, more substantive. Romney was much better put together than he has appeared for a while. I thought Obama's responses were thoughtful and complete. Nonetheless, Romney's energy when making his point was assertive and confident. I will say that it was interesting to look at their faces while the other was commenting. Obama had this smug smile. Romney kept looking like he was going to cry when Barack was speaking.

Obama is funded by a number of larger financial institutions. I don't deny that may have tempered some of his reform measures, but it doesn't change the fact that the Republican party wants to dismantly a lot of the regulation and consumer protection measures he put in place. Obama is to date, neither for, nor against the pipeline. He wanted more conclusive studies on the potential environmental impact and how it would play out with some of the indigenous folks' reservation that it would run through. I value that kind of careful consideration in my president.

Perhaps because he is in bed with the Koch brothers. But the whole tax cuts for millionaires, fix the deficit by increasing the military thing doesn't stick in your maw?

This looks like the common praise for Romney. It's so weird to see people silently rooting for a candidate they have no passion for. I have yet to see any real defense of Romney, just attacks on Obama. It's like: I like Reagan because he's not Carter, I like David Cameron because he's not Gordon Brown. But what does Romney really mean to do with our country? What about that sounds like a good idea?

I dig it! I'm only hearing one of two vocalists on these tunes so far.

Don't want to talk Fed Tweedling? How about, how does a candidate that has bashed 47% of the country get elected? How should our nation's leaders avoid us pitching in our hat next to Israel for a war with Iran? What do you expect to see in the debates? Does Romney still have pull with the teaparty? What should the Republican party, really be about in the 21st century? I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on any of these things.

Man, I am easy to sidetrack; the U.S. has lower inflation rates, still, than most other countries in the world. Right now Canada and Australia have us beat by .5 percent, along with ten or so others, and countries like Japan and the Ukraine which have deflation (a nasty problem too). Meanwhile countries like China, Germany, France, the UK, Chile and about a hundred others have higher inflation than we do. The Omani Rial is worth two and a half times the U.S. dollar. Would you like to trade economies with Oman?

That's fair. I'm no moderator, it was a suggestion. Maybe not the best one. I guess I'm out of Fed debate in the context of the Presidential Election, but people can discuss what they will- thread relevant or no. That's no conspiracy talk, it's just showing a war hungry jingoist for what he is. That guy's trigger finger is itchy.

Obama isn't looking to put the public option in place on health care, or stop throwing money at Israel either. You could make a thread of everything that won't be relevant to the presidential election. Those issues will matter to people. They won't matter much for the election. Which might deserve mention in this thread..... once. I'm not trying to edit you Sparky, it deserves its own thread. The story won't develop in presidential terms, it will be nationally stagnant and an ongoing talking point for you... forever. A lot of news will come out about the election in the next two months

On a totally other tangent I propose a cease on Federal Reserve discussions in this thread. It is a worthy, and fascinating conversation. I think it could go much further, but it also has nothing to do with the Presidential Election. We have all recognized that neither candidate has made any statement to lead us to believe they have any unusual, or specific plans for changing it. Give it another thread.

The following sentiment is perennial enough (truism even?) to appear cliche: Take the cost of every fucking bomb that was dropped by this country that made men and women with their own hopes and dreams into a meat and rubble stew, now compare it to food stamps, soup kitchens, state appointed attorneys and so on. If you think you're being ripped off by taxes no matter what, then which tax funded effort feels better for you as a human? Which one cost more money for that matter? Now I'll put my bleeding heart soapbox back in my garage.......

Netanyahu says that Iran will have nuclear capabilities by next summer, and that the world needs to act. He also brought up the fact that Iran has denied the holocaust. He then waved the blueprints for Auschwitz. To me, that is in bad taste. The reality of Auschwitz should not be a bargaining chip for a U.S. invasion of Israel. The Iranian distortion of history will not be the deciding factor as to whether or not they will act aggressive to their neighbors. It seems odd, as if both Israel and Iran feel that the holocaust is the main reason Israel should, or should not be attacked. Biza

The same thing that made Social Distortion mind blowing when I was a teen makes them seem silly now. They have some undeniably catchy tunes, but most of their catalog seems ridiculous now. I think Mike Ness looks like a douche through grown up eyes.

That Wilco supports Obama, or that the GOP is making it harder to vote?

I totally agree with Sparky on this. So there.

Scott Walker