Political Irony

9 Comments

1. TJ wrote:

   I appreciate the second to last panel. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read a Politifact article about a Republican where there is just the smallest sliver of truth and it’s rated half-true and then Obama gets the same rating because of one little thing that they judge to be false.

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 7:40 am | Permalink
2. PatriotSGT wrote:

   OK, now i’m confused, again. Last night after the 3rd debate I began to think I should support Obama. My wife who has been telling me to vote Obama because he gives stuff to the people and she didn’t really know that much about Romney and theorized he was too rich to understand regular America, told me Romney’s going to win and we shouldn’t vote for Obama.
   I asked her why and she said all Obama is doing is attacking Romneys plan, but she hasn’t heard over the last 3 debates what his own plan for the next four years is. She said in her simple way he’s all talk and no plan.
   Now you have to understand my wife is a hispanic immigrant who’s been here 25 years. She concentrates on her work, her children and our house. She doesn’t spend much time listening or even trying to understand politics. She picks up on how people say things more then what, because english is her 2nd language and its also more cultural for her to do so. Believe me, when we argue it has way more to do with how I say something then what i said.
   So, net gain in my household is zip, nada for either candidate, we just flipped. 1 for Obama (me) and one for Romneys(my wife).

   Who knows what will happen on election day.

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 10:15 am | Permalink
3. Iron Knee wrote:

   Sheesh. Obama spent the first debate not attacking Romney but talking about what he would do, and everyone condemned him for it. So now he changes strategy and attacks Romney, like everyone wants him to do, and your wife decides to vote for Romney because of it?

   You don’t have to guess what Obama would do, you can look at what he has already done. Your wife is a hispanic immigrant, so I presume that immigration is an important topic for her. Obama supports the DREAM act. When Republicans in Congress blocked it, Obama “signed a directive that implemented its key provision – allowing young people brought into the country without authorization as children to avoid deportation if they graduate high school or join the military“. Romney’s position? He is against the DREAM act, supports “self-deportation”, and likes Arizona’s controversial immigration statute that targets hispanics. In the first debate, they argued about just this.

   Is your wife living proof that Romney can just say anything, even bald-faced lies, and not only get away with it, but win support? Is all that is important to her is that Romney is a good salesman, even when he is selling a load of crap?

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 11:14 am | Permalink
4. Jeff wrote:

   I think that Romney played a very clever game in this last debate. Here’s my rundown of the theory.

   http://delvrme.blogspot.com/2012/10/is-this-what-happened-last-night.html

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Permalink
5. PATRIOTSGT wrote:

   Jeff – Those thoughts crossed my mind as well while I was watching the debate.

   IK – I here ya, believe me. She did not like either opponent attacking the other, she wanted to hear the plans. Her biggest issues are the economy and jjobs, education and immigration and that might not be the correct order depending on what day it is.

   With jobs, she is one of those small business people who has been effected by unemployment and lack of capital in the middle class. She runs a daycare, works for herself and has had trouble keeping vacancies filled and finding quality clients. She has a degree in early childhood education and has forthe last 10 years or so been registered in the state as a top level provider. She’s probably been to more trainings and workshops the any provider in the state because she enjoys her work and relishes learning all can. She is not fond of the increase in regulation and the extra paperwork she now has which I’ve talked about before. She also has more fee’s to pay and doesn’t like that either.

   On education she believes that people should have the right to direct their education tax dollars where they feel it can do the most good. By that i mean if the taxpayer wants to pay for a charter or independent school vs contributing to public they should be allowed. We took our kids out of public school after 3 years because she didn’t like how they were teaching. We pay for independent schools and pay taxes for public schools. She tried after 10 years to enroll our daughter into kindergarten at the school near where she works, the school said no because our primary residence is in a different school district. We have three properties in the school district she waned her to attend and pay plenty of real estate tax, which part goes to education but the school still said no a rule is a rule. She was very dissatisfied and we enrolled the child in independent school instead.

   On immigration she liked Bush’s immigration reform proposal and though it was a step in the right direction. She is in favor of the Dream act, but against illegal immigration. She had to wait on a list for 5 years to get here and now some of her family can’t even get on a list. She feels the “Dreamers” will butt to e front of the line and if amnesty is granted to any others none of her family could ever get here. She thinks the illegals should go home and wait in line like she did and her family is doing.

   She is complex, but tends to view things from the bottom up. I guess Romney appealed to her with his school choices, stance on immigration and that he is a business person, like herseelf and might understand how to ge us working better then Obama. She was raised Roman Catholic like many hispanics but is in favor of same sex unions and even has a 2 mom family and their childchild in her daycare. She is against abortions unless it’s for the life of the mother.

   She may yet change her mind a will probably wait unitl the last minute to decide.

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm | Permalink
6. Loray wrote:

   I really enjoyed this string of comments – you each have made some dynamic points!

   TJ: Ain’t it the truth?? I hear ya.

   Patriotsgt: Kudos for your recognizizing the balance achieved from the unbalancing. You have a shot, though, as Iron Knee set it out pretty plainly, with a clear rationale and spot-on interpretation at the end. Take that shot.
   It’s not your wife’s failing. It’s the human condition to WANT to believe in what we are being sold. Mitt gets away with this BS, as he exploits the natural tendency for people to WANT to see the good in others. To have that belief undermined makes us feel foolish, or naive, at the least, for having fallen for it – and none of us enjoys wearing that hat.
   Aside, please reassure her that there are PLENTY of people, here – millions – with English as their FIRST language, who have been rendered incapable of sifting out the truth from the lies, as the stories (and story-tellers) have been THAT convincing, all the while, playing to the politics of FEAR.
   And they drank the Kool Aid.

   Iron Knee: Don’t know how you do it, but you do it consistently and well. You lay out your take, exposing your leaning, yet do so without creating animosity or inviting attack. You maintain the highroad while questioning the low one. And you even make us grin.
   Thanks. It’s an art.
   Did’ja ever think of running? (said tongue in cheek, of course – you’re needed, here) But, just sayin’ . . .

   Jeff: I think your run-down was on the mark. Not rocket science, yet your analysis was crisp and rational, and most likely exactly the plan. Nice job.
   I’d love your take on the beads of sweat and the brittle demi-smile that flashed on again, off again. This was not the tanned leading man of the past two debates. This was one who spent the days leading up to this debate, literally sweating it out. This was a bully – playing defense – albeit somewhat insipidly. He punted. Fortunately, the media-that-is-not-Fox picked up on exactly what you did, and blasted him.
   I had to LOL after the debate, when James Carville remarked that ” . . .one came to attack, and the other one came to AGREE.”
   On the other hand, had to shudder when John Kerry, in all seriousness, commented, “I was stunned – Mitt Romney really SCARES me.” He followed up, explaining that ” . . . .the Romney/Ryan ticket is the WEAKEST presidential candidacy in history – a one-term governor and a Congressman who’s been dealing with budget.” He added, “Neither of them has ever had to make foreign policy decision.”

   The proverbial canary in the mine?
   The scary part is in what Kerry DIDN’T say.

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Permalink
7. jonah wrote:

   Jeff, interesting thoughts. The only flaw in romney’s plan is that he doesn’t know what the conservatives who voted him as the republican nominee will do now. Will they see him as the flip-flopper he is and not vote guaranteeing an Obama win and then vote for a more conservative candidate in 4 years or do they hate Obama enough that they’ll vote anyway? My guess is that a small percentage of conservatives may lose whatever enthusiasm they gained from the 1st debate and they will not vote.

   Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Permalink
8. Loray wrote:

   Jonah: You may have just nailed it with your guess. This was the one possibility that no one has talked about – and which could save the Union.

   Let’s hope!

   Thursday, October 25, 2012 at 10:59 am | Permalink
9. Devin wrote:

   Hello, I enjoy reading through your post. I like to write a little comment to support you.

   Sunday, October 28, 2012 at 7:45 pm | Permalink