Debate #3

[brownbomber]

Originally Posted by Gorram

Call me cynical:

- we elect a few hundred politicos for a few years but there are millions of government employees who have jobs for life. Who's the government?

- our eyes and ears in most things are the press, who clearly lean far to the left IMHO and will not stop slanting the news till we have all traded our freedoms for safe government jobs.

- what you see at election time is the circuses of "Bread and Circuses"

- I always vote, if only so I can complain.

Try watching Foxnews. As bad or worse than CBC for being partisan. I would like to find sonething between CNN and Fox to suit my own political beliefs.

[Gorram]

No question Fox/Sun have another point of view, but they are a relatively small portion of the media.

Having dated a reporter long ago, I can assure you there are few if any story's that aren't heavily filtered by the personal biases of the individual. Left or right.

Cheers, G.

[HunterDave]

Who is the most unbiased network in the USA for those of us that want objective journalism?

In Canada I watch Global.

[score]

Originally Posted by Rocky7

Yes and no. Yes, to the extent that he had to put to bed the Obama accusations of being a war-monger. No, to the extent that he pointed out Obama has usually been a day late and a dollar short.



Agreed. In the result, he looks like a President and Obama looks like a demagoguish university professor.

Anyway, the main point for us is that Romney will be good for Alberta's economic future and North America's political future. We don't need a Statist winding down what should be the most powerful free democracy on earth.

While I agree with your last statement wholeheartedly, and that is the final analysis, unfortunately those sentiments run contrary to the majority of Canadians and yes, even Albertans. Anti-American thinking is engrained in our society. To me, this is part of the Canadian fabric that is nothing new and is in fact gaining momentum, thanks to many things, a list too long for this discussion. Anti-American ideology/ B.S. equates to Canadian identity because there is no Canadian identity. Like I said before, Obama will go down this time. At least the American people will not be fooled twice. Obama has appeared to be stumbling for quite a while now.

[Rocky7]

Originally Posted by score

To me, this is part of the Canadian fabric that is nothing new and is in fact gaining momentum, thanks to many things, a list too long for this discussion. Anti-American ideology/ B.S. equates to Canadian identity because there is no Canadian identity.

To carry that further, I suggest there is no Canadian identity because we are at least two large cultures - East and West. We have never been of one mind. The North West Territories (the West) did not ask to join Confederation; it was taken by arms and imperial decree. For all those and other reasons, we are and have been a marriage of convenience.

An independent Alberta/West is not only desirable, it is inevitable. Oil and water (no pun intended) will not stay mixed.

At least the American people will not be fooled twice. Obama has appeared to be stumbling for quite a while now.

One would sure hope so. It is odd to me that he stays so high in the polls. It is also instructive that he stands to gain 95%+ of the black vote. Where's the real racism in that demographic?

Romney also has a far better knowledge of Canada, and that can't hurt. His family spent summers in Ontario.

[AndrewM]

Maybe the no identity for Canada is true for your generations. I for one think we have an amazing country and every province brings something special to the table. Maybe you guys need to take a trip across Canada and realize there is more to the country than Alberta.
At the extreme the West is raw material and East is manufacturing. One cannot work without the other unless we rely solely on foreign countries.

I am Canadian!

[chasingtail]

They were both jumping over themselves sucking up to Israel, need that Jewish campaign money I guess. No matter who is president they are going to get sucked into another war in the middle east.

A lot of threats from Obamas supporters about having race riots if he loses. Might be why the government has purchased over a billion rounds of ammo over the last little while. I suggest you don't visit the US in November at least stay away from the urban centers. This could get really interesting.

[Rocky7]

Originally Posted by chasingtail

A lot of threats from Obamas supporters about having race riots if he loses.

No kidding!

I guess they can't believe that a black man can be an idiot.

[score]

Originally Posted by chasingtail

Anyone who has watched all three debates and would still vote for Obama is a complete and utter moron.

Trouble is, there is no shortage of those. Lets just hope that they are not the majority.

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

Maybe the no identity for Canada is true for your generations. I for one think we have an amazing country and every province brings something special to the table. Maybe you guys need to take a trip across Canada and realize there is more to the country than Alberta.
At the extreme the West is raw material and East is manufacturing. One cannot work without the other unless we rely solely on foreign countries.

I am Canadian!

Where were you during the NEP?

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by chasingtail

They were both jumping over themselves sucking up to Israel, need that Jewish campaign money I guess. No matter who is president they are going to get sucked into another war in the middle east.

A lot of threats from Obamas supporters about having race riots if he loses. Might be why the government has purchased over a billion rounds of ammo over the last little while. I suggest you don't visit the US in November at least stay away from the urban centers. This could get really interesting.

And my wife is going to be in Miami on Nov 6 !

I don't think anyone's mind got changed after last evening's 'debate'. One thing I think it did do was affirm some more about each man's character.

[rugatika]

Lots of the right wing talking heads seem to be saying that Obama may have won the debate slightly on points, but his snarky comments, and belittling of Romney may have hurt him with women voters, while Romney seemed much more presidential.

I think the polls will continue to move in Romney's favor.

[score]

Originally Posted by Rocky7

To carry that further, I suggest there is no Canadian identity because we are at least two large cultures - East and West. We have never been of one mind. The North West Territories (the West) did not ask to join Confederation; it was taken by arms and imperial decree. For all those and other reasons, we are and have been a marriage of convenience.

An independent Alberta/West is not only desirable, it is inevitable. Oil and water (no pun intended) will not stay mixed.



One would sure hope so. It is odd to me that he stays so high in the polls. It is also instructive that he stands to gain 95%+ of the black vote. Where's the real racism in that demographic?

Romney also has a far better knowledge of Canada, and that can't hurt. His family spent summers in Ontario.

Agreed. Early in my career I had the pleasure of working for a couple of years with The National Museum in Ottawa with an entire crew of French Canadians. One would have to be blind, deaf and completely unconscious to not have recognized the clear distinction between the thinking of them and us. The differences pretty much encompassed all ways of life and certainly attitudes. Without trying to offend any French within this forum, it was really night and day and they did IMO anyways (without going into specifics and details) have very little, lets just say respect for the West in any way at all. It was very evident that they viewed us as uneducated, uncultured, redneck hicks. For those that think that it is the West and our desires to be independent, I can assure you that those feelings are very mutual. There is very little common ground. In terms of polls, I have really never put much faith in them as they can easily be skewed. As well, I tend to believe that alot of people are undecided up until very close to election time, many making their decision moments prior to scratching their x. I'm not sure but it appears to me that there are many certain blacks that are quite disallusioned by Obama and the ones that did and will vote for him again would, no matter what anyhow. My impression is that he will likely get a large percentage of votes from immigrants and Hispanics. I hope I am right in saying that what I have seen from watching Obama over the last year or so is a man that has lost his edge, is desperate and fumbling around in speeches and responses. At times he has been so stumped and unable to speak that he almost appeared to be impaired. This likely is a result of desperation. He knows he is in trouble and is scrambling. I believe that the American people can see this and the obvious screw ups he has performed at home and abroad that he has lost alot of credibility on the world stage and trust at home. U.S. voters have not missed this and are I think somewhat embarrased. This is very detrimental to a U.S. President.

[Smokey]

Originally Posted by score

Agreed. Early in my career I had the pleasure of working for a couple of years with The National Museum in Ottawa with an entire crew of French Canadians. One would have to be blind, deaf and completely unconscious to not have recognized the clear distinction between the thinking of them and us. The differences pretty much encompassed all ways of life and certainly attitudes. Without trying to offend any French within this forum, it was really night and day and they did IMO anyways (without going into specifics and details) have very little, lets just say respect for the West in any way at all. It was very evident that they viewed us as uneducated, uncultured, redneck hicks. For those that think that it is the West and our desires to be independent, I can assure you that those feelings are very mutual. There is very little common ground. In terms of polls, I have really never put much faith in them as they can easily be skewed. As well, I tend to believe that alot of people are undecided up until very close to election time, many making their decision moments prior to scratching their x. I'm not sure but it appears to me that there are many certain blacks that are quite disallusioned by Obama and the ones that did and will vote for him again would, no matter what anyhow. My impression is that he will likely get a large percentage of votes from immigrants and Hispanics. I hope I am right in saying that what I have seen from watching Obama over the last year or so is a man that has lost his edge, is desperate and fumbling around in speeches and responses. At times he has been so stumped and unable to speak that he almost appeared to be impaired. This likely is a result of desperation. He knows he is in trouble and is scrambling. I believe that the American people can see this and the obvious screw ups he has performed at home and abroad that he has lost alot of credibility on the world stage and trust at home. U.S. voters have not missed this and are I think somewhat embarrased. This is very detrimental to a U.S. President.

I think the stress of the job would cause anyone to loose an edge. I don't blame the guy for golfing as much as he does. My recollection of George Bush before his second term was the same. The gaffs and mumbling that constituted as his press conferences were that of epic proportion. Americans voted for him again.

In the end there is 5-10 percent of true undecided and they decide the election, and there is little separating these two. Ones a liberal and the other is moderate, and they both agree on so many of the same issues. You could see that last night. Romney in my opinion is going to win on that he is a businessman because the central issue is the economy. When he wins there will be very little change in foreign policy, or monetary policy. If the economy turns around in a year or eighteen months it will probably have less to do with Romney and more to do with the present regime. Obama got stuck with two wars and the government was already started the corporate welfare automakers and bank bailouts. Romney may or may not get an improving economy, but he will get the blame if things don't turn around whether that's is justified or not.

[Okotokian]

Man, LOVED it when Obama handed Romney his azz on the 1916 navy comparison. Brilliant retort. Was like Romney was wearing a "kick me" sign. Even if you root for Romney you have to laugh at that one. But then Obama took it too far, got condescending, and came off looking like a jerk. He should have simply stopped at the horses and bayonets comment. That was gold. From there on he hurt himself.

I think Obama won the debate. But Romney's main thrust against him isn't in the Foreign policy arena anyway. They are fairly close together in outlook and Americans don't have it as their number one concern anyway. It's about the Economy. So Obama could win twenty debates about non-economic topics and still concievably lose the election.

[HunterDave]

Latest election polls........pick the one that you choose to believe.......lol!

[Wulfespirit]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Who is the most unbiased network in the USA for those of us that want objective journalism?

In Canada I watch Global.

It seems to me Global (Edmonton anyway) is almost as bad as the CBC in terms of their left wing slant. Sometimes it feels like every piece of news they report is followed up by a huge focus on calls for more regulation, more government, more enforcement, full body armor requirements before being allowed to ride a tricycle, etc...

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Man, LOVED it when Obama handed Romney his azz on the 1916 navy comparison. Brilliant retort. Was like Romney was wearing a "kick me" sign. Even if you root for Romney you have to laugh at that one. But then Obama took it too far, got condescending, and came off looking like a jerk. He should have simply stopped at the horses and bayonets comment. That was gold. From there on he hurt himself.

I think Obama won the debate. But Romney's main thrust against him isn't in the Foreign policy arena anyway. They are fairly close together in outlook and Americans don't have it as their number one concern anyway. It's about the Economy. So Obama could win twenty debates about non-economic topics and still concievably lose the election.

That was a good zinger, and Obama struggled a bit to get it out the way he rehearsed it. BUT then, you could almost see undecided voters cringing as Obama made himself look like a small little man as he continued to childishly explain to Romney what an aircraft carrier and a sub were. What may have been a good zinger that should have been left alone, Obama destroyed. Obama looked like a child in the schoolyard making fun of someone that just got an A+...Romney looked like a president that had thoughtfully considered recommendations from the Navy.

Marines have been calling in to talk shows this morning explaining that they still have bayonet training. But then a president that pronounces "corpsman" as "corpseman" repeatedly, can't be expected to know much about the Navy.

bye bye Barack!

[BGSH]

Obviously Obama will win the election but i would have loved to see Romney win.

[molly]

Is it just me, or does Mr. Romney have only one facial expression??

[Smokey]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Man, LOVED it when Obama handed Romney his azz on the 1916 navy comparison. Brilliant retort. Was like Romney was wearing a "kick me" sign. Even if you root for Romney you have to laugh at that one. But then Obama took it too far, got condescending, and came off looking like a jerk. He should have simply stopped at the horses and bayonets comment. That was gold. From there on he hurt himself.

I think Obama won the debate. But Romney's main thrust against him isn't in the Foreign policy arena anyway. They are fairly close together in outlook and Americans don't have it as their number one concern anyway. It's about the Economy. So Obama could win twenty debates about non-economic topics and still concievably lose the election.

His retort was wicked burn, props to Obama, it basically said I'm the Commander in Chief mofo. Heck, Romney should of given him a fist bump on that comment, cause its a classic. Whoever in Obama staff wrote that talking point should receive a Pulitzer Prize. However according CNN a comment like that don't help him a swing state like North Carolina where the Navy is a big deal...and it may make him look a bit pompous to others. I personally don't care, I like a good burn now and again as long as its not against me. Sounds like he offended some bayonet or army surplus people.

I guess he did not need his teleprompter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2005868.html

[TheClash]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Man, LOVED it when Obama handed Romney his azz on the 1916 navy comparison. Brilliant retort. Was like Romney was wearing a "kick me" sign. Even if you root for Romney you have to laugh at that one. But then Obama took it too far, got condescending, and came off looking like a jerk. He should have simply stopped at the horses and bayonets comment. That was gold. From there on he hurt himself.

I think Obama won the debate. But Romney's main thrust against him isn't in the Foreign policy arena anyway. They are fairly close together in outlook and Americans don't have it as their number one concern anyway. It's about the Economy. So Obama could win twenty debates about non-economic topics and still concievably lose the election.

although horses and bayonets are still very prevalent in the us army..

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/23/ob...ls-fact-check/

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by TheClash

although horses and bayonets are still very prevalent in the us army..

You're confusing the US army with the Canadian Army.

LOL seriously, get your point, but they have little role in strategic deterrence anymore.

And how does Obama's remark "fail fact check"????? He said they have less horses than in 1916. Do your sources indicate that the US Army has MORE horses than in 1916?

[TheClash]

very true. lol.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

You're confusing the US army with the Canadian Army.

LOL seriously, get your point, but they have little role in strategic deterrence anymore.

And how does Obama's remark "fail fact check"????? He said they have less horses than in 1916. Do your sources indicate that the US Army has MORE horses than in 1916?

Whatever the joke, greater minds than Obama disagree with him on the Navy requiring more ships. Once again, O clearly demonstrates that he can deliver a rehearsed line, but has no substance.

http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-b...ntity-problem/

[cooper]

Originally Posted by molly

Is it just me, or does Mr. Romney have only one facial expression??

what kind of expression do you expect from 300 million people breathing each others farts. come to alberta you.ll see the same look . but thats from sniffin gas.

[Gunfighter]

What exactly was the handed his a#$ line are talking about. Be the guy has no clue about his own military commander and chief or not.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by greylynx

Where were you during the NEP?

I was not born yet. My generation is the 25-35 year olds.

[Grain]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Man, LOVED it when Obama handed Romney his azz on the 1916 navy comparison. Brilliant retort. Was like Romney was wearing a "kick me" sign. Even if you root for Romney you have to laugh at that one. But then Obama took it too far, got condescending, and came off looking like a jerk. He should have simply stopped at the horses and bayonets comment. That was gold. From there on he hurt himself.

I think Obama won the debate. But Romney's main thrust against him isn't in the Foreign policy arena anyway. They are fairly close together in outlook and Americans don't have it as their number one concern anyway. It's about the Economy. So Obama could win twenty debates about non-economic topics and still concievably lose the election.

Well said, I agree.
<rant mode on>
I find it hilarious that the most biased folks posting on here have issues with biased media! You want open market, you got it! Surely you don't expect publicly owned media to say something that may hurt their bottom line do you! They have as big an agenda as the politicians, don't try and fault them for playing the game well. You want unbiased media? As in not for profit media (the only true way to get it)? You mean like CBC...PBS... your the same guys slamming them everyday. Pull your heads out of your asses if you think that everything your reading/watching about the election isn't co-ordinated to swing you one way or the other. Unfortunately we don't have a reliable unbiased media option anywhere anymore. Read between the lines and don't drink the kool-aid, EITHER flavor. Go Libertarians!
<rant mode off>

[HunterDave]

So who got the facts right..........and who got them wrong?

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/false-c...-final-debate/