GiHadOrange

I thought lines like "those liberals" in a slurring manner is used when there is a perception that these so called liberals don't do anything when there should be done actually something, at least in the perception by those who call someone liberal.

e.g. as in: Those liberals don't do enough against illegal immigration.

I know in America is everything little bit different, as we had the discussion before what is a socialist in America and what is a socialist in the rest of the world. Similar difference exist when it comes to liberals in America and what defines a liberal in the rest of the world.

Calling those American "liberals" socialists fits better IMHO.

Liberals can also stay for a small government concept, socialist never.

The Republicans have little or no compassion or caring for anyone exempt them and their way of life. Money will be spent by the Republicans, but it will be only for the benefit of them and the richer portions of American society.

If you equate Republicans with conservatives, then there is no contest, conservatives consistently donate more time and money to helping the needy. Liberals by definition believe it is the government's job to help everyone. Basically, to spend someone else's money to help, not their own. That isn't very compassionate or caring.

Can we stick to the line to call these kind of liberals socialist, socialist by definition and not liberals by definition?

Scarborough: "Keep Talking About Binders And Mitt Romney Will Win In A Landslide"

http://www.realclear..._landslide.html

That one and Big Bird.

Might be funny and entertaining for Obama fans, but hardly anyhow good enough to convince an undecided voter.

Unfortunately I was travelling during the last debate, but I've seen snippets of it here and there. However, today I finally saw Romney's "Act of Terror" howler, which must have surely cost some debate prepper their job.

The one who should be losing her job is Candy Crowley. She ended up having to walk back her huge gaffe and admit that Mitt Romney had his facts correct.

(video edited out)

Nah, not necessary. I have seen moderators who are far worse and would not admit mistakes.

Actually, Thaksin may have a pretty decent chance of winning this suit. While few would deny that he funded the protests, I suspect that they would have a hard time tracing the money back to him personally. At best, they might find some bag-men who went to Dubai & returned with suitcases full of money. However, that would probably be circumstantial evidence at best, as anyone who started saying anything that was too incriminating would probably be 'Sae Danged'.

Also, if my understanding of Thai defamation law is correct, he doesn't have to prove that what was said about him was false. He just has to show that it damaged his reputation. When it comes to Thai defamation law, the true is no defence... which is probably why Thaksin loves to use it!

I doubt that Abhisit and Co. could anyhow prove their allegations. So Thaksin will probably win.

Are your sure with your understanding of the Thai defamation law (true is no defence) or is that something your read on Thaivisa a while ago?

well, i have some doubts and looks like there is a lack of evidence to support these claims. so it is nothing more than a conspiracy theory.

For me, one of the issues which jangled my bells was the drilling for oil issue, where Romney emphasized several times that he would allow easy access to any areas - to drillers. I forget his exact words, but it sounded like there were no off-limits areas, not national parks, not arctic regions, not offshore. Granted, many of those who think like I do (being v. careful about drilling) are already in the Obama camp. Yet, that one issue may be the decider for some waffling voters.

Obama stressed, several times, his keen interest in getting much happening with alternative energy resources. Romney gave a nod to wind energy briefly, but also mentioned the importance of nuclear, which is a red flag issue for many.

Whats wrong from becoming independent from oil imports from outside North America?

Do tree huggers believe it is greener and cleaner when the oil comes from South America or the middle east?

If he is pro nuclear it is just a sign that he is sane.

The second debate in one picture.

The betting sites are raising Obama's odds about 2.5 percent after the debate.

Not a bad night's work for the President.

I cannot open the picture, there is an error message.

Is it another attempt to create a meme like it was tried with Big Bird?

I am wondering if that helps to convince any undecided voters or rather turn them away.

Of course the economic is more important.

Looks like Obama could not disprove the claim that he is a socialist.

Unfortunately the American right's definition of 'socialist' bears absolutely no resemblance to the definition used in the rest of the world.

By any measure in any other western democracy, the Democrats - and Obama- would be a right-of-centre party.

But the USA isn't the "rest of the world" it is the USA and over there, the Democrats are not a right-of-center party, they are on the Left. As popular as Obama might be in the "rest of the world" it doesn't matter one iota. I guarantee voters in other western democracies do not look to how popular their politicians are with Americans before voting for them.

His point was that Americans throw around the word socialist but have no real idea what it means.

Actually you could also claim the Americans have a fine sense what socialist ideas really mean.

I genuinely wasn't trying to get into the 'if only the rest of the world got a choice in this'. It is indeed a US election for US citizens, and you are right very few voters care about what others think.

That wasn't my point. All i was saying is that on a western democratic poltical spectrum, the Democrats would be centre-right. Sure, American's consider them the party of the 'left', but everything is relative.

And so is the term "socialist" very relative and doesn't have necessary to mean that someone is "left".

You are right - both of them are on the right side of that political spectrum you mentioned. But in the perception of the Americans who trust much more Romney than Obama in economical issues there seems to be a lot of them thinking Obama is somehow a "socialist".

I know its more complicated, but we can keep it simple, because it wouldn't matter for our American friends how the rest of the world thinks about what makes one to a "socialists."

I liked the last question which came right after Romney reminded us again that the POTUS is a "socialist" who has no clue how economic works.:

ROMNEY: Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.

CROWLEY: Governor Romney, I want to introduce you to Barry Green, because he’s going to have the last question to you first?

ROMNEY: Barry? Where is Barry?

QUESTION: Hi, Governor. I think this is a tough question. To each of you. What do you believe is the biggest misperception that the American people have about you as a man and a candidate? Using specific examples, can you take this opportunity to debunk that misperception and set us straight?

...

IMHO Obama failed to handle this. The perception or misperception of him as a socialist is still there.

Obviously you haven't seen The Wall Mart people (google them in images).

Sorry but I think anyone who pay to see people riot is a bit daft.

Take his advice, google: People of Walmart.

It will more likely look like a John Waters film than a real riot, but i can understand that a quite a few people would not understand why to pay for a John Waters film or even watch something like that.

John Waters the guy famous for brown stripes and a 300 pound Transvestite? That John Waters. You want me to watch Pink Flamingo?

Yes.

Now google: people of walmart.

And rethink why some people might be willing to pay to see them rioting.

It's really true. When a side is complaining about moderation, you know that is always the LOSING side.

Well they certainly lost on that question. However, now Candy Crowly is admitting that she and Obama were wrong and Romney was right. If a moderator is going to do "fact" checking during the middle of a debate, they better have their facts straight.

Fair enough.

Does that mean she didn't got upset after someone complained?

The rioting of Wall-Mart People, now there's something I'd pay to see!

Did you like the 2011 riots in London then?

Obviously you haven't seen The Wall Mart people (google them in images).

Sorry but I think anyone who pay to see people riot is a bit daft.

Take his advice, google: People of Walmart.

It will more likely look like a John Waters film than a real riot, but i can understand that a quite a few people would not understand why to pay for a John Waters film or even watch something like that.

^ I agree, the Libya card is a very minor issue in this campaign, despite Republican attempts to blow it up. Americans have come to expect screw ups abroad, such as er...Iraq.

no its most certainly not ( now ) !!

http://www.dailymail...-Watergate.html

Then there's 'fast & furious' or the many leaks coming out of the White house which have jeopardized U.S Navy Seals and the security interests of her allies. There are many Watergates surrounding the Obama administration, yet the press seems reluctant in the extreme to follow them up, indeed it appears to do the opposite.

But you got a lot of talks about Big Birds in the media. Isn't that not enough?

Isn't the economy the most important thing right now?

Of course the economic is more important.

Looks like Obama could not disprove the claim that he is a socialist.

Obama targeted women and Ohio and he achieved his goal of shoring up their support. Romney was weak on his women issues responses iin respect to the pay equity issue (Ledbetter), contraception and his nonsensical comment about women in his cabinet.

Romney should have said, "I'm interested to hear the President explain why women in his own administration are paid less than the men"

In the woman issue i was more impressed by Romney than by Obama. The Potus had just some anecdotes about his single parent mother to offer, meanwhile Romney came up with some figures and statistics, next to this cabinet story.

I just spotted this, adding credence to my comment that the girl would be in as much danger in the UK as Pakistan due to the large number of undesirables the UK has let in.

http://www.telegraph...K-hospital.html

Two well-wishers posing as relatives have been stopped by police from visiting Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl shot in the head by the Taliban who has been flown to the UK for specialist medical care.

Must be the EDL trying to bump her off I guess.

From the end of the article:

The attack has succeeded in uniting Pakistan in a wave of condemnation. Authorities have offered a reward of £70,000 for the capture of the gunmen.

Hundreds of vigils and demonstrations have been held as Pakistan prays for her recovery.

At least the mentioned it, but it would never made the headline and considered worth a lengthly and detailed report.

It would probably offend people if you say that Pakistani are good, kind and friendly people. That will not be selected for you to read. maybe done in order to make easier to defend drone bombings in Pakistan to the public in the west.

this was news 5 days ago. but of course according to some ignorant haters such thing never happen.

Fatwa For Taliban’s Attack On Child Education Campaigner Malala Yousufzai

Lahore: More than 50 Ulema and religious scholars belonging to Sunni Ittehad Council (SIT), a conglomerate of religious parties of Barelvi school of thought , issued a fatwa (religious decree), dubbing Taliban’s attack on child education campaigner Malala Yousufzai un-Islamic. ...

http://awamtv.com/ne...alala-yousufzai

So what repercussions are attached to this fatwa? When a fatwa was issued against Salman Rushdie for writing something some Islamic scholars didn't like he had to go into hiding for over a decade on pain of death. I don't see any bounty put on the heads of the Taliban for this attempted murder. Therein lies the difference.

The difference is what becomes BIG NEWS in the west and what not. A Fatwa for someone who is loved by the west issued by some Imam who has in reality little influence in the community is blown up to big news and described as now anyone who wears a turban would be now ready to kill that person.

But if the ummah speaks out against terrorists, it isn't worth to make some news and so the ignorant claim that would never happen.

The MSM are very selective with their news - isn't that also one of your observations?

Thats why here some questions by the ignorant are popping up why - the Muslims would never do something against it. But the opposite is true. Many Muslim from the moderate and even ultra religious ones are against violence and don't support that kind of terror.

So now Pakistan and the Pakistani people stand fully behind this young girl in an amazing act of solidarity it doesn't make the news in the west.

It even goes so far that someone feel offended if their own prejudice and assumption don't met with reality. Here its allowed to bash Pakistan and the Muslims, but not to praise them.

Hallo haters, FYI: that girl likes Pakistan. It is her homeland. I guess she doesn't even think about to request asylum in the UK.

She is just there because she can get a better medical treatment and all that is paid for her by the Pakistani government.

Many ask where are the voices speaking out against these extremist groups. What happened to this young girl should help those asking to understand the relative silence.

the silence might be a result of getting silenced.

Some people don't want let you to know or to hear what would disprove your assumptions.

this was news 5 days ago. but of course according to some ignorant haters such thing never happen.

Fatwa For Taliban’s Attack On Child Education Campaigner Malala Yousufzai

Lahore: More than 50 Ulema and religious scholars belonging to Sunni Ittehad Council (SIT), a conglomerate of religious parties of Barelvi school of thought , issued a fatwa (religious decree), dubbing Taliban’s attack on child education campaigner Malala Yousufzai un-Islamic. ...

http://awamtv.com/news/fatwa-for-talibans-attack-on-child-education-campaigner-malala-yousufzai

Hopefully they'll let her stay in Britain

Why?

This is Pakistan's moral issue and it is the responsibility of the Pakistani government and people to address the situation.

Christians are presecuted on a daily basis in Pakistan, with it being a normal state of affairs to accuse Christians of blasphemy and all manner of assorted crimes. Yet, none of the Imams say anything and no muslims take to the streets of London, accomopanied by their infidel enablers to voice their concerns. No one is giving refuge to Christians.

I don't know what it has to do with Christians and muslim protests in the streets of London.

The girl in question got last year a so called National Youth Peace Prize, given to her by the Government of Pakistan. here with the then Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani.

The prize is now even named after her.

I thought it was 5,280 feet in a mile?

There come the problems. As for the feets there are also different miles.

And i cannot be sure what kind of mile some newspaper article or a random forum dude is using, same goes for the feets.

Its a little bit different than looking at the instruments in a cockpit or if i know that a pilot is speaking.

And didn't failed some NASA mission recently for because different systems where used?

Scientists and engineers will tell you metric is the way to go.

good luck to them.

[media]