Surely in the glory days of the Victorian age, politics was more civilized and more elegant than it was today. Why we lost out on a great and glorious age of civility in political discourse, when the politician from a lower-class background with a silver tongue was bashed for such an absurdity and the one who had an illegitimate child was bashed for his paying child support. What a civilized and vanished day those long-vanished times were.
And now for a completely different question, what are your favorite political cartoons?
I recently noted that Mitt Romney's family has a private equity firm named Solamere that has an interest in voting machines. I expressed concern that this ownership is, if nothing else, a clear case of conflict of interest. Would-be public officials would do better to earn public trust by not owning a stake in the very machines needed to tabulate the ballots that get them to public office.
oslo raised some points about how much influence over said voting machines Romney or his family would actually have, noting that his interest probably isn't enough for control over said machines. Noted, but the conflict still (in my opinion) out-weighs the real-world influence he may or may not have.
Some wise man said once: *Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection.*
I wonder why Democratic party leaders, Obama and Clinton was so much against those anti-Muslim film maker? Even here in talk_politics I was blamed for defending those "provocateurs" rights.
Since when "provocateur" supposed to be an offensive epithet toward peaceful film-maker? Why is that? Seems they forgot completely about freedom. They don't understand it, don't need it, don't want it. They hate freedom. [Spoiler (click to open)]I wouldn't defend that Romney is freedom fighter either, but at least he understands this issue. I can't tell that Obama or Hillary does.
In their mind "freedom of speech" is to post pornographic collage with their political opponent faces. Seems like they are "ok" with any libel against republicans, libertarians, tea party and so on. Who said a word against that lie in democratic party? Anyone? Is it because of freedom of speech or what? "Kill the rich" is covered by freedom of speech, but shitty anti-Muslim video is not?
Seems like Obama's administration completely forgot about freedom, the only freedom they respect - their own freedom to lie and rule. More government means more freedom for Obama, less for people. Funny thing is that "democratic" media supposed to fight for freedom, helps them to lie effectively and don't question their decisions and lie at all. You can google "Charles Woods" but only Fox and abcnews have coverage for that. In internet era at least few hours after information become widely available they still failed to report it. Such a liars.
The Ohio Republican Party filed an election complaint Thursday with the Franklin County Board of Elections alleging the Buckeyes for Obama student organization at Ohio State University violated a law that prohibits offering something of value for a person's vote.
Buckeyes for Obama began a series of early vote rallies Oct. 22 that run through Nov. 1. On posters, the events are advertised: "Free Food. Come Together. Make History."
Ohio Republican Chairman Bob Bennett charges that the campaign has an "unlimited" tab with the pizza chain Donatos for the six rallies, being held at the Ohio Union.
Bennett's letter to directors of the bipartisan election board said "it is reasonable to infer that the individuals handing out food, including the Obama for America staffers, were attempting to -- and in fact, may have succeed at -- influencing electors to register to vote and/or cast a ballot. Such conduct is clearly prohibited under Ohio law."