Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
Lots of binder talk and memes today.
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
The internet was busy today
- Thread starter Mark K 2
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Wow, I didn't even notice that there was any fuss over Romney's phrasing. So innocuous was the phrase to me, so forgettable was it IMO, that the first thing I thought of when I saw this pic was "Romney is married to his work? Well, I guess that makes about as much sense as these meme pictures ever do." Even after looking up the "backstory" for this picture I don't see anything wrong with the quote. Though only because of Romney's appearance, not because of its content, this picture is almost funny IMO.
Though not as funny as the veritable laugh riot that was the Obama/Candy tag-team gaffe about the President denouncing the 9/11/2012 embassy incident as an "act of terror" explicitly on 9/12/2012, before flying off to Vegas. I had to admit, when they teamed up on Romney with that blatant falsehood and told him to "read the transcript" to "prove" himself incorrect, I was rofling. :bwahaha: :rofl:
I don't like how Romney's tie is askew in that picture, which is why I'm not a fan of that tie knot in general.
Though not as funny as the veritable laugh riot that was the Obama/Candy tag-team gaffe about the President denouncing the 9/11/2012 embassy incident as an "act of terror" explicitly on 9/12/2012, before flying off to Vegas. I had to admit, when they teamed up on Romney with that blatant falsehood and told him to "read the transcript" to "prove" himself incorrect, I was rofling. :bwahaha: :rofl:
I don't like how Romney's tie is askew in that picture, which is why I'm not a fan of that tie knot in general.
Ya....and now the Democratic party has arrange a conferance call with the women's group in Massachusetts who provided the Binder of women, who claim that Romney never requested it???Then why was it sent? Whether he personally requested it, or he had a staff member request it, or if just showed up on his desk....he hired a lot of women and that's what counts.
Why do politicians want to knit-pick these insignificant details...when most of the details are being done by staff members and not the candidate themselves, and it may or may not have been the candidates idea in the first place?
Why don't they debate the issues factually and not use off the cuff statements to imply that the other is lying or being deceitful.....We already know that politicians will lie to get their way, or to extracate themselves from a sticky situation....Lets stop nibbling aournd the edges and take a bite of the real issues that people are concerned about.
Personally, I don't think either candidate should be elected... The American voter is always stuck with the two least qualified candidates who point at the other and claim he is not qualified because he parts his hair on the wrong side????:angry:
...Rich
Why do politicians want to knit-pick these insignificant details...when most of the details are being done by staff members and not the candidate themselves, and it may or may not have been the candidates idea in the first place?
Why don't they debate the issues factually and not use off the cuff statements to imply that the other is lying or being deceitful.....We already know that politicians will lie to get their way, or to extracate themselves from a sticky situation....Lets stop nibbling aournd the edges and take a bite of the real issues that people are concerned about.
Personally, I don't think either candidate should be elected... The American voter is always stuck with the two least qualified candidates who point at the other and claim he is not qualified because he parts his hair on the wrong side????:angry:
...Rich
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,884
- Reaction score
- 70
Well, if Romney loses....Barry gets to elect 2-3 Supreme Court Justices in the next 4 years. That joke will last longer than I will live....and it won't be so funny IMO.
A point that is lost nearly all of the electorate, I'm afraid. This is actually one of the most important implications of this election. A Supreme Court of Obama's choosing could make profound changes in the U.S. I just pray that everyone knows who they are voting for and the reasons that candidate best supports their interests.
Oh, and on-topic (sorry Mark):
I didn't think anything of the statement, either. Has nobody in the democratic party ever been involved in a recruitment process for a business or agency? He mentioned a mundane managerial request and it gets made into a national issue or joke? Would you say that a manager of any type is wrong if given a recruitment list full of white men and asks for a more diversified choice? That's silly. I still fail to see the issue with a typical recruitment process, especially in a bureaucratic setting, the most p.c. of all environments.
And what other medium was he supposed to get them in that would have been more flattering (as I suppose the "binder" is the part of the joke I'm not getting)? How else would anyone have expected him to have received the information he requested? A report in a binder seems pretty typical to me. Perhaps he should have just requested a printout of the names of women and had the list piled on his desk. Then he could have said, "I had a pile of women on my desk."
Can our politicians just talk about the issues and their records on things that can actually be considered issues?
I didn't think anything of the statement, either. Has nobody in the democratic party ever been involved in a recruitment process for a business or agency? He mentioned a mundane managerial request and it gets made into a national issue or joke? Would you say that a manager of any type is wrong if given a recruitment list full of white men and asks for a more diversified choice? That's silly. I still fail to see the issue with a typical recruitment process, especially in a bureaucratic setting, the most p.c. of all environments.
And what other medium was he supposed to get them in that would have been more flattering (as I suppose the "binder" is the part of the joke I'm not getting)? How else would anyone have expected him to have received the information he requested? A report in a binder seems pretty typical to me. Perhaps he should have just requested a printout of the names of women and had the list piled on his desk. Then he could have said, "I had a pile of women on my desk."
Can our politicians just talk about the issues and their records on things that can actually be considered issues?
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
What he said and/or the way he said it sure has hit amazon.com. I also notice that Staples. Yeah, THAT Staples. Has a 30% off sale on binders this week.
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
I only have one statment. Watching bama. He was itching in his pants, to butt in. I saw him as rude. Not the forceful on target, leader the media portrayed.
When Mitt had something to say he stood up and was very composed and quiet. Until his chance to interject. The moderator kept cutting Mitt off.
Bama ratled on and you could tell the moderator was not nuetral. The loudest clapping that started was reported to be 1st whats her name.
The short clap for Mitt was stiffled very quikly. I truly believe this debate was put together for OB to putt Mitt on the defensive.
Just my take on it. I did go into it open minded. This debate was not moderated nuetral...Too many points of intrest for me to explain my position. Not sure I can stand watching another debate.
When Mitt had something to say he stood up and was very composed and quiet. Until his chance to interject. The moderator kept cutting Mitt off.
Bama ratled on and you could tell the moderator was not nuetral. The loudest clapping that started was reported to be 1st whats her name.
The short clap for Mitt was stiffled very quikly. I truly believe this debate was put together for OB to putt Mitt on the defensive.
Just my take on it. I did go into it open minded. This debate was not moderated nuetral...Too many points of intrest for me to explain my position. Not sure I can stand watching another debate.
Eddie,
I saw a lot of what you saw in the debate. At first, both were interupting each other then later, Romney stopped interrupting, but Obama kept interrupting Romney....That should have been stopped. I also thought the moderator was leaning a bit in favor of Obama, and it appears that other news media noticed that too.
That type of a debate forum is hard to control and requires more control. I would suggest that if the candidate is given 2 minutes to respond, or to rebut the other candidate's statements, the candidates microphone should only be on when they speaking time begins and cut off at 2 minutes with a loud buzzer...no exceptions. While the moderator is speaking, neither candidates microphone should be on, and After the buzzer sounds the moderator should simply move on to the next question. I think it would be good if the moderator could cut off the microphone if the candidates answer is not related to the topic of the question that was asked. I saw both candidate dance around some questions and shift their answers to points they wanted to make even though that was not the focus of the original question.
I know it sounds a bit childish to have to treat adults like that, but I think both behaved rather badly and especially the President.
I did like it when Obama started to interrupt Romney and Mitt stop him in mid-sentence with: "That was not a question, it was a statement!" and Obama was speechless and just sat back down.
...Rich
I saw a lot of what you saw in the debate. At first, both were interupting each other then later, Romney stopped interrupting, but Obama kept interrupting Romney....That should have been stopped. I also thought the moderator was leaning a bit in favor of Obama, and it appears that other news media noticed that too.
That type of a debate forum is hard to control and requires more control. I would suggest that if the candidate is given 2 minutes to respond, or to rebut the other candidate's statements, the candidates microphone should only be on when they speaking time begins and cut off at 2 minutes with a loud buzzer...no exceptions. While the moderator is speaking, neither candidates microphone should be on, and After the buzzer sounds the moderator should simply move on to the next question. I think it would be good if the moderator could cut off the microphone if the candidates answer is not related to the topic of the question that was asked. I saw both candidate dance around some questions and shift their answers to points they wanted to make even though that was not the focus of the original question.
I know it sounds a bit childish to have to treat adults like that, but I think both behaved rather badly and especially the President.
I did like it when Obama started to interrupt Romney and Mitt stop him in mid-sentence with: "That was not a question, it was a statement!" and Obama was speechless and just sat back down.
...Rich
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
[Broken External Image]:
