Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: 2nd Debate Thoughts?
LOL! Oh. I guess we should both stay off the "unbiased" web sites.
Exactly - it sounded weird. Because his viewpoint is weird. He talked about giving flex time to an executive employee as if that had anything at all to do with the plight women face in not receiving equal pay/opportunity. I mean, what was his point? Just let Governors decide who get's flex time? Because he certainly did not insinuate that he was for any accountability requiring a business to make sure they pay people who do the exact same job the same money regardless of gender.
And the binder thing was so condescending. You may have heard it differently than I - because I got the notion that he was implying he had to look far and wide to find female candidates that were qualified. And then it turns out that not only did his staff not put those binders together, they didn't even request them. His whole premise was a lie. A woman's group put them together prior to the election and then forwarded them to his office after he won. Had the other candidate won, they would have still been forwarded. He had nothing to do with it.
Perhaps he comes across as sounding "weird" about woman's rights because he doesn't really believe in them?
You're just taking a quote out of context.
This was the thesis of that speech: "The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. "
I think that's actually a benign thing to say. Success clearly a product of both the individual and their environment.
Agreed. It's not offensive at all. It's just funny. Mittens has an unintentional sense of humor.
(1) Aggressively promote domestic energy development, especially fossil fuels.
(2) Expand the market for U.S. goods overseas by negotiating new trade agreements and standing up to China on intellectual-property and currency issues.
(3) Improve workforce skills by transferring job-training programs to the states and going after teachers' unions, which, he says, stand in the way of school choice and better instruction.
(4) Attack the deficit through budget cuts, not tax increases.
(5) Reshape the regulatory climate to "encourage and promote small business" rather than swamp it.
I am not sure how much more specific he can get? You do remember the President isn't a dictator, right? He can't just go into Congress and ramrod his plan without their vote. I think this is a good solid foundation to build upon and given his record of being able to work with both Reps and Dems I am confident they can work together to build something that is going to get America turning back in the right direction.
I gave last night to Romney, I felt like he maintained composure and presented his ideas. Obama came off as a petulant child to me.
He said ladyfolk?
cats, did you watch the debate? He did not say "ladyfolk" but the gist of Fezzes statement is true. She's paraphasing.
Of course he didn't. And it wasn't even him who insinuated that women had to be home to cook dinner. He was addressing the concerns raised to him by the woman he chose as his Chief of Staff in MA
"Now one of the reasons I was able to get so many good women to be part of that team was because of our recruiting effort. But number two, because I recognized that if you're going to have women in the workforce that sometimes you need to be more flexible. My chief of staff, for instance, had two kids that were still in school.
She said, I can't be here until 7 or 8 o'clock at night. I need to be able to get home at 5 o'clock so I can be there for making dinner for my kids and being with them when they get home from school. So we said fine. Let's have a flexible schedule so you can have hours that work for you."
You didn't even watch the debate, did you?
I'd like to hear from his Chief of Staff to see if that's what she actually said to him or what he assumed when she asked to leave at 5 PM.
I did watch the debate but though I missed something since she had it in quotes.
Typical dem. someone proves a point and you have to nit-pick or doubt.
Did Obama cut the deficit? He said he was going to by at half.
Romney's Chief of Staff in MA was Beth Meyers. She is now a Senior Adviser to his Presidential Campaign and was charged with the task of helping to pick Romney's VP. Sounds like he thought very highly of her and her skills and sounds like she thought highly of him as well considering she accepted a position to be a part of the campaign.
I bet there are many women, single moms or not, who have children or not, who would be very grateful for consideration in the work place. I think the fact that people are upset by this is absurd. Because you know what, a lot of women do make dinner for their families.
From the feminist point of view, you don't want the pity? You want to be treated the same as every male in the workplace? Then fine. But I'll bet there's a lot of women who would appreciate this. Finding fault with compassion; now that's sad.
Romney could have done a better job on Libya, but will kick butt in the last debate which will emphasize foreign affairs.
Romney did really great last night on the economy, far better than Obama, and most will ultimately agree that the economy is the key in deciding the upcoming election.
I don't find allowing people to have regular work hours to be "compassionate". I find it to be a smart move to get good people to work for you. That doesn't mean that Romney didn't word it poorly.
Compassionate is not kicking struggling people when they're down because you think they should just quit whining and get a job.
I don't think either side relied on facts and honesty:
Summary
The second Obama-Romney debate was heated, confrontational and full of claims that sometimes didn?t match the facts.
http://factcheck.org/2012/10/factchecking-the-hofstra-debate/
That didn't answer my question.
LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!
And I'm not a dem.
lolz.
Exactly!
I've refuted Romney's points before, but I'll do it again.
1) Drilling: Legitimate policy decision of balancing environment and energy (Obama) or just drilling the crap out of everything without worrying about environmental concerns (Romney)
2) China: Romney's position has no clear distinction from Obama. If he had any legitimate, new ideas, Obama would happily steal them. "Standing up to China" is not as trivial as some people like to pretend it is.
3) Jobs/skills/unions: Romney is anti-union. Overall he is less supportive of education than Obama and would rather cut rich people's taxes than invest in the education of poor kids.
4) Budget Cuts: Romney has flip-flopped and never really outlined a clear plan on what exactly he plans to cut. He's hinted he doesn't consider ending the Mortgage tax deduction as a tax increase (it is). Pretty much every media outlet, including some right of center ones, have declared that Romney's numbers really don't add up at all. Pretty much no legitimate economist thinks we can balance the budget with cuts alone.
5) Small businesses: Haven't seen anything new from Romney, and Obama would happily steal any new ideas. Typically the regulatory climate doesn't hurt small businesses that much, although it can affect the ability to grow. I would love to hear Romney get more specific on what regulations he wants to do away with.
That is fine LuckyDad, you are entitled to your own take on his plan. But can you tell me WHAT Obama has done in the last 4 years that would warrant me extending his contract for another 4?
You agree with me, then. Welcome to the dark side.
This is my BIGGEST problem with Obama. Anyone else is worth a shot!
If Romney does what he (vaguely) claims he will and wins the election, I will bet $10 that we will be worse-off financially in 4 years than we are now.
Well I happen to believe that if we allow Obama to continue to do NOTHING in the next 4 years, we will not only be worse off than we are now. But the America we know and love will look a lot more like England a democratic socialist country. Our founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves.
Why do you say that? curious..