|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2016 11:24:57 GMT -5
This isn't some left or right issue. Many of the goofs in the media on both sides will play their favorites, I just find it kinda ridiculous that any politician running for president would allow a minor celebrity with that kind of shady past speak in favor of them at a national convention. Scott Baio tweeted out (twice) a meme of Former First Lady, Former Senator of New York, and Former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton standing in front of a sign that was manipulated to make it look like it said "cunt" TWICE. IN THE WEEK BEFORE HE SPOKE AT THE RNC. I think your moral high ground here is a termite mound.
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Jul 22, 2016 11:28:48 GMT -5
This isn't some left or right issue. Many of the goofs in the media on both sides will play their favorites, I just find it kinda ridiculous that any politician running for president would allow a minor celebrity with that kind of shady past speak in favor of them at a national convention. Scott Baio tweeted out (twice) a meme of Former First Lady, Former Senator of New York, and Former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton standing in front of a sign that was manipulated to make it look like it said "cunt" TWICE. IN THE WEEK BEFORE HE SPOKE AT THE RNC. I think your moral high ground here is a termite mound. What moral high ground? Seems like everyone assumes I'm a die hard republican because I don't like Lena Dunham and don't think that firearms should be abolished in this country. And who gives a rats ass about what Chachi thinks? The guy hasn't been relevant in 30 years. Not sure why he was even invited either.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 22, 2016 11:33:17 GMT -5
Scott Baio tweeted out (twice) a meme of Former First Lady, Former Senator of New York, and Former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton standing in front of a sign that was manipulated to make it look like it said "cunt" TWICE. IN THE WEEK BEFORE HE SPOKE AT THE RNC. I think your moral high ground here is a termite mound. What moral high ground? Seems like everyone assumes I'm a die hard republican because I don't like Lena Dunham and don't think that firearms should be abolished in this country. And who gives a rats ass about what Chachi thinks? The guy hasn't been relevant in 30 years. Not sure why he was even invited. As someone who owns four firearms I don't have any problem with your not wanting firearms abolished. I am, however, tired of that strawman because there are very very very few people in the U.S. who are actually calling for firearms to be abolished. The same could be said...Who gives a rats ass what Lena Dunham thinks. She's in no position to enact any of her thoughts, and frankly I had to Google her and still had no idea who she was beyond her apparently being a minor celebrity.
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Jul 22, 2016 11:40:56 GMT -5
What moral high ground? Seems like everyone assumes I'm a die hard republican because I don't like Lena Dunham and don't think that firearms should be abolished in this country. And who gives a rats ass about what Chachi thinks? The guy hasn't been relevant in 30 years. Not sure why he was even invited. As someone who owns four firearms I don't have any problem with your not wanting firearms abolished. I am, however, tired of that strawman because there are very very very few people in the U.S. who are actually calling for firearms to be abolished. The same could be said...Who gives a rats ass what Lena Dunham thinks. She's in no position to enact any of her thoughts, and frankly I had to Google her and still had no idea who she was beyond her apparently being a minor celebrity. Feminists, who are pretty much all liberal, care about what she thinks. Don't ask me why On the flip side...Scott Baio? Maybe a handful of 50-something year old housewives who had a crush on him in the early 80's care about his stance, but I doubt anyone else does.
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jul 22, 2016 12:00:58 GMT -5
As someone who owns four firearms I don't have any problem with your not wanting firearms abolished. I am, however, tired of that strawman because there are very very very few people in the U.S. who are actually calling for firearms to be abolished. The same could be said...Who gives a rats ass what Lena Dunham thinks. She's in no position to enact any of her thoughts, and frankly I had to Google her and still had no idea who she was beyond her apparently being a minor celebrity. Feminists, who are pretty much all liberal, care about what she thinks. Don't ask me why On the flip side...Scott Baio? Maybe a handful of 50-something year old housewives who had a crush on him in the early 80's care about his stance, but I doubt anyone else does. But this is where the Democrats always win. Lena Dunham is a current celebrity and media darling who is well-known and liked by the millenial demographic the Democrats want to capture. Just like Michelle Obama doing "Carpool Karaoke" or having popular celebrities like John Stewart in their camp, the Democrats have an appeal to young people because they appear to be "cool". By contrast, the Republicans have the guy from Charles in Charge, less than mediocre former NFLer Tim Tebow, and Angelina Jolie's dad (who narrated Trump's bio video at the convention last night) on their side. They have no appeal to anyone under the age of 40 or who isn't white. Big difference there, don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 22, 2016 12:12:32 GMT -5
By contrast, the Republicans have the guy from Charles in Charge, less than mediocre former NFLer Tim Tebow, and Angelina Jolie's dad (who narrated Trump's bio video at the convention last night) on their side. They have no appeal to anyone under the age of 40 or who isn't white. Maybe that's why they went for Chachi, hoping some of the Fonz's cool would rub off. But Fonzie is a lefty!
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Jul 22, 2016 12:43:06 GMT -5
This countries in big trouble if idiotic celebrities have any influence on how people vote. Wait, judging the candidates that are running, we're already in big trouble
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jul 22, 2016 13:13:50 GMT -5
I often bitch about many of my government's laws and regulations, but one I am very happy with is the one regulating political contributions. Here are a few key excerpts : 62. Only an elector may make a contribution. He shall do so only in favour of a political party, an association or an independent candidate authorized by the director general and only in conformity with this division.
63. Every contribution must be made by the elector himself out of his own property.
64. The total of contributions by the same elector during the same calendar year shall not exceed the amount of $3 000.
69. Every contribution of money of over $100 must be made by cheque or other order of payment signed by the elector and drawn on his account in a chartered bank or a trust company having an office in Québec, or in a savings and credit union.
70. For every contribution, the official representative or the person designated in accordance with section 66 shall issue a receipt to the contributor.
75. Outside an election period, every radio, television or cable broadcaster and every owner of a newspaper, a periodical or other printed matter may make air time on the radio or television or space in the newspaper, periodical or other printed matter available free of charge to authorized political parties, provided he offers such service equitably as to quality and quantity to the parties represented in the National Assembly and to the parties which received at least 3% of the valid votes in the last general election.
In other terms : no company, no union, no lobby, no PAC may give money to politicians. Rich individuals cannot outright buy an election because they're capped at 3,000 bucks each. There is a paper trail to follow if someone tries to cheat. The media, if it wants to give free air time to its favourite party, must offer the same deal to all parties. Because politics shouldn't be about raising money. I don't understand this at all. How are you silly northern people ever going to corrupt your political process if you're going to have rules like this?
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Jul 22, 2016 14:38:14 GMT -5
Feminists, who are pretty much all liberal, care about what she thinks. Don't ask me why On the flip side...Scott Baio? Maybe a handful of 50-something year old housewives who had a crush on him in the early 80's care about his stance, but I doubt anyone else does. But this is where the Democrats always win. Lena Dunham is a current celebrity and media darling who is well-known and liked by the millenial demographic the Democrats want to capture. Just like Michelle Obama doing "Carpool Karaoke" or having popular celebrities like John Stewart in their camp, the Democrats have an appeal to young people because they appear to be "cool". By contrast, the Republicans have the guy from Charles in Charge, less than mediocre former NFLer Tim Tebow, and Angelina Jolie's dad (who narrated Trump's bio video at the convention last night) on their side. They have no appeal to anyone under the age of 40 or who isn't white. Big difference there, don't you think? I agree
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 22, 2016 17:26:23 GMT -5
I often bitch about many of my government's laws and regulations, but one I am very happy with is the one regulating political contributions. Here are a few key excerpts : 62. Only an elector may make a contribution. He shall do so only in favour of a political party, an association or an independent candidate authorized by the director general and only in conformity with this division.
63. Every contribution must be made by the elector himself out of his own property.
64. The total of contributions by the same elector during the same calendar year shall not exceed the amount of $3 000.
69. Every contribution of money of over $100 must be made by cheque or other order of payment signed by the elector and drawn on his account in a chartered bank or a trust company having an office in Québec, or in a savings and credit union.
70. For every contribution, the official representative or the person designated in accordance with section 66 shall issue a receipt to the contributor.
75. Outside an election period, every radio, television or cable broadcaster and every owner of a newspaper, a periodical or other printed matter may make air time on the radio or television or space in the newspaper, periodical or other printed matter available free of charge to authorized political parties, provided he offers such service equitably as to quality and quantity to the parties represented in the National Assembly and to the parties which received at least 3% of the valid votes in the last general election.
In other terms : no company, no union, no lobby, no PAC may give money to politicians. Rich individuals cannot outright buy an election because they're capped at 3,000 bucks each. There is a paper trail to follow if someone tries to cheat. The media, if it wants to give free air time to its favourite party, must offer the same deal to all parties. Because politics shouldn't be about raising money. Those are precisely the regulations we need.
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Jul 22, 2016 19:51:17 GMT -5
This isn't some left or right issue. Many of the goofs in the media on both sides will play their favorites, I just find it kinda ridiculous that any politician running for president would allow a minor celebrity with that kind of shady past speak in favor of them at a national convention. Scott Baio tweeted out (twice) a meme of Former First Lady, Former Senator of New York, and Former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton standing in front of a sign that was manipulated to make it look like it said "cunt" TWICE. IN THE WEEK BEFORE HE SPOKE AT THE RNC. I think your moral high ground here is a termite mound. He's starting to ruin Charles in Charge for me. Henry Winkler needs to smack him upside the head...
|
|
|
Post by howardm416 on Jul 23, 2016 9:59:09 GMT -5
Scott Baio's speech sounded like one of those Charles In Charge episodes where the parents who hired Charles to watch their kids were out of town for the weekend and Charles or the kids threw a party. But then the parents come home early and Charles has to explain himself. That's what his speech sounded like.
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jul 26, 2016 8:30:29 GMT -5
I really don't understand why anyone would let Scott Baio speak at anything. I would be surprised if he were invited to speak at the opening of a local car wash. And certainly wouldn't care to hear what he had to say. It's sad that he was apparently the best they could get.
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Jul 26, 2016 19:53:57 GMT -5
I really don't understand why anyone would let Scott Baio speak at anything. I would be surprised if he were invited to speak at the opening of a local car wash. And certainly wouldn't care to hear what he had to say. It's sad that he was apparently the best they could get. Well, I do still like him as Bob Loblaw...
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 26, 2016 20:36:21 GMT -5
It sucks that the best the Dems could do to counter Scott Baio was Meryl Streep. She's never even had her own sitcom.
|
|