The Presidential 'Debate'

[Qqmike]

Jeez, anything could happen for October surprise. Obama could catch "the" terrorists (any of them, esp the latest). Any of many wildest-imagination events could erupt. Hell, Romney-Ryan might even decide at the very last minute to publish the details of their plan(s). (We know one of them: "5" is one detail.) Just when all leading journalists gave up asking R&R 3x/interview for details, that's when they--R&R--will whip 'm out big time!

Yes, I agree, anything could happen in October.

[67GTA]

Speculation is not news. Those articles are pathetic.

The Allred article is speculation at this point, but the leaked info has some origin/source that hasn't been made public yet. The Van Jones article is a direct quote from Van Jones.

[woodsmoke]

I dunno, this is just thought, but it might be that neither side "really" wants the Presidency this go around.

a) It is forgone that if O is re-elected that Obamacare will go into force with a vengance, and as Ms. Pelosi once opined, they have to have it actually in action to see just what it will do. If it is massively off the wall there could really be civil unrest.
b) If R gets elected, he has already said that there are some parts he would keep, so the Dems would always be screaming about how he did the wrong things and didn't do the right things.
c) I don't really think that EITHER group really wants to deal with overseas developments.
i) if Al-Queda really is "on it's heels" then if O gets reelected he gets to ...um....not have something to deal with and so foreign policy goes away...would he "gin up" something to make himself look good?
ii) Same for R.
but what if Al-queda really is on a comeback?
I don't think that either of them really has a way to deal with the obvious situation of whether or not Al-queda is coming back that it is going to be a decades long fight.
I) O would want to not have boots on the ground and obviously is detested by all of the various agencies that will have to deal with terrorism including the military.
II) R would probably put boots on the ground, but then Al-Queda would just dance and weave since they have learned that to try to stand in place to fight is futile, so..

who looks good in any of the four scenarios?

AND YES....there are a multitude of other possible scenarious some making one side "look good" and some the other,

i dunno but it is a possiblity that neither party "really" wants to deal with overseas events.

So it could be that a possible October surprise would be that BOTH sides do something to make themselves look bad in one light and "picked upon" by the other side in another light and the whole election goes weeping into hanging chad land.

woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

A hyper conservative WOMAN at the college brought up to me in the hall that the U.S. has sold 12 million bushels of wheat to Iran when last year none was sold.

And the comment she made was whether or not Gov. Romney would bring it up in the debate tonight.

Well, that got me to thinking....something that I seldom do...

a) if Gov. Romney brought it up then Pres. Obama could point to his "crippling financial" sanctions but that he was also for "the people" by sending wheat.

There also is the drought in Iran which their Pres, (who thinks that an Imam is going to crawl out of a well and bring about the world wide Caliphate(and that the event can be hastened by causing chaos in the world) ),

And their Pres says that the U.S. is tampering with the weather to cause suffering in Iran...

And there is valid reason for him to say that because.... Steven Chiu, Pres. Obama's Science guy has advocated seeding clouds in the Gulf of Mexico to stave off another Katrina.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...071818,00.html

So, Pres. Obama could say that Romney is a saber rattler and doesn't really care about "the people".

b) Pres. Obama could bring it up to show his humanitarian side and "get the jump" on Gov. Romney bringing it up, but then he would have to explain why if his sanctions are "crippling the economy" he would do that.

c) Pres. Obama could say it is an export thing to increase the U.S. income.

d) What would Gov. Romeny do differently, he would be labled as a people hater if he did it or labled "soft on terrorists with nukes" if he didn't.

So....I'm wondering if it will come up, who would bring it up and how it would be framed.

Any thoughts?

woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

Well, sad story again this semester.

During the lecture on the prokaryotes, of which the bacillus bacterium is discussed and mention of Anthrax is made, I..... again, asked how many people had heard of:

a) what happened at a major building in terms of anthrax a few years ago. One person in two sections of twenty four raised a hand.
b) another clue, it was the "Senate Office Building".. three hands, one in one section two in another.

Sooooooo the numbers of people who know about this has been declining year by year.....

So....eventually no-one will know about what happened at the Senate Office Building.

Now, this was "domestic terrorism", but one of the reasons that Bush went into Iraq was because Hussein had SAID that he had WMDs, nuclear and biological, and HAD used gas terror weapons, actually gassed(not anthrax) the Kurds, again forgotton by the people who hate Bush....

There were a bunch of "trailers" that the military thought has some kind of liquid/powder WMD in them but when the military got to them they were completely sterilized and sitting in the desert so since nobody could "prove" that a liquid/powder WMD has been in them .....

they were of course belittled by the people who hate bush...

sterilized trailers in the middle of the desert...

So Anthrax can be "weaponized" and carried around as a powder....how come this is not at least "mentioned" in some meaningful way that can be REMEMBERED by the high schools?

And then the pols and pundits say that the American People are stoopid and that debates don't mean anything....

How come no mention of Anthrax by Pres. Obama since his admin emphasizes DOMESTIC terrorism?

How come no mention of Anthrax by Gov. Romney since his admin would probably emphasize INTERNATIONAl terrorism?

At least the heads of THIS science department think this should be AT LEAST....mentioned....

so that people watching a debate can think about what was:

a) talked about
b) NOT talked about

just an observation.

woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

A stunning/hilarious thing happened at the college today.

A former student (biology) of mine was bringing in those cool Choco cereals and white sugar for a "demonstration" in a class and stopped to ask me a question, and also proffer some of the pre-made aforementioned munchies!

Generally she asked if I had watched the debate last night and what i thought, while at the same time mentioning that she realizes that I NEVER come down on one side or the other, but what I thought about "THE" debate?

I, instead asked her "why do you ask"?

To keep it short, her and her husband watched and thought that Pres. Obama was "not debating" when he said to Gov. Romney something to the effect of "we now have things called aircraft carriers that carry airplanes and submarines that go underwater", and that the statement was not "debating" but instead "trying to insult Gov. Romney".

And, THEN, ( it was fall over on the floor time for the old woodsmoker! ) she brought up that I had lectured on the Darwin debates about what Bishop Wilberforce had said. She could not remember Wilberforce or Huxley but remembered, generally, what Wilberforce had said about a "monkey's uncle" and that he had said it because he figured that he was losing the debate.

Her and her hubby then got on the net and....they went to THAT PLACE....on the net .....where ALL COLLEGE PROFESSORS say is EVIL, not to be trusted, etc.....Wikipedia....

And after hunting around found the Wikipedia page on the debate, read it and FOLLOWED THE LINKS....

So...the upshot of her question was; did I think that what Pres. Obama did to Gov. Romeny was along the same general lines, that he thought he had "lost" on some part of the debate and was doing somthing to demean Gov. Romney?

I did not answer whether I thought so but, instead, answered that it would seem that the "forms" of the two occurences were similar and so it would seem that they were similar things.

And then she said, "I KNEW you would do that!" and laughed.

So...... it would seem that at least "some" of the "stupid mindless sheeple" are not so stupid or mindless as the pols and talking heads would want.

And, it is possible that whether OR NOT somebody knew about the Darwin debate, that a logical person, who was not "committed" to one side or another would look at least somewhat "askance" at what Pres. Obama said, and HOW he said it, and it might just alter how they think about the President and his positions.

Just some thoughts.

woodsmoke

[Guest]

For anyone that is interested, Russia Today will be showing the debate between the 3rd party candidates. I think only RT and C-span is covering the event.

[woodsmoke]

Cesar Henao for congress as Independent, a fascinating story.

http://cesarforcongress.com/

[67GTA]

More from the AP. Something is brewing. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...10-24-11-55-51

[Qqmike]

Where I grew up (Northern IL, about an hr w of Chicago, steel mill town), and when I grew up (early 60's), if your name was Mitt, and esp if you came from a priviledged (undefined for now, but obvious when you see it) family, you'd get beat up every single sh*'n afternoon walking home from school.
(Comment has nothing to do with nothin'.)
;-)

[woodsmoke]

I loved Chicago when i was there in the late sixties. Spent over a year at Great Lakes Naval Station and got early liberty to go into town to the Art Institute, Field Museum, the Picasso statue, Kungsholm, etc.

That was in the middle of the "race riots" and as long as I was not in the "south side" things were safe and I greatly enjoyed it.

woodsmoke

[Qqmike]

woody, I ended up back in n. IL at NIU for Master's in math (algebraic topology), finished 1973. My wife (#1) and I drove in to Chicago two or three times a month to goof around, esp the 'standard' tour you noted of " ... Art Institute, Field Museum, the Picasso statue ..." and around the loop, Lakeshore Dr., the horses (caught Secretariat one day, made all of 10 cents on $2), etc. Back in the day, dad had two south-side night clubs, fully serviced by one A.C., they became friends (to select another supplier would have been death, or going any other way). There's lots of personal stories about and between Chi-town and another 'sin city' (ref.: Time Mag) (that would be Terre Haute, IN), best not discussed here!

[woodsmoke]

yeah great times
woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

well, it isn't part of the "debate" but, apparently, according to multiple sources including MSN(as left as it gets), Pres. O, in an interview with Rolling Stone called Gov. R, a ...."bulls^&**()".

Now, yes, there are many political pundits on the right that have called the Pres. a variety of names, but I can't remember, right now, a news item about Gov. R. calling the Pres. any such kind of term.

woodsmoke

[capt-zero]

To get back to the original theme of this thread; I believe it was Studs Turkle who said, "Washington is a whorehouse, and every four years we get to elect a new piano player."