therightfangirl | Entries tagged with mitt romney

brendala.livejournal.com

Scott Adams (the artist behind Dilbert) just released this blog post about why he feels compelled to vote for Romney despite the fact that he disagrees with about 90% of his policies. His reasoning is a little weird. But it's an interesting read (and pretty ballsy considering the industry he operates in).

The whole post is gold. But here's the money quote:

So while I don't agree with Romney's positions on most topics, I'm endorsing him for president starting today. I think we need to set a minimum standard for presidential behavior, and jailing American citizens for political gain simply has to be a firing offense no matter how awesome you might be in other ways.

My thoughts:

( Read more... )

jessm78.livejournal.com

Okay, so I watched the debate (sorry I wasn't here for the live post, was in another room from the computer all night). Apparently some people online are taking issue with the fact that Romney said "government doesn't create jobs", but they said he turned around and said his government will create jobs. Did any of you guys imply that from what he said during the debate?

I guess this is like a two-part question. There's an actor I kind of like (used to really like, but I've backed off a little mainly because the fandom is really crazy) who retweeted something that an entertainment blogger tweeted:

Romney continues adorable streak, insisting "government does not create jobs," then insisting HIS government will create jobs. #wtf #debate

My first reaction was to be a little pissed off and think "just when I couldn't lose any more respect for this guy..." He's usually the type of person who doesn't talk politics. He has made jabs at Obama at fan conventions, mainly his stimulus, and he did make a snarky comment during the primaries about Newt denying an "open" relationship but hid his affair from his wife, etc. This is a guy from Texas who for all intents and purposes is pro-gun, maybe socially liberal but I'm not really sure.

Does this tweet prove that he's in the tank for Obama? I know, I really shouldn't care, and I guess I mostly don't. But again it just grates on me to have to lose respect for yet another actor because they have to be a political moron. :P And that I'd have to stop watching their show, buying the dvds etc (even though I still like the show). How do you guys deal with being into tv shows where the actors' politics are completely opposite of yours? I guess it just makes sense to separate the person from their performance?

Sorry if this doesn't make sense... still early and I need coffee...

jessm78.livejournal.com

Ever since 2003, I've been an avid visitor of the website Freerepublic.com. Never joined but I lurked there and they put my fears to rest back in 2004 when the exit polls all showed John Kerry winning at first.

Now I'm over there and most of them are all harping on the fact that Obama is ahead in today's Rassmussen poll, I think 2 points ahead of Romney (although the internals don't make sense in that they're saying Romney is ahead with women while Obama is ahead with men; plus he's assuming Dems will have a bigger turnout this time... huh?). They're all saying what an awful candidate Romney is, that he'll be just like McCain and Dole in the debates, that this country is too busy loving their new "Obamaphones" and want government to take care of them and they'll all just reelect him.

This is seriously freaking me out. I just cannot think of 4 more years of Obama considering how bad things are. I know the media likes to demoralize us into not voting, a lot of the polls oversample Democrats, etc.

Yes, I know this country is vastly different now from the way it was even 20 years ago. And I know that the die-hard Obama fans will stick with him. But I'd like to think that the average Joe is a little concerned about the way things are going to want change.

I'm really worried for my future and that of my family and friends if this guy ends up being reelected. Someone please calm my fears before I slit my wrists. :(

Current Mood: worried

rivetspoon.livejournal.com

Ever since I first heard "Mitt Romney causes cancer" I always think of the movie/graphic novel The Watchmen, and how Dr. Manhattan was led to believe that he'd caused cancer in his loved ones by simply existing in their presence over extended periods of time.

Thus I wanted to make this:

You're free to take it and share it. If you want to play with it, I can upload the text-free base.

Also I'm so proud of myself: I got my first liberal unfollow on Tumblr the other day. She still chats with me on Twitter, though, so she mostly just got sick of seeing the reblogs. Still friends, it seems, though. :)

Current Mood: artistic

jessm78.livejournal.com

Anyone have any flisters mentioning/bitching about this?

I have a liberal flister who is usually a very respectful person. We've agreed to disagree on a bit. But she wrote a long rant in her LJ yesterday about it. She thought it was "cruel" of Romney to say that remark about 47% of Americans wanting to be treated like victims, etc. To be honest, I scrolled right past it because I didn't feel like getting into an argument. I'd had a long day and wasn't in the mood.

Last night a British friend-of-a-friend had to make a snide remark about it though. One of my British flisters was complaining about fanfiction, and how it's annoying when people "Americanise" their characters, and what's the big deal if someone writes a fic using British spelling or colloquialisms. Her friend commented:

"And criticism because someone isn't using the proper "American" words. Well, newsflash all Americans, your language is just a worse version of "proper English" i.e BRITISH ENGLISH. So shut up!"

I seriously hate when they throw that card around, that our English is a "dumbed-down" version of their "proper" English. My friend herself challenged her a little, saying it wasn't just Americans who do it. I finally had to say something and asked her not to generalize like that. I personally don't care if I'm reading fic and it's in British English. I mean, yeah, if you're reading a published novel about American characters *in* America getting something out of the boot of their car, or giving someone a "five note", it might feel a little out of place, but that's just me. My friend later assured me that this girl was just kidding. Maybe I'm clueless, but usually when people kid on the net, they'll put something like "LOL" or ";)" or whatever.

Anyway, to get back to the whole thing about Romney's statement, that friend-of-a-friend replies to my comment with:

"Okay... I'm not doing a Mitt Romney "47% of all Americans" if that's what you're referring to, no."

Is this not a big deal at all and she's just trying to tell me she's not generalizing? Was Romney really generalizing when he made this statement? Personally I didn't really find anything wrong with it, although a few people told me there are people who are actually struggling and are part of that percentage. It's obvious what she thinks of him, but I could have done without that I think.

Current Mood: annoyed

jessm78.livejournal.com

I've been a subscriber on and off since the early 90s. I received a gift subscription about a year ago, which was fine because I like reading about some of my fave shows. Just received this week's issue and it really pissed me off.

They have an article in their "In the News" section entitled "The Conventions' Winners and Losers." For "winners", they include the speeches of both Michelle Obama and Ann Romney (must've really pained them to include her), the "partisan cable networks" (MSNBC and Fox News are mentioned for getting the most viewers during the DNC and RNC, respectively), and Bill Clinton, natch.

For the "losers", they pick everyone on the right: "The convention bounce", as in the lack of bounce for Romney following his convention; Clint Eastwood, and Sarah Palin.

I shouldn't have been surprised, but it just pisses me off how they perpetrate this garbage to prop up Obama. Romney actually did receive a small bounce after the RNC. Most polls I saw, including Reuters/Ipsos (which has been known to tilt left) and Rassmussen, showed him with a bounce between 4 and 6 points at least. But of course the media wouldn't make any mention of it. Meanwhile, according to pollsters, Obama did receive a bounce (though some of those polls I saw were pretty suspect based on the questions asked and oversampling Democrats... in one, Romney trailed by 5 points, but was leading by double digits with Independents) but it's already fading pretty quickly. Of course they don't want us to know this either. I fired off an email to them. They'll probably laugh and delete it, but I don't care. Had to let them know that not all of their readers appreciate this.

I know, you're thinking, "Well, what do you expect from them?" I do like TV Guide for info on my shows. But again, I'm just so sick and tired of them bending over backwards to show how slanted they are and to prop up this President. *shakes head*

Current Mood: annoyed

chaine-maille.livejournal.com

I stayed up for Rubio's and Romney's speeches on Thursday night - very motivating, I thought.

Anyway. It always aggravates me how so many of my friends lump all Republicans together as bigots or Bible-huggers and such. It's rude and it's not necessarily true and after reading offensive posts about all republicans being against women's rights and welfare (although I'm sure they weren't meant to be really offensive, but I find them very in-your-face) I have trouble falling asleep!

So this occurred to me:

It seems to me (and I'm doing a bit of generalizing here, mind you) that liberals have nice ideals - they want everyone to have enough of everything, they want everyone to get along, love each other, save the planet, etc.

So do republicans! Except our method of achieving that ideal doesn't take the easy road. It'll take time and for awhile it might hurt. But you can't jump to the final goal without trudging through the hard stuff.

If that makes sense? It makes more sense in my head than when I wrote it out here... Also, this is my first post here, I'm just tired of thinking to myself in a den of liberals that I can't talk to.

jessm78.livejournal.com

I guess most of you guys either don't talk about politics much on your LJs or you have mostly conservatives on your flist. But for those of you who have liberal flisters, have you experienced any provoking comments yet?

I have an flister who I've met in person a few times. She's a really nice girl but a very strong-minded liberal. Despite our very different political views, we get along well and don't really discuss politics. Today she made a post showing off a button a friend gave her that said "Dogs Against Romney" on it. She told us she was voting for Obama, how strongly held her beliefs are, and five reasons that she's a liberal. She said at the end that she's fine with agreeing to disagree. I told her that's what I love about her, that she can at least be respectful of opposing views. But one of her friends (who isn't on my flist) decides to say "If you have a vagina and are voting the Ronney/Ryan ticket, I judge you. I judge you hard."

It's comments like this that annoy me because they seem like they're looking for a fight. I'm sure this person thinks that not everyone on my friend's flist has the same exact beliefs. And I'm sure there are some out there, but none of the conservatives or libertarians on my flist say things like this. It always seems to be the liberals. More than four years ago a former (thank goodness) flister was ranting "I HATE THE ASSHOLES WHO VOTED FOR BUSH!"

99% of my flist are liberals, so I have a filter for political posts that includes like-minded friends. I know it's my LJ and I should be able to say whatever I want, but I don't feel like slinging mud back and forth with people I otherwise get along with. Has anyone else had to deal with such provoking garbage before? Hoping I'm not alone, lol. I have a feeling it's going to get worse as the weeks go by. *sigh*

Current Mood: annoyed

jessm78.livejournal.com

Let me preface this by saying that I'm not the biggest fan of Romney and I am a life-long dog lover. But this is an example of another MSM hits finally making it on social media, and I think it's hilarious how they have selective memories when it comes to Obama.

I saw someone on my flist post this:

( Bla bla bla, Romney is evil, bla bla bla )

(Probably doesn't matter but this flister is from the UK)

Okay - first of all, I first heard about this a few months ago *at least*. It's only making the rounds on LJ now?? I guess someone's really feeling threatened by the possibility that Romney might actually defeat Obama....

I felt compelled to comment and inform her that Obama used to *eat* dog. Isn't that abuse of sorts? I'm sure they'd rebut with "Oh but that was years ago and he never said he liked it! Plus he has Bo now!" Well, this Romney thing was years ago, too. Again I'm not the biggest Romney fan and I don't condone what he did, but honestly, the one-sided drama queens just make me shake my head. I'd comment to her but she's a decent person otherwise (has never posted about politics before with the exception of her opposition to SOPA/PIPA/ACTA) and I don't feel like getting into an argument.

Current Mood: annoyed

dreadfulpenny00.livejournal.com

Mediaite posted an article yesterday titled Romney's Solyndra? State-Funded Massachusets Solar Company Goes Bankrupt in which comparisons are made between a solar company in Lowell, Massachusetts called Konarka and Solyndra, a California-based solar company in California. Both received government funding to keep their operations going and both are connected with the main two current Presidential candidates. However, there are some major differences between the two.

( One of these things is not like the other... )

There's a world of difference between a Governor investing in a corporation within his own state to ensure job creation and the President of the United States floating a company a half-million dollar loan to fulfill a lofty campaign promise. There's also a big difference in a company that goes bankrupt eight years after getting $1.5 million in state government funding and a company that goes bankrupt one year after getting $527 million in federal government funding. I just hope the American voting public is smart enough to notice the difference but if the 2008 election is any indication, they're not.

X-posted from