Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Deadmeat1471]

'John McCain doesn't understand torture enhanced interrogation techniques.'

  Santorum had to be trolling on this one.

[Frumple]

... you seem to not realize that Santorum seems to be dead serious about just about every damn thing he says. Man apparently doesn't troll, though people would feel a lot better about his sanity if he did.

[Deadmeat1471]

... you seem to not realize that Santorum seems to be dead serious about just about every damn thing he says. Man apparently doesn't troll, though people would feel a lot better about his sanity if he did.

To be honest, I like politicians like this. We have a politician here Ken Livingston, he says what he thinks and he doesn't sugar coat it. He gets alot of flak about it, but at the end of the day he has integrity. Because you know what he says is what he means, and thats his political currency for the people.

Santorum might be batshit, but I respect a guy who doesn't bullshit. It gives the man a level of credibility no amount of propaganda and charisma will give you. It's just a shame that what he says is almost always total bollocks.

[nenjin]

I used to think that about Ron Paul. But he's backpedaling away from all his (non-economic, non-foreign policy) rhetoric as fast as his legs will let him. It wouldn't make him more acceptable to me as a candidate, or his views better in my eyes, but he'd get an iota of more respect out of me.

[palsch]

We have a politician here Ken Livingston, he says what he thinks and he doesn't sugar coat it. He gets alot of flak about it, but at the end of the day he has integrity.

Sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that.

The guy worked for Press TV, the British media arm of the Iranian government. He only left when they were shut down for ignoring Ofcom regulations, specifically keeping editorial control in Tehran. He also hosted a Muslim cleric who called for the death penalty for homosexuals. Yet he still campaigns hard on gay rights.

I really wanted to see Oona King get the nod over him in this mayoral election, not least because Livingston being nominated pretty much means Boris wins again.

[Frumple]

I'd probably go in fifty/fifty on it... integrity is one thing, but knowing when to shut the hell up or stay quiet is kind of important when you're dealing with a non-homogeneous ideological base (read: All of them). Santorum in particular is just a really shitty politician -- and I mean this in the higher sense of good social leader, not just someone that wins elections -- and the fact that he's running for what he is, with the positions that he holds, just makes that really bloody obvious.

I can respect ideological integrity, but willful ignorance, stupidity, or insanity -- and it's one or more of the three in Santorum's case -- pretty easily counters what little respect that sort of integrity garners. Sticking to your guns doesn't excuse incompetence or having your head stuck up the ass of a centuries-to-millennium outdated ideological foundation

But it's all rather irrelevant, really. The chances of the man getting elected president this time around is still basically zero.

[G-Flex]

I'd probably go in fifty/fifty on it... integrity is one thing, but knowing when to shut the hell up or stay quiet is kind of important when you're dealing with a non-homogeneous ideological base (read: All of them). Santorum in particular is just a really shitty politician -- and I mean this in the higher sense of good social leader, not just someone that wins elections -- and the fact that he's running for what he is, with the positions that he holds, just makes that really bloody obvious.

I can respect ideological integrity, but willful ignorance, stupidity, or insanity -- and it's one or more of the three in Santorum's case -- pretty easily counters what little respect that sort of integrity garners. Sticking to your guns doesn't excuse incompetence or having your head stuck up the ass of a centuries-to-millennium outdated ideological foundation

But it's all rather irrelevant, really. The chances of the man getting elected president this time around is still basically zero.

I also find it hard to think someone has "integrity" while they simultaneously 1) claim to support the US Constitution, and 2) claim to support religiously-oriented policies and legislation within the US government.

[Frumple]

Ideological integrity, to be more precise. And specifically to his own, which includes that sort of hypocrisy and radical interpretation/fabrication.

[Deadmeat1471]

We have a politician here Ken Livingston, he says what he thinks and he doesn't sugar coat it. He gets alot of flak about it, but at the end of the day he has integrity.

Sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that.

The guy worked for Press TV, the British media arm of the Iranian government. He only left when they were shut down for ignoring Ofcom regulations, specifically keeping editorial control in Tehran. He also hosted a Muslim cleric who called for the death penalty for homosexuals. Yet he still campaigns hard on gay rights.

I really wanted to see Oona King get the nod over him in this mayoral election, not least because Livingston being nominated pretty much means Boris wins again.

Absolutely true points.
What I meant though was his statements, his arguments, what he says that we can see. It's not distorted, he goes right for the throat and says it. I remember that stuff about Iran, i'm sure there were some mitigating circumstances to some of this, though I don't recall enough of it to comment/defend this though.

You can't deny that he says what he means, he gets beaten down for it all the time, it's probably what brings his popularity down the most. Thats all i'm refering to, and that gives the man credibility in my opinion.

I'd probably go in fifty/fifty on it... integrity is one thing, but knowing when to shut the hell up or stay quiet is kind of important when you're dealing with a non-homogeneous ideological base (read: All of them). Santorum in particular is just a really shitty politician -- and I mean this in the higher sense of good social leader, not just someone that wins elections -- and the fact that he's running for what he is, with the positions that he holds, just makes that really bloody obvious.

I can respect ideological integrity, but willful ignorance, stupidity, or insanity -- and it's one or more of the three in Santorum's case -- pretty easily counters what little respect that sort of integrity garners. Sticking to your guns doesn't excuse incompetence or having your head stuck up the ass of a centuries-to-millennium outdated ideological foundation

But it's all rather irrelevant, really. The chances of the man getting elected president this time around is still basically zero.

I also find it hard to think someone has "integrity" while they simultaneously 1) claim to support the US Constitution, and 2) claim to support religiously-oriented policies and legislation within the US government.

I would say it is integrity, its just nonsense. He believes what he says, but what he says is absolute tripe.

Ideological integrity, to be more precise. And specifically to his own, which includes that sort of hypocrisy and radical interpretation/fabrication.

I think you're completely right here.

[G-Flex]

Ideological integrity, to be more precise. And specifically to his own, which includes that sort of hypocrisy and radical interpretation/fabrication.

Internally speaking, that's not integrity at all though. He's just being a two-faced bullshitter to himself in addition to being one to the electorate.

[Deadmeat1471]

Ideological integrity, to be more precise. And specifically to his own, which includes that sort of hypocrisy and radical interpretation/fabrication.

Internally speaking, that's not integrity at all though. He's just being a two-faced bullshitter to himself in addition to being one to the electorate.

Not at all, it means he speaks from the heart, But whats in his heart is a load of crap.
I respect the man, but I wouldn't vote for him.

[G-Flex]

You respect a man for (probably willfully) holding intellectually dishonest and two-faced beliefs? You respect someone who would pretend to love what his country stands for while actively subverting it, and actually believing he's doing the former and not the latter? How is that respectable to you?

[Deadmeat1471]

You respect a man for (probably willfully) holding intellectually dishonest and two-faced beliefs? You respect someone who would pretend to love what his country stands for while actively subverting it, and actually believing he's doing the former and not the latter? How is that respectable to you?

He doesnt know or think they are two faced. It is not beyond the realm of reason for an american candidate to beleive relgion and conservatism arent mutually exclusive.

For the record, I am a rabid athiest with extremely left wing views. I do not support the man or any of his ideas.
I respect any man(or woman) who says what he means and doesn't take the easy road of pandering.
Granted that road is easier for someone who truly believes in the crap he does for a republican, but there it is.

Mit Romney for example, doesn't have this trait. He seems too fake to me and I believe this is one of his highest criticisms? (it would be mine)
*Other than his vast wealth, which I find a strange criticism in a country like the USA where he is supposed to be the architypical capitalist worker, a self made man?

[Aqizzar]

Mit Romney for example, doesn't have this trait. He seems too fake to me and I believe this is one of his highest criticisms? (it would be mine)
*Other than his vast wealth, which I find a strange criticism in a country like the USA where he is supposed to be the architypical capitalist worker, a self made man?

Well, that's partly thanks to the ad campaign against him, from his history.  His father was the governor of Michigan, and a very wealthy man, who sent his son to the finest colleges (which ironically makes him an elitist in the American rubric) and gave him most of his starting capital for his businesses.  Mitt is now exponentially more wealthy than Romney Sr. ever was, but he's anything but a self-made man.

Which is why it makes a strong criticism, in this particular year, as American political speech has really seized on "the rich get richer and the poor don't" as a foundational element.

[lemon10]

He made all his wealth in the financial industry, largely doing things that the vast majority of Americans don't understand and don't really bring any benefit to the economy while serving to make those who work in it obscenely wealthy at the expense of others.
It would be different if he made his wealth in anything besides the financial industry, and the complaints about him (from the republican side) would have much less to stand on, and probably wouldn't have been brought up at all.