Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Romney: Obama is naive not to be afraid of Chavez. Obama: Only a pansy like Romney would be afraid of Chavez   (content.usatoday.com) divider line 175
    More: Amusing, Hugo Chavez, Mitt Romney, President Obama  
•       •       •

4360 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Jul 2012 at 3:28 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



175 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-12 12:55:12 PM  
I . . . actually sort of like that comeback. If the Democratic surrogates could keep that line up, it might actually might have political effect.
 
2012-07-12 12:55:52 PM  
"President Obama's remarks continue a pattern of weakness in his foreign policy, one that has emboldened adversaries and diminished U.S. influence."

i595.photobucket.com
"Mr. Romney, I would like to take issue with that statement but I can't because Obama had the Navy SEALS blow my farking face off in a 24-style nighttime raid. They took all my porn and weed, too."
 
2012-07-12 12:57:13 PM  
Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.
 
2012-07-12 01:05:26 PM  
Also FTA: "It's baffling that Mitt Romney is so scared of a leader like Chavez whose power is fading, while Romney continues to remain silent about how to confront al-Qaeda or how to bring our troops home from Afghanistan," LaBolt said.

Isn't it obvious? Romney wants us terrified of the big, scary, colored man.

/Which one, you ask?
//Why both, of course.
 
2012-07-12 01:10:41 PM  
What's all this crazy talk about being afraid of large oil exporting countries? Chavez puts on a red hat and it's all "ooooh, he's so scary, he might be hiding under my bed!" - while he's shipping boatloads of oil into the USA.

Anyone afraid of Chavez is a spineless gutless worm.
 
2012-07-12 01:16:03 PM  
Chevez is a two-bit quasi dictator. No one should be afraid of him. Quit looking for enemies Mitt.
 
2012-07-12 01:16:05 PM  

coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.


Yeah, but we know better by now. They aren't remotely related.
 
2012-07-12 01:20:31 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: What's all this crazy talk about being afraid of large oil exporting countries? Chavez puts on a red hat and it's all "ooooh, he's so scary, he might be hiding under my bed!" - while he's shipping boatloads of oil into the USA.

Anyone afraid of Chavez is a spineless gutless worm.


The only thing that could be worse would be if that spineless gutless worm couldn't hold a political position on anything for more than five minutes at a time.
 
2012-07-12 01:21:39 PM  

GAT_00: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

Yeah, but we know better by now. They aren't remotely related.


That's not entirely true. I think they're related by marriage. Like cousins twice removed or something. That's why they have the same last name.
 
2012-07-12 01:24:34 PM  

SphericalTime: Marcus Aurelius: What's all this crazy talk about being afraid of large oil exporting countries? Chavez puts on a red hat and it's all "ooooh, he's so scary, he might be hiding under my bed!" - while he's shipping boatloads of oil into the USA.

Anyone afraid of Chavez is a spineless gutless worm.

The only thing that could be worse would be if that spineless gutless worm couldn't hold a political position on anything for more than five minutes at a time.


He believes in nothing. He's a nihilist, and those men are cowards.
 
2012-07-12 01:29:28 PM  
"I'm not a pansy! You take that back! I'm so upset I'm going to go ride my ballet horse for a while!"
 
2012-07-12 01:30:49 PM  
So, are you going to trust Obama, who apologizes for America instead of defending it?
 
2012-07-12 01:32:51 PM  

Mentat: Chevez is a two-bit quasi dictator. No one should be afraid of him. Quit looking for enemies Mitt.


Without enemies the GOP has nothing to run on.

kbronsito: He believes in nothing. He's a nihilist, and those men are cowards.


Romney's position on any given issue is "quantum superposition"
 
2012-07-12 01:35:58 PM  
Mr. Burns: (Sarcastic) Oooh, the Germans Chavez are mad at me. I'm so scared! Oooh, the Germans Chavez! (Hiding behind Smithers) Uh oh, the Germans Chavez are going to get me!
Horst: Stop it!
Man: Stop, sir.
Mr. Burns: Don't let the Germans Chavez come after me. Oh no, the Germans Chavez are coming after me.
Man: Please stop the "pretending you are scared" game, please.
Horst: Stop it! Stop it!
Mr. Burns: (Pause) No! They're so big and strong!
Man: Stop it.
Horst: Stop it, Mr. Burns.
Man: Please stop pretending you are scared of us, please, now.
Mr. Burns: Oh, protect me from the Germans Chavez! The Germans Chavez--
Horst: Burns, Stop it!
 
2012-07-12 01:42:10 PM  

Mentat: Chevez is a two-bit quasi dictator. No one should be afraid of him. Quit looking for enemies Mitt.


He got up to the "Booga Booga" chapter in Rove's handbook.
 
2012-07-12 01:42:40 PM  
i.imgur.com

The only threat to national security Romney will acknowledge is Konstantin Pavlovich Loshadev. Genetically engineered in an 80's looking Russian laboratory by steely-eyed blonde scientists, Konstantin Pavlovich learned ballet under Baryshnikov himself.
 
2012-07-12 01:48:45 PM  
What the hell is wrong with Republicans?

These people just don't feel alive unless they're crapping their pants and scaring the shiat out of rednecks.

I_Am_Weasel: Mr. Burns: Oh, protect me from the Germans Chavez! The Germans Chavez--
Horst: Burns, Stop it!


Hey! The Chavez is not all smiles and sunshine!
 
2012-07-12 01:49:59 PM  

GAT_00: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

Yeah, but we know better by now. They aren't remotely related.


Well, the thing is, Campaign Obama doesn't have to deal with Congress. Governing Obama does, and there's your issue.
 
2012-07-12 01:52:59 PM  

coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.


I think if he gets a second term, he might be. This is not just based on pipe dreaming, but also on the time he "scandously" was caught telling the Russian president: ""This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

We'll see what happens.
 
2012-07-12 01:58:32 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-07-12 01:59:56 PM  

mitchcumstein1: GAT_00: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

Yeah, but we know better by now. They aren't remotely related.

Well, the thing is, Campaign Obama doesn't have to deal with Congress. Governing Obama does, and there's your issue.


Governing Obama doesn't deal with Congress and that's the problem. He doesn't direct anything domestically.
 
2012-07-12 02:01:38 PM  
Farking Pinochet was worse than Chevez could ever hope to be and Republicans loved that guy. Seriously GOP, grow some balls.
 
2012-07-12 02:07:14 PM  

mahuika: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

I think if he gets a second term, he might be. This is not just based on pipe dreaming, but also on the time he "scandously" was caught telling the Russian president: ""This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

We'll see what happens.


See, I'm not of the "oh, this compromise is a strategic decision and he will change after the election" school. I think this is who Obama is, character-wise. He's not an FDR type hardass. He really believes in compromise over all. He would rather get something through Congress, even if it is a conservative, watered-down version of what Democrats want, than put his foot down and slog it out to get something more progressive. I think he's a bit less naive now about the Republicans, but I don't expect much change in that regard.
 
2012-07-12 02:09:19 PM  

mitchcumstein1: GAT_00: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

Yeah, but we know better by now. They aren't remotely related.

Well, the thing is, Campaign Obama doesn't have to deal with Congress. Governing Obama does, and there's your issue.


I am willing to give Obama a pass on health care and other legislative initiatives he had to deal with Congress on. However, no one forced him to assemble the pro-Wall Street jackasses he put on his economic team. No one is forcing him to step up drone attacks and heighten the executive power that Bush had already increased. These are on his shoulders alone and it's not fair to blame the Republicans for that.
 
2012-07-12 02:11:15 PM  

coco ebert: mahuika: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

I think if he gets a second term, he might be. This is not just based on pipe dreaming, but also on the time he "scandously" was caught telling the Russian president: ""This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

We'll see what happens.

See, I'm not of the "oh, this compromise is a strategic decision and he will change after the election" school. I think this is who Obama is, character-wise. He's not an FDR type hardass. He really believes in compromise over all. He would rather get something through Congress, even if it is a conservative, watered-down version of what Democrats want, than put his foot down and slog it out to get something more progressive. I think he's a bit less naive now about the Republicans, but I don't expect much change in that regard.


I see. I certainly agree that he believes in compromise, but I also think he has bit his tongue more than a few times in the past, and that if he'd reelcted, he will be more outspoken and be more willing to go out on a limb.

That said, Congress operates differently than they did under FDR and in today's political climate, it could be that FDR would fail to acheive his agenda.
 
2012-07-12 02:12:39 PM  

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 600x414]


You just wait and see at the Olympics. All of the American ballet horses will be dropping like flies from a mysterious illness, their deaths eerily similar to that of Alexander Litvenenko. It's going to be like Munich all over again, except President Fart won't have the guts to send Mossad after them.
 
2012-07-12 02:14:32 PM  
Advantage: Obama
 
2012-07-12 02:16:32 PM  

coco ebert: See, I'm not of the "oh, this compromise is a strategic decision and he will change after the election" school. I think this is who Obama is, character-wise. He's not an FDR type hardass. He really believes in compromise over all. He would rather get something through Congress, even if it is a conservative, watered-down version of what Democrats want, than put his foot down and slog it out to get something more progressive. I think he's a bit less naive now about the Republicans, but I don't expect much change in that regard.


President Obama is a Rockefeller Republican. Anyone who thought he was going to be a Kucinich-style Progressive wasn't paying attention.

Basically, he is really as far right as a sane, post-industrial Democracy should go.

Of course, the pendulum will swing, and at some point in the next few decades we'll be probably be biatching about entrenched leftists instead of entrenched rightists, because we can't do anything moderately in the US.

Politically we're like a nation of people who get upset they have been eating a little too much fast food lately, so get into Crossfit and get excited when they puke during a workout.
 
2012-07-12 02:18:54 PM  
i.imgur.com

ok that one didn't come out so well :(
 
2012-07-12 02:19:53 PM  

sweetmelissa31: All of the American ballet horses will be dropping like flies from a mysterious illness


horse AIDS :(
 
2012-07-12 02:21:03 PM  

mahuika: coco ebert: mahuika: coco ebert: Man, I wish Governing Obama were more like Campaign Obama.

I think if he gets a second term, he might be. This is not just based on pipe dreaming, but also on the time he "scandously" was caught telling the Russian president: ""This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

We'll see what happens.

See, I'm not of the "oh, this compromise is a strategic decision and he will change after the election" school. I think this is who Obama is, character-wise. He's not an FDR type hardass. He really believes in compromise over all. He would rather get something through Congress, even if it is a conservative, watered-down version of what Democrats want, than put his foot down and slog it out to get something more progressive. I think he's a bit less naive now about the Republicans, but I don't expect much change in that regard.

I see. I certainly agree that he believes in compromise, but I also think he has bit his tongue more than a few times in the past, and that if he'd reelcted, he will be more outspoken and be more willing to go out on a limb.

That said, Congress operates differently than they did under FDR and in today's political climate, it could be that FDR would fail to acheive his agenda.


Sure, we can't expect Obama to be an FDR when times are different. However, I don't see Obama as a strong leader in the FDR mode in that he is more likely to dictate his legislative and executive priorities based on what he sees as feasible and where the general consensus in the country is rather than put forth a strong position on things.
 
2012-07-12 02:22:48 PM  

coco ebert: However, no one forced him to assemble the pro-Wall Street jackasses he put on his economic team.


Who else is he going to pick? You need people who know the system, unfortunately that's Wall Street people. You just have to hope you've picked the right ones.

No one is forcing him to step up drone attacks and heighten the executive power that Bush had already increased.

Honestly, I have no issue with drone strikes. It's a hell of a lot better than sending in troops, and frankly, that area of the world is a complete farking mess. We're going to be there one way or another for a very long time.
 
2012-07-12 02:24:01 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: President Obama is a Rockefeller Republican. Anyone who thought he was going to be a Kucinich-style Progressive wasn't paying attention.


That's true, but I don't think that counters with the Campaign Obama that I see. I just want him to call the Republicans out more often, which he does when he's campaigning.
 
2012-07-12 02:25:23 PM  

coco ebert: Sure, we can't expect Obama to be an FDR when times are different. However, I don't see Obama as a strong leader in the FDR mode in that he is more likely to dictate his legislative and executive priorities based on what he sees as feasible and where the general consensus in the country is rather than put forth a strong position on things.


Wait, you have an issue with President Obama's expansion of the executive, but you like want him to be more like FDR?

He can't win for losing with you.
 
2012-07-12 02:27:28 PM  

coco ebert: Sure, we can't expect Obama to be an FDR when times are different. However, I don't see Obama as a strong leader in the FDR mode in that he is more likely to dictate his legislative and executive priorities based on what he sees as feasible and where the general consensus in the country is rather than put forth a strong position on things.


Depends entirely on what you think the role of the President should be. This ties in with the different ideas of what "representation" means in representative democracy.

For folks who believe that the representation is meant to enable the current will of the electorate in any given instance, for example, find the idea that some Senators, Reps and Presidents base their positions on polling numbers to be the proper, if not optimal, method of representation.

Others (seemingly more these days, both on the electorate side and the elected side) go by the idea that being elected means that whatever you, personally as a representative, decide on any issue is how you should vote. That is, the electorate elected you to make the decision for them.

While the quasi-imperial-Presidency, or, put another way, President as leader in some sort of "army of Americans" way, has some considerable resonance with Americans (who, amusingly, consider themselves to be independent and not led), that's not the only way the Presidential role can be executed.
 
2012-07-12 02:36:47 PM  

Mentat: Farking Pinochet was worse than Chevez could ever hope to be and Republicans loved that guy. Seriously GOP, grow some balls.


His intelligence agency blew up a car to kill a political enemy near downtown DC and if i recall correctly (besides the intended target) he killed a U.S. citizen and crippled another.

Republican response: Hey, here's some more military aid to fight commies.
 
2012-07-12 02:40:09 PM  

mitchcumstein1: Honestly, I have no issue with drone strikes. It's a hell of a lot better than sending in troops, and frankly, that area of the world is a complete farking mess. We're going to be there one way or another for a very long time.


Neither do I, frankly. If it wasn't drone strikes it'd be covert ops using human assets. The US utilizing extra-judicial means to get at our foes is not at all new.

mahuika: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: President Obama is a Rockefeller Republican. Anyone who thought he was going to be a Kucinich-style Progressive wasn't paying attention.

That's true, but I don't think that counters with the Campaign Obama that I see. I just want him to call the Republicans out more often, which he does when he's campaigning.


I definitely think that he believed that, in the first 2-3 years of his term, he could serve as "facilitator in chief". Which is a perfectly fine mode to govern in from the executive branch if your loyal opposition is both loyal and well-intentioned. That impression of him has stuck, but over the last year or so, he's definitely realized that he's gotta play a tougher game, but also a finesse game at the same time.

Luckily, he's very competent at being Troll-in-Chief
 
CDP [TotalFark]
2012-07-12 02:47:31 PM  
It's a safe bet that the vast majority of Obama's supporters are either ignorant or supportive of Chavez and Ahmadinejad's alliance, Iran's nuclear aspirations, the Cuban missile crisis, or just plain lack the intellect to see the farce of history attempting to repeat itself

i132.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-12 02:48:38 PM  

CDP: It's a safe bet that the vast majority of Obama's supporters are either ignorant or supportive of Chavez and Ahmadinejad's alliance, Iran's nuclear aspirations, the Cuban missile crisis, or just plain lack the intellect to see the farce of history attempting to repeat itself

[Link][i132.photobucket.com image 245x380]


No only that, but Iran's aggressive use of Photoshop will eventually lead to Persian domination of the entire geographic region.
 
2012-07-12 02:50:58 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: CDP: It's a safe bet that the vast majority of Obama's supporters are either ignorant or supportive of Chavez and Ahmadinejad's alliance, Iran's nuclear aspirations, the Cuban missile crisis, or just plain lack the intellect to see the farce of history attempting to repeat itself

[Link][i132.photobucket.com image 245x380]

No only that, but Iran's aggressive use of Photoshop will eventually lead to Persian domination of the entire geographic region.


Rugs and long-haired cats everywhere, man. It'll be like Dachau all over again.
 
2012-07-12 02:51:23 PM  

mitchcumstein1: coco ebert: Sure, we can't expect Obama to be an FDR when times are different. However, I don't see Obama as a strong leader in the FDR mode in that he is more likely to dictate his legislative and executive priorities based on what he sees as feasible and where the general consensus in the country is rather than put forth a strong position on things.

Wait, you have an issue with President Obama's expansion of the executive, but you like want him to be more like FDR?

He can't win for losing with you.


I didn't mean for him to me more like FDR in that regard (internment, stacking the court- heavens no!). I meant it more as an issue of style and character.
 
2012-07-12 02:55:59 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: coco ebert: Sure, we can't expect Obama to be an FDR when times are different. However, I don't see Obama as a strong leader in the FDR mode in that he is more likely to dictate his legislative and executive priorities based on what he sees as feasible and where the general consensus in the country is rather than put forth a strong position on things.

Depends entirely on what you think the role of the President should be. This ties in with the different ideas of what "representation" means in representative democracy.

For folks who believe that the representation is meant to enable the current will of the electorate in any given instance, for example, find the idea that some Senators, Reps and Presidents base their positions on polling numbers to be the proper, if not optimal, method of representation.

Others (seemingly more these days, both on the electorate side and the elected side) go by the idea that being elected means that whatever you, personally as a representative, decide on any issue is how you should vote. That is, the electorate elected you to make the decision for them.

While the quasi-imperial-Presidency, or, put another way, President as leader in some sort of "army of Americans" way, has some considerable resonance with Americans (who, amusingly, consider themselves to be independent and not led), that's not the only way the Presidential role can be executed.


Good point. It does to a certain extent depend on how you think leaders should lead (or rather, if they should follow). I happen to think that ideally we elect leaders because we see them as experts in some realm that function nonetheless within the limitations of the Constitution and established law and thus they should set out an agenda and explain why it's important to go in one particular direction. One may not agree with that path, but there is something to be said for the pedagogical aspect of leadership.
 
2012-07-12 03:32:45 PM  

Doctor Funkenstein: "President Obama's remarks continue a pattern of weakness in his foreign policy, one that has emboldened adversaries and diminished U.S. influence."

[i595.photobucket.com image 196x257]
"Mr. Romney, I would like to take issue with that statement but I can't because Obama had the Navy SEALS blow my farking face off in a 24-style nighttime raid. They took all my porn and weed, too."


i301.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-12 03:32:50 PM  
Scoff all you want, but you libs will be cowering in fear and begging strong, conservative men to protect you with their amazing gun collections when the mighty Venezuelan naval invasion force breaches our shores.

We may protect you, but only if you pay us in gold bars. Oh wait, you don't have any!
 
2012-07-12 03:35:07 PM  
Is this early saber rattling from Mitt? Is he looking to get us into a war with Venezuela if he is elected?

Or is he just a pansy?

Probably both.
 
2012-07-12 03:36:39 PM  

CDP: It's a safe bet that the vast majority of Obama's supporters are either ignorant or supportive of Chavez and Ahmadinejad's alliance, Iran's nuclear aspirations, the Cuban missile crisis, or just plain lack the intellect to see the farce of history attempting to repeat itself

[i132.photobucket.com image 245x380]


And it's a safe bet that the majority of Romney supporters are ignorant of the fact that Chavez is dying of cancer.

/or just ignorant, period.
//And wasn't the Soviet Union Russia the biggest geopolitical threat to American power?
 
2012-07-12 03:39:04 PM  
Whatever the threat, know that under a Romney presidency, we will face threats on multiple fronts, but his sons will have already served their country proudly by working on his campaign. Twice, even.
 
2012-07-12 03:40:21 PM  

SphericalTime: Marcus Aurelius: What's all this crazy talk about being afraid of large oil exporting countries? Chavez puts on a red hat and it's all "ooooh, he's so scary, he might be hiding under my bed!" - while he's shipping boatloads of oil into the USA.

Anyone afraid of Chavez is a spineless gutless worm.

The only thing that could be worse would be if that spineless gutless worm couldn't hold a political position on anything for more than five minutes at a time.


i293.photobucket.com

That's for both of you and the comment in the headline.
 
2012-07-12 03:40:51 PM  
A Republican running a campaign based on fear? You're kidding!
 
2012-07-12 03:40:54 PM  

JohnnyC: Is this early saber rattling from Mitt? Is he looking to get us into a war with Venezuela if he is elected?

Or is he just a pansy?

Probably both.


The 2008 version was "we know how to get Bin Laden, and we would never dream of going into Pakistan."

They're bluffing again. Seen it, got the t-shirt.

memeshirts.wordans.us
 
Displayed 50 of 175 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report