I was caught up in Romney fever for a time

[All-American]

I suspect that the 24 hour news network has ended the era in which the President could be a popular figure. There is and always will be too much exposure for American voters not to find something they don't like about the government leaders.

The only way around this that I can see is for government leaders to get off the front pages of the papers is to stop doing things that are newsworthy-- id est, decreasing the size of the government. You'd think that if the government can't find things that are important enough to get on the front page of the paper that people actually like, that it would be a rather glaring sign.

I suspect America has wanted a more conservative government ever since Reagan came along. Bush I and Bush II's greatest flaws have been a very UNconservative approach to spending and regulation ("read my lips" comes to mind). Meanwhile, Clinton's greatest victory is the fact that he yielded so much ground to the conservatives.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Those are excellent choices, but if I were to glean attributes from among the board, I think I'd steal modesty, discernment, maturity, and a nicely-sized income.

Umm..... Good luck with that. Don't look at me.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Umm..... Good luck with that. Don't look at me.

Yeah, well, I think you came out on top of that list. You've got something that's marketable. Me? I'll I've got going for me is the fact that I may someday be worth something.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Whether Gitmo fits the decription of a panopticon or not, I am uncertain as I'm a little, or rather a lot rusty on my Foucault, but I do remember some of the details of concentration camps having studied German and lived in Germany, and the comparison is very poor and in poor taste. Perhaps the Japanese internment camps creates a better analogy.

I don't have the Nazi death camps specifically in mind (and neither does Foucault). It's more about the control of movement, the surveillance of behavior, and the partitioning of the infected from the healthy. Foucault's discussion of the 17th century plague, and the techniques to control it with prison logic, have application to today's discussion of terror. Terror is our plague in some senses.

The Nazi camps did impliment a measure of panopticism, but they had many other aspects as well. I would argue that the Nazi camps are an intense, but not particularly representitive, instance of a much broader mode of thinking. In Foucauldian terms, Gitmo could be thought of as a center for those infected with terrorism.

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by Archaea

If I could but possess, pelagius's financial acumen, PAC and Goat's wit, Jeff's engineering expertise, SIEQ's philosophical insights and vocabulary, Creekster's former cycling ability, Seattle's writing ability, Solon's classical knowledge, CHC's critical training, AA's potential and Mike's ingenuity, I'd really be unstoppable.

Your forgetting Mormon Red Death's sexpertise

[Insensitive PAP]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

and then when his "we should double Gitmo" statement came out, I suddenly realized something: almost nothing distinguishes Mitt from Bush.

The guys on cougarboard couldn't even tell me how Mitt differed from Bush on the issues.

If you really, really look at the facts: there is very little to suggest that Mitt is principled, and A LOT of evidence to suggest that he is not.

Sorry Mitt, I am off the bandwagon.

Also, I think if Bush is anything, he is principled. Isn't that what everyone complains about, his inflexibility? If anything, Mitt is the opposite of Bush because of his malleability.

I still have my questions about Mitt, and I don't expect all my questions will be answered in a twinkling.

[RockyBalboa]

I'll ask this question: Does anyone think a politician changes his mind because he actually well decided or realized he was wrong...or do you think a politician will change their mind 99.9% of the time for political gain?

I've no reason to NOT believe Romney when he says that on a couple of issues, abortion one of them, that he came to realize that he was just flat out wrong.

Have any of you ever realized you're flat out wrong on something and changed your mind or thought process about it or did you change your mind because you realized it would bring you gain later on?

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by All-American

I suspect that the 24 hour news network has ended the era in which the President could be a popular figure. There is and always will be too much exposure for American voters not to find something they don't like about the government leaders.

That's a fantastic point. I question whether Washington himself would have been as universally loved if he'd had CNN covering everything he did and said.

[MikeWaters]

When I liked Romney I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

But when I realized that my values regarding torture, Gitmo etc. didn't match wth Romney's I stopped giving him the benefit of the doubt.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When I liked Romney I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

But when I realized that my values regarding torture, Gitmo etc. didn't match wth Romney's I stopped giving him the benefit of the doubt.

My guess is no leader shares your very idealistic views toward torture, and that you dismissing Romney for a silly, intangible reason.