Members JKane Posted March 24, 2012 Members Posted March 24, 2012 Yesterday afternoon the Rick Santorum campaign dropped the weirdest, most terrifying ad of the American political season thus far. They did it via YouTube, where, as noted at MSNBC.com, the video is unlisted: Only those with a link can see it. Seems like a silly way to disseminate an ad. Maybe it'll hit our televisions after the opinion makers weigh in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DApjHZq9o7M&hd=1 Entitled Obamaville, it presents a horror-show vision of America in the dread year 2014. In Obamaville the streets are empty, and scary-looking crows are everywhere. Children's shoes are discarded in the dirt -- and where are the children? They're gone! Look at the abandoned playgrounds, the equipment therein manipulated by naught but the lonely wind. (Or is it something more sinister?) This is 28 Days Later, reimagined in the rustbelt. Lookit the little lonesome baby, squirming in what might be a bathtub. Lookit the psychotic smiling nurse wearing too much lipstick, saying "Shhhhhhh" -- is she euthanizing us? Is that horrible nurse lady euthanizing the American Dream? And see the man who appears to be blowing his brains out with a gasoline pump. And see, in particular, the television sitting on the floor in some dilapidated Obamavillian house, relaying pictures of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The narrator intones: "A rogue nation, and sworn American enemy, has become a nuclear threat." As the narrator says "sworn American enemy," Ahmadinejad's face is replaced for just an instant with Barack Obama's. They are one and the same, goes the implication; brother jihadis beneath the skin. The ad's got no ideas, no arguments, no obvious references to the actual objective reality inhabited by actual citizens in the actual world. Whoever made it doesn't think the American people are smart enough to be swayed by such things. Rather, the ad's an appeal for the votes of idiots and paranoiacs -- which, you'd think, would be galling to the potential Santorumites at whom it's aimed. It may sometimes be difficult to discern who the good guys are in American politics, but the really bad guys are never hard to locate. They're the ones who make ads like this. Read more: http://www.towleroad.../#ixzz1q4irSuGP Quote
Guest hitoallusa Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 It's unfortunate that they have to make such an ad. If Rick and his people are not balanced then Rick should not be nominated.. Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 He seems really desperate to me. I don't see how he can possibly think he is electable in November. He is for off to the right and extreme that he is turning off more voters than he is appealing to. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted March 25, 2012 Members Posted March 25, 2012 I was absolutely convinced this was somebody pranking Santorum & the media until I clicked through and found NBC quoting Santorum campaign officials defending their ad. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, if this is something put together by a legit campaign with something to lose, think what those loose cannons in the independant Superpacs will be belching out by September. LOL, anybody want to join me in an "Impeach John Roberts" petition? Quote
Members JKane Posted March 25, 2012 Author Members Posted March 25, 2012 LOL, anybody want to join me in an "Impeach John Roberts" petition? Yes! I would in a second if I thought it'd do any good! But AFAIK there's no constitutional method for removing a justice. Best we can do is pray for them to die. Absurd as that sounds, there are apparently religious conservatives routinely praying for 'liberal' justices to die! Good thing it accomplishes exactly jack and shit, I suppose! Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Yes! I would in a second if I thought it'd do any good! But AFAIK there's no constitutional method for removing a justice. Justice Chase would have been interested to hear that during his House impeachment proceedings. (Acquitted in the Senate, though. Sound familiar?) Cf. Article III, "on good behavior." Understood as judiciary equivalent to the executive impeachment threshold of "high crimes and misdemeanors." Quote
Members JKane Posted March 25, 2012 Author Members Posted March 25, 2012 Ah yes, today I learned... But while there are already (a couple, competing, per Democratic usual) petitions up to 'impeach The Supreme Court 5' it doesn't sound like it has a snowball's chance in hell. Quote
Members JKane Posted March 25, 2012 Author Members Posted March 25, 2012 More specifically, 2/3rds of the Senate required, so not even if a miracle occurred and we got 60 seats in November. The House of Representatives brings charges, called "articles of impeachment," against officials it considers guilty of criminal or ethical violations. If a simple majority of the House finds sufficient evidence to support impeachment, the official proceeds to trial in the Senate. The Vice-President of the United States presides over impeachment trials involving Article III federal judges and Supreme Court justices. Conviction requires a vote of two-thirds of the Senators present. Plus I don't agree with the principal of removing Justices for controversial opinions, as much as I disagree. It just underlines the importance of not letting a chimp like Bush make the appointments. So the best we can hope for is a sudden death of Scalia and Thomas. And that Obama has enough political capital left to appoint people more worthy to the positions, and I personally hope he continues to appoint women. The oldest justice serving is Ginsberg though. Quote
