Hollywood/Politics connection
+2
Nicky80
Way2Old4Dis
6 posters
Page 1 of 1
Hollywood/Politics connection
I thought this was interesting, given the talk about George's crazy-rumored political aspirations.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-reeling-bitter-election-defeats-746423
Hollywood Reeling From Bitter Election Defeats
3:01 AM PST 11/05/2014 by Tina Daunt
AP Images
Bobby Shriver
60 Hollywood Names Who Gave Money to Unseat Mitch McConnell »
Tuesday's midterm elections brought defeats for many Hollywood-supported candidates.
The entertainment industry's political losing streak started mid-afternoon on Tuesday, with Alison Lundergan Grimes' defeat by Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Read more TV Stations Benefit From Spending Bonanza During Costly Midterm Election
Next, Sen. Kay Hagan lost her expensive battle in North Carolina. She was followed by Michelle Nunn in Georgia, Sen. Mark Pryor in Arkansas, Sen. Mark Udall in Colorado and Sen. Mark Begich in Alaska — all of them recipients of Hollywood cash.
Few had anticipated that Sen. Mark Warner, once a Hollywood pick for president, would be locked in a tight race against GOP challenger Ed Gillespie … or that Sen. Mary Landrieu would be pushed into a runoff election in Louisiana.
As the news started to sink in that the Republicans were back in control of the Senate — and Jeffrey Katzenberg's archnemesis McConnell would be leading the charge — Hollywood politicos turned their attention to Bobby Shriver, the industry pick to replace longtime Los Angeles County supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who was forced to retire because of term limits.
Read more MSNBC Arrives at Midterm Election With Little Ratings Steam
The scion of American political royalty had received thousands of dollars in Hollywood campaign contributions in his effort to represent the Westside of Los Angeles and parts of the San Fernando Valley on the Board of Supervisors.
His campaign finance report read like a list of Oscar attendees. Among the donors: Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks, J.J. Abrams, Oprah Winfrey, Jerry Bruckheimer, Jimmy Iovine, Warren Beatty, Jessica Alba, Chris O'Donnell, Rob Lowe, Larry David, Ted Danson, Joan Cusack, Harvey Keitel and Michael Douglas.
But just before 4 a.m. L.A. time, Shriver was officially defeated by onetime TV star Shiela Kuehl, now a veteran Sacramento lawmaker whose campaign was heavily supported by organized labor. Shriver got just more than 47.2 percent of the vote, compared to his opponent's nearly 52.8 percent. His loss was a sort of coup de grace for Hollywood's political efforts this season.
Read more Church of Scientology's L.A. Headquarters Serving as Midterm Polling Station
Tennis Channel chief Ken Solomon said he and his fellow Hollywood fundraisers realized in recent weeks that their candidates were in trouble. As Barbra Streisand sent out a donation plea to Democratic fundraisers across the country, industry politicos began to prepare themselves for a losing battle.
"It was the worst election map since Eisenhower," Solomon said. "We all put on our body armor and were waiting for this explosion. Now we just need to move forward."
Nov. 5, 3:45 a.m. Updated with final Shriver race figures.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-reeling-bitter-election-defeats-746423
Hollywood Reeling From Bitter Election Defeats
3:01 AM PST 11/05/2014 by Tina Daunt
- 0
- 48
- 0
- 2
- 0
- Email
- [url=javascript:;]Print[/url]
Comments
AP Images
Bobby Shriver
Bobby Shriver's loss marked the end of a day that saw industry politicos' favorites defeated and Republicans back in control of the U.S. Senate
Recommended:60 Hollywood Names Who Gave Money to Unseat Mitch McConnell »
Tuesday's midterm elections brought defeats for many Hollywood-supported candidates.
The entertainment industry's political losing streak started mid-afternoon on Tuesday, with Alison Lundergan Grimes' defeat by Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Read more TV Stations Benefit From Spending Bonanza During Costly Midterm Election
Next, Sen. Kay Hagan lost her expensive battle in North Carolina. She was followed by Michelle Nunn in Georgia, Sen. Mark Pryor in Arkansas, Sen. Mark Udall in Colorado and Sen. Mark Begich in Alaska — all of them recipients of Hollywood cash.
Few had anticipated that Sen. Mark Warner, once a Hollywood pick for president, would be locked in a tight race against GOP challenger Ed Gillespie … or that Sen. Mary Landrieu would be pushed into a runoff election in Louisiana.
As the news started to sink in that the Republicans were back in control of the Senate — and Jeffrey Katzenberg's archnemesis McConnell would be leading the charge — Hollywood politicos turned their attention to Bobby Shriver, the industry pick to replace longtime Los Angeles County supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who was forced to retire because of term limits.
Read more MSNBC Arrives at Midterm Election With Little Ratings Steam
The scion of American political royalty had received thousands of dollars in Hollywood campaign contributions in his effort to represent the Westside of Los Angeles and parts of the San Fernando Valley on the Board of Supervisors.
His campaign finance report read like a list of Oscar attendees. Among the donors: Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg, David Geffen, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks, J.J. Abrams, Oprah Winfrey, Jerry Bruckheimer, Jimmy Iovine, Warren Beatty, Jessica Alba, Chris O'Donnell, Rob Lowe, Larry David, Ted Danson, Joan Cusack, Harvey Keitel and Michael Douglas.
But just before 4 a.m. L.A. time, Shriver was officially defeated by onetime TV star Shiela Kuehl, now a veteran Sacramento lawmaker whose campaign was heavily supported by organized labor. Shriver got just more than 47.2 percent of the vote, compared to his opponent's nearly 52.8 percent. His loss was a sort of coup de grace for Hollywood's political efforts this season.
Read more Church of Scientology's L.A. Headquarters Serving as Midterm Polling Station
Tennis Channel chief Ken Solomon said he and his fellow Hollywood fundraisers realized in recent weeks that their candidates were in trouble. As Barbra Streisand sent out a donation plea to Democratic fundraisers across the country, industry politicos began to prepare themselves for a losing battle.
"It was the worst election map since Eisenhower," Solomon said. "We all put on our body armor and were waiting for this explosion. Now we just need to move forward."
Nov. 5, 3:45 a.m. Updated with final Shriver race figures.
Way2Old4Dis- Mastering the tao of Clooney
- Posts : 2742
Join date : 2012-06-25
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
the election was interesting. it is in the news here too. I understand when People are unhappy with they President but to have this result means nothing will happen in the next two years. I could be wrong but I don't think it will go Hand in Hand in the next two years. American people make it more complicated and blame the government but it's them who vote (or don't). I was surprised that the Americans voted the republicans after two years Obama was in power (forgot which election that was).
I don't understand why the republicans voted and so many democrats didn't bother because they are disappointed. For me it shows that the republicans are more loyal then the democrats....
Of course I can be wrong. I haven't read all the news yet but this is the first Impression I got.
I was even surprised that the democrats advertisement on TV was "against" Obama.
I don't know if he really disappoint People..or if people put they expetations too high.
I wonder how George thinks about it. He supported him well at the beginning. Guess everyone wants to keep quite now....
Now for my understanding this vote only shows americans are unhappy about Obama...but do you think in two years time the republicans will win the next election for president too or is there still a chance for the democrats?
I don't understand why the republicans voted and so many democrats didn't bother because they are disappointed. For me it shows that the republicans are more loyal then the democrats....
Of course I can be wrong. I haven't read all the news yet but this is the first Impression I got.
I was even surprised that the democrats advertisement on TV was "against" Obama.
I don't know if he really disappoint People..or if people put they expetations too high.
I wonder how George thinks about it. He supported him well at the beginning. Guess everyone wants to keep quite now....
Now for my understanding this vote only shows americans are unhappy about Obama...but do you think in two years time the republicans will win the next election for president too or is there still a chance for the democrats?
Nicky80- Casamigos with Mr Clooney
- Posts : 8561
Join date : 2013-05-01
Location : Germany
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
I'll give you my perspective, which is bound to anger some people and confuse others.
Let me say right off the top that I'm registered as an 'independent." But I have yet to meet, hear, or read about a Republican that I would trust with my car keys, much less my vote. They have an absolutely horrible record on issues facing the middle class, women, and anybody who is non-white. So, until there is a viable third-party candidate who mirrors my views in any election, I vote 'Democrat.'
As little as I think of the current Republicans -- and believe me, it is very, very little -- I think the Democrats deserved the shellacking they got. They let the Republicans bully them into inertia, and didn't support President Obama when he needed them. They allowed the country's agenda to be taken over by obstructionist, bitter, undereducated, good-old-boy minions and outright racists whose entire reason for being was to stop President Obama from making any progress on any issue. The Democrats did nothing proactive until the past year, when they started their "grassroots" campaigns that mimicked the President's but distanced themselves from him, all the while asking for money to defeat those evil Republicans. While I agree the Republicans are responsible for most of the major problems we have now, the Democrats did little to derail them.
But, and this is crucial, there was a tremendous effort to limit the Democratic turnout. It has been going on since the President won his first term. There was a surge of state laws that tried to put new restrictions on voters, such as requiring certain forms of ID (in Texas, they would allow someone to use a gun license as a form of ID, but not a college ID card), or requiring that a voter casts his ballot in the precinct of his residence (remember, some people vote on lunch breaks from work, for example). And in the meantime, the number of polling places in ethnic communities was cut, and many of those were barely accessible by public transportation.
Why did this happen? Because the Republicans knew that that the surge in Democratic voter participation was part of President Obama's legacy. They claimed voter fraud, but there is actually less fraud now than there was under Republican administrations. Yet there was never a push for new voter laws until Obama won. And the way to defeat Democrats is to keep Democratic supporters from voting.
Still, the results are not due to Republicans suppressing Democratic votes. A lot of it comes down to money. The Koch brothers and Republican PACs funneled millions into negative ad campaigns in every major race. Democrats have PACs, too, but none as willing or able to buy elections as the Republicans. And again, the Dems were asking people like me to contribute, when they had an abysmal record of standing up for our causes. I don't give money to cowards. Republicans, on the other hand, give out of hate and fear, which tends to make people very loyal.
Fear and hate of what? A liberal Black man running the country.
I'm not going to argue with anyone on that point. I'll just point to the American President being heckled as a liar during a State of the Union address, and a governor having the audacity to wag her finger in his face when he visited her state. Just two examples, leaving out the racist comments and e-mails circulated at the local, state, and national levels, either by Republican leaders or their supporters. So this will just have to be stipulated. The US is full of fucking racists.
So now the Republicans will have to prove that they can govern. I think they will fail miserably, because they've shown little evidence of competence. When they do, they will have set themselves up for running in 2016 with a miserable showing. They will always have their core whatever-they-do-is-fine minions, but it remains to be seen if enough voters will recognize them for the bullshit artists they are, and vote with conscience and intelligence instead of fear-based loyalty.
Again, only my take on things.
Let me say right off the top that I'm registered as an 'independent." But I have yet to meet, hear, or read about a Republican that I would trust with my car keys, much less my vote. They have an absolutely horrible record on issues facing the middle class, women, and anybody who is non-white. So, until there is a viable third-party candidate who mirrors my views in any election, I vote 'Democrat.'
As little as I think of the current Republicans -- and believe me, it is very, very little -- I think the Democrats deserved the shellacking they got. They let the Republicans bully them into inertia, and didn't support President Obama when he needed them. They allowed the country's agenda to be taken over by obstructionist, bitter, undereducated, good-old-boy minions and outright racists whose entire reason for being was to stop President Obama from making any progress on any issue. The Democrats did nothing proactive until the past year, when they started their "grassroots" campaigns that mimicked the President's but distanced themselves from him, all the while asking for money to defeat those evil Republicans. While I agree the Republicans are responsible for most of the major problems we have now, the Democrats did little to derail them.
But, and this is crucial, there was a tremendous effort to limit the Democratic turnout. It has been going on since the President won his first term. There was a surge of state laws that tried to put new restrictions on voters, such as requiring certain forms of ID (in Texas, they would allow someone to use a gun license as a form of ID, but not a college ID card), or requiring that a voter casts his ballot in the precinct of his residence (remember, some people vote on lunch breaks from work, for example). And in the meantime, the number of polling places in ethnic communities was cut, and many of those were barely accessible by public transportation.
Why did this happen? Because the Republicans knew that that the surge in Democratic voter participation was part of President Obama's legacy. They claimed voter fraud, but there is actually less fraud now than there was under Republican administrations. Yet there was never a push for new voter laws until Obama won. And the way to defeat Democrats is to keep Democratic supporters from voting.
Still, the results are not due to Republicans suppressing Democratic votes. A lot of it comes down to money. The Koch brothers and Republican PACs funneled millions into negative ad campaigns in every major race. Democrats have PACs, too, but none as willing or able to buy elections as the Republicans. And again, the Dems were asking people like me to contribute, when they had an abysmal record of standing up for our causes. I don't give money to cowards. Republicans, on the other hand, give out of hate and fear, which tends to make people very loyal.
Fear and hate of what? A liberal Black man running the country.
I'm not going to argue with anyone on that point. I'll just point to the American President being heckled as a liar during a State of the Union address, and a governor having the audacity to wag her finger in his face when he visited her state. Just two examples, leaving out the racist comments and e-mails circulated at the local, state, and national levels, either by Republican leaders or their supporters. So this will just have to be stipulated. The US is full of fucking racists.
So now the Republicans will have to prove that they can govern. I think they will fail miserably, because they've shown little evidence of competence. When they do, they will have set themselves up for running in 2016 with a miserable showing. They will always have their core whatever-they-do-is-fine minions, but it remains to be seen if enough voters will recognize them for the bullshit artists they are, and vote with conscience and intelligence instead of fear-based loyalty.
Again, only my take on things.
Way2Old4Dis- Mastering the tao of Clooney
- Posts : 2742
Join date : 2012-06-25
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
thanks Way2old4dis for your opinion. interesting. I agree with it especially the point that the democrats allowed the republicans to bully them. The democrats came across very weak the last few years. And you are right the democrats didn't support Obama when he needed them and the whole world could watch it. I am specially surprised about the black community. they wanted Obama and even though they felt disappointed they let him down. and lot of racist apploud for that. All the blacks and Latinos and other whites should have backed him up when he needed it.
If it comes to politic I find it hard to understand american people. One day they are happy the next they are not and destroy you. And People wonder why america has so may problems (of course other countries too). I don't believe an american politician could do a big Change in the US. People just run you over if they don't agree and don't let you try......But maybe I see it wrong.
I foudn this an interesting Quote from our German newspaper which you can compare with the times
Google Translation
Is Obama really so bad?
No, he is not. But nothing helped him: Not the low unemployment (six percent), not economic growth (3.5 percent). Because Americans are disappointed and confused at the same time: Disappointed, because of the upturn most People didn't reach; insecure, because felt lined crisis to crisis: Ebola, Ukraine, jihadists. The mood is lousy, the mistrust in principle. The Republicans are not popular, quite the contrary. The midterms were thus perceived more as a choice between two evils - if you went vote at all.
That's why America did not move last night to the right. Rather, the country lurches.
Why could then win the Republican?
Because their core clientele, mainly the old, white men, was better to mobilize; because in the Senate this time those seats were proposed, in which the Democrats had more to lose; because the boys, Latinos, blacks are disappointed by a president who did not consider what he promised. Whether this happened now because of the resistance of the infiltrated by the Tea Party Republicans or not, is irrelevant here. It was now time, the President, had promised the people the change. And he is the one who can not deliver now.
Obama is not a decisive leader like Ronald Reagan, but he is thoughtful. He is not emotionally like Bill Clinton, but cool-rational. He is not a deal maker as Lyndon Johnson, but a loner. In short: Obama does not fit so well into this polarized time. He had set out to reconcile the country. And just so that he is now finally failed. This Tuesday, voters have deprived him more than just the remainders of his parliamentary majority. The confidence in his strength is gone.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-kongresswahlen-barack-obama-vor-zwei-schweren-jahren-a-1001073.html
If it comes to politic I find it hard to understand american people. One day they are happy the next they are not and destroy you. And People wonder why america has so may problems (of course other countries too). I don't believe an american politician could do a big Change in the US. People just run you over if they don't agree and don't let you try......But maybe I see it wrong.
I foudn this an interesting Quote from our German newspaper which you can compare with the times
Google Translation
Is Obama really so bad?
No, he is not. But nothing helped him: Not the low unemployment (six percent), not economic growth (3.5 percent). Because Americans are disappointed and confused at the same time: Disappointed, because of the upturn most People didn't reach; insecure, because felt lined crisis to crisis: Ebola, Ukraine, jihadists. The mood is lousy, the mistrust in principle. The Republicans are not popular, quite the contrary. The midterms were thus perceived more as a choice between two evils - if you went vote at all.
That's why America did not move last night to the right. Rather, the country lurches.
Why could then win the Republican?
Because their core clientele, mainly the old, white men, was better to mobilize; because in the Senate this time those seats were proposed, in which the Democrats had more to lose; because the boys, Latinos, blacks are disappointed by a president who did not consider what he promised. Whether this happened now because of the resistance of the infiltrated by the Tea Party Republicans or not, is irrelevant here. It was now time, the President, had promised the people the change. And he is the one who can not deliver now.
Obama is not a decisive leader like Ronald Reagan, but he is thoughtful. He is not emotionally like Bill Clinton, but cool-rational. He is not a deal maker as Lyndon Johnson, but a loner. In short: Obama does not fit so well into this polarized time. He had set out to reconcile the country. And just so that he is now finally failed. This Tuesday, voters have deprived him more than just the remainders of his parliamentary majority. The confidence in his strength is gone.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-kongresswahlen-barack-obama-vor-zwei-schweren-jahren-a-1001073.html
Nicky80- Casamigos with Mr Clooney
- Posts : 8561
Join date : 2013-05-01
Location : Germany
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Voters let themselves be swayed by false and superficial "issues" that the Republicans exploited. There is nothing new in that. But the fact that the country is solvent again, that employment is higher (though the statistics look better than the actual employment picture), and that we're out of two long, brutal wars (one of which was treacherously illegal, IMO) made no difference. Despicable of the Republicans, but the Democrats let them get away with it, so it's just desserts in my book.
Way2Old4Dis- Mastering the tao of Clooney
- Posts : 2742
Join date : 2012-06-25
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
https://twitter.com/evilgrrl/status/490731074754838528
George Clooney on Obama and the Democrats. pic.twitter.com/Gg1XKc5AFm
— Lee SM (@evilgrrl) July 20, 2014
Last edited by Katiedot on Wed 05 Nov 2014, 23:17; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : added tweet)
Silje- More than a little bit enthusiastic about Clooney
- Posts : 1083
Join date : 2014-05-30
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Can't copy the tweet but it has a statement from G. Not a new one. But valid for this election.
Silje- More than a little bit enthusiastic about Clooney
- Posts : 1083
Join date : 2014-05-30
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
""Fear and hate of what? A liberal Black man running the country....."""
that's what's been fueling the republicans since Obama was elected...certainly isn't their concern for the country. IMO
that's what's been fueling the republicans since Obama was elected...certainly isn't their concern for the country. IMO
ldg- Clooney virgin
- Posts : 34
Join date : 2014-08-22
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Re: George's statement... So, so true.
In the state (southeast) that I live in, the Democratic incumbent senator won every major county in the metropolitan areas. She lost. The Republican challenger won the rural, poor, southern, white districts. He was a favored pet of the Koch money machine, and most, if not all, of his campaign ads said something to the effect of, "She supported Obama, and we know how evil Obama is."
Keep in mind that this challenger has a record of voting against Medicare and Medicaid, voted for cuts to education that took teacher aides out of the classrooms and increased class sizes, and approved tax cuts for the wealthy to pay for it all -- in other words, issues that keep the people who voted for him poor and uneducated. But the Democrats had allowed President Obama to be so aggressively attacked that he was too weak to help them, and the hate mongering worked.
"Eat their own." That's a perfect way to put it.
In the state (southeast) that I live in, the Democratic incumbent senator won every major county in the metropolitan areas. She lost. The Republican challenger won the rural, poor, southern, white districts. He was a favored pet of the Koch money machine, and most, if not all, of his campaign ads said something to the effect of, "She supported Obama, and we know how evil Obama is."
Keep in mind that this challenger has a record of voting against Medicare and Medicaid, voted for cuts to education that took teacher aides out of the classrooms and increased class sizes, and approved tax cuts for the wealthy to pay for it all -- in other words, issues that keep the people who voted for him poor and uneducated. But the Democrats had allowed President Obama to be so aggressively attacked that he was too weak to help them, and the hate mongering worked.
"Eat their own." That's a perfect way to put it.
Way2Old4Dis- Mastering the tao of Clooney
- Posts : 2742
Join date : 2012-06-25
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
There are plenty of Youtube videos talking about Obama as the Antichrist. That is pretty crazy. Can't really see this happening in Europe.
Silje- More than a little bit enthusiastic about Clooney
- Posts : 1083
Join date : 2014-05-30
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Jon Stewart and the Daily Show's perspective. It's funny 'cause it's true.
(Sorry, I don't know how to do the video.)
http://theweek.com/article/index/271436/speedreads-jon-stewart-mocks-the-newly-anti-gridlock-gop-who-the-f--k-are-you-people
Jon Stewart mocks the newly anti-gridlock GOP: 'Who the f--k are you people?'
The Democrats took a good electoral beating on Tuesday. Jon Stewart had a more vulgar way of putting it on Wednesday night's Daily Show, but he was bewildered by the GOP's sudden embrace of bipartisanship and ending gridlock right after they picked off control of the Senate. "Who the f--k are you people?" he asked, singling out lead obstructionist Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Democrats came in for their share of abuse, too. Senior Political Analyst Jordan Klepper said that minutes after Republicans won, they proclaimed another "morning in America," with a booming stock market, low unemployment, only one Ebola case, and cheap gas.
When Stewart pointed out that all of those things happened under Obama and the Democratic Senate, Klepper scoffed. "If Democrats had accomplished all of that, they would have been out there bragging about it for months — it would have been the central message of their campaign" Klepper said. Instead, he said, their main message was: "We're sorry — don't be mad! We don't like Obama, either." Klepper's re-appropriation of Obama's famous campaign slogans is worth watching to the end for. --Peter Weber
24
511
1052
(Sorry, I don't know how to do the video.)
http://theweek.com/article/index/271436/speedreads-jon-stewart-mocks-the-newly-anti-gridlock-gop-who-the-f--k-are-you-people
Jon Stewart mocks the newly anti-gridlock GOP: 'Who the f--k are you people?'
The Democrats took a good electoral beating on Tuesday. Jon Stewart had a more vulgar way of putting it on Wednesday night's Daily Show, but he was bewildered by the GOP's sudden embrace of bipartisanship and ending gridlock right after they picked off control of the Senate. "Who the f--k are you people?" he asked, singling out lead obstructionist Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Democrats came in for their share of abuse, too. Senior Political Analyst Jordan Klepper said that minutes after Republicans won, they proclaimed another "morning in America," with a booming stock market, low unemployment, only one Ebola case, and cheap gas.
When Stewart pointed out that all of those things happened under Obama and the Democratic Senate, Klepper scoffed. "If Democrats had accomplished all of that, they would have been out there bragging about it for months — it would have been the central message of their campaign" Klepper said. Instead, he said, their main message was: "We're sorry — don't be mad! We don't like Obama, either." Klepper's re-appropriation of Obama's famous campaign slogans is worth watching to the end for. --Peter Weber
24
511
1052
Way2Old4Dis- Mastering the tao of Clooney
- Posts : 2742
Join date : 2012-06-25
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
The video can only be watched in the US.
What does GOP mean?
What does GOP mean?
Silje- More than a little bit enthusiastic about Clooney
- Posts : 1083
Join date : 2014-05-30
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
The Republican Party, commonly referred to as the GOP (abbreviation for Grand Old Party), is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, the other being the Democratic Party.
melbert- George Clooney fan forever!
- Posts : 19324
Join date : 2010-12-06
Location : George's House
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Silje - Both major parties have their heads up their butts and are out of touch with reality, which is why this country is such a freakin' mess. All they care about is power and re-election. Even well intentioned politicians get eaten by the machine.
I used to be against term limits. I felt my vote served that purpose. But now I wish that all federal representatives were limited to one term in office. The only reason they'd have for being there would be to serve their country - not to line their pockets and secure a cushy future for themselves.
Obama didn't let us down - we let him down, and if the Democrats don't get their act together 2016 is going to be an uphill fight.
I used to be against term limits. I felt my vote served that purpose. But now I wish that all federal representatives were limited to one term in office. The only reason they'd have for being there would be to serve their country - not to line their pockets and secure a cushy future for themselves.
Obama didn't let us down - we let him down, and if the Democrats don't get their act together 2016 is going to be an uphill fight.
LizzyNY- Casamigos with Mr Clooney
- Posts : 8167
Join date : 2013-08-28
Location : NY, USA
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Thanks Mel.
And Lizzy as an European, your political system makes no sense.
If the GOP has the majority in both senate and house or did I get that wrong? , then they will block everything Obama will try to do in the next 2 years. That is no way to run a country.
And Lizzy as an European, your political system makes no sense.
If the GOP has the majority in both senate and house or did I get that wrong? , then they will block everything Obama will try to do in the next 2 years. That is no way to run a country.
Silje- More than a little bit enthusiastic about Clooney
- Posts : 1083
Join date : 2014-05-30
Re: Hollywood/Politics connection
Silje - You're 100% right! It is no way to run a country and it's not the way the system is supposed to work. These men are supposed to be acting in the best interests of the people.
Most of the time the two parties at least try to compromise and run the country, but when Obama was elected the Republicans in Congress first dedicated themselves to making him a one-term President. When that didn't work and he got re-elected, they decided to try and stop him from accomplishing anything that might make him look good - even if his programs could help the American people. They are more concerned with amassing power for power's sake than in good government and the welfare of the country. IMO, they're a disgrace.
Most of the time the two parties at least try to compromise and run the country, but when Obama was elected the Republicans in Congress first dedicated themselves to making him a one-term President. When that didn't work and he got re-elected, they decided to try and stop him from accomplishing anything that might make him look good - even if his programs could help the American people. They are more concerned with amassing power for power's sake than in good government and the welfare of the country. IMO, they're a disgrace.
LizzyNY- Casamigos with Mr Clooney
- Posts : 8167
Join date : 2013-08-28
Location : NY, USA
Similar topics
» The Nestle Connection
» YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION COULD FAIL IN JULY
» George Clooney WW2 Movie Has Regina Connection
» George reveals the Miley Cyrus connection
» George Clooney to go into politics?
» YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION COULD FAIL IN JULY
» George Clooney WW2 Movie Has Regina Connection
» George reveals the Miley Cyrus connection
» George Clooney to go into politics?
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Fri 22 Mar 2024, 09:42 by annemariew
» George Clooney e Amal Alamuddin in Francia, ecco il loro nido
Sun 17 Mar 2024, 22:18 by party animal - not!
» Back in the UK
Mon 11 Mar 2024, 16:38 by annemariew
» George Clooney makes the effort to show his fans that he appreciates them
Sun 10 Mar 2024, 21:20 by carolhathaway
» What Happened?
Tue 27 Feb 2024, 10:51 by annemariew
» George and Amal in France with new St Bernard puppy
Mon 26 Feb 2024, 22:31 by Ida
» George on the Letterman Show
Wed 21 Feb 2024, 15:59 by LizzyNY
» George and Amal with a new puppy
Wed 14 Feb 2024, 19:14 by benex
» Amal new book on freedom of speech released
Tue 13 Feb 2024, 18:49 by party animal - not!