Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think that Romney is actually pretty well positioned going into this final debate tonight. He came out and thoroughly beat Obama in debate #1. In the second debate, they more or less tied, although Obama obviously increased much more in his performance (he was starting from lower). He was therefore better than Romney on a relative scale.In debate #3, Obama will not have the advantage of going "nowhere but up". If Romney can beat Obama once again, he will sway the tide of support in his favor leading into the final two weeks of the campaign.
Also interesting:
Bundesarchiv Bild 183-C12701, Nürnberg, Reichsparteitag, RAD-Appell [CC-BY-SA-3.0-de (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/deed.en)], by This image was provided to Wikimedia Commons by the German Federal Archive (Deutsches Bundesarchiv) as part of a cooperation project. The German Federal Archive guarantees an authentic representation only using the originals (negative and/or positive), resp. the digitalization of the originals as provided by the Digital Image Archive., from Wikimedia CommonsInteresting to learn that the Zeppelinfeld was one of Albert Speer's first works for the Nazis and was modelled on the Pergamon Altarhttp://www.museums.nuremberg.de/documentation-centre/topics/party-rally-grounds.html
At least you identified it, but from what I see it is a somewhat tenuous connection to the Pergamon Altar.See here -
Phid, do you know if any of this was used in the 1936 Olympics?
No, it was not begun until after. From the article accompanying the photos:
On the occasion of the cornerstone celebration, Hitler presented a two-meter high model of the planned new construction in front of 24,000 people. The stadium was to have room for more than 400,000 spectators. Excavation began in 1938, but they didn't get much further than that. Construction in Nuremberg ceased only one year later due to the outbreak of World War II.
Speaking of, look at this – the enormous stadium that Hitler had planned outside Nuremburg:http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/photo-gallery-the-fuehrer-s-new-stadium-fotostrecke-88633.html
I was going to say something like the Reichssportfeld, but I don't think that's it. It looks like there's an old school track running around the field.
I think there are two essential problems with the thinking of people on the left in regard to taxes – 1) the principle of taxation and 2) the economic effects of taxation. In regard to the principle, the left says that the rich have to pay their "fair share". Whatever "fair share" is essentially boils down to subjective notions of "fairness", and as we all know what is fair to one person is not fair to another. The "fair share" argument can also be grounded in envy; those on the bottom sometimes seem angry at the rich because they have what others don't. I don't think that these kinds of emotional issues ought to play a part in a rational discussion on taxation. The purpose of taxation should be to raise revenue to pay for services that benefit all, rather than a means to punish one group because of their state in life.In regard to the practical effects of taxation, I think people on the left feel that if only taxes on the rich were to increase by (for example) 10%, the poor would be better off and the economy would continue on hunky dorey, even better than before. The problem is that 1) the poor will never see that 10% after it goes through the grabbing hands in government, 2) the rich will have less capital to invest, and 3) it will make the country a less attractive place to invest for others outside the country.
That article from Business Insider by Henry Blodget seems to present a compelling case with what I would call is a “selective” set of facts. There are too many to address, but I will comment on this, where Blodget argues against the creation of jobs by the “rich”:
What creates the jobs, Hanauer astutely observes, is a healthy economic ecosystem surrounding the company, which starts with the company's customers.
How in the world do these people think a "healthy economic ecosystem" is created? Out of thin air? One of the presumptions of a healthy economic ecosystem is consumer confidence; that is, the confidence that putting money into the ecosystem will bear fruit, that it won't be significantly consumed by taxation and/or complying with excessive regulation. Yet, the entire line that is being sold by the left is that taxation needs to be higher on certain groups and that we need more regulation. If people with cash on hand (call them the "rich", or just call them ordinary people looking for investment opportunities) do not feel that their dollars will go far in the United States in terms of investment return, they will look elsewhere. Not taxing the poor doesn't provide this type of "healthy economic ecosystem", and the proof is what we're seeing right now; somewhere around half of Americans don't pay any income tax, I imagine that government spending on entitlements is at or near all-time highs, and yet our economy is still struggling to go along. I don't think that the rich alone are responsible for creating jobs (this seems to be a strawman floated by Blodget) but I do think that they play a strong part. Blodget says "And until we return to more reasonable tax policies that help the 99% instead of just the 1%, our economy is going to go nowhere." Really? If the rich already pay a disproportionately high amount of taxes, how is it "unreasonable"?
One more thing – did you hear how many times Obama brought up Planned Parenthood? He must have brought it in about three of his answers at differing points. The Dems must have decided they wanted to use it as a wedge issue. Later, Chris Matthews was quoted as saying that if Romney/Ryan get in, their prolife policy will be “almost like Shariah.”
Interesting interactive diagram on voting patterns in the U.S.http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/10/15/us/politics/swing-history.html
I thought Obama did better than he did in the first debate. Who won? I don't think that there was a clear winner. Liberals will think Obama won, conservatives may think Romney won. At the end of the day, I think that Romney has to do two things to win, and he should put his best efforts into focusing on these messages:1) He's a businessman (and a rich one at that) and Obama's a community organizer. Obama's policies over the past four years have failed. Who is better equipped to help the economy going forward? Clearly, Romney.2) So many other issues depend on the economy: funding for our military/national security depends on a strong economy at home; increasing the strength of our educational system depends on a strong economy; reducing the debt requires a strong economy; reducing crime will happen with a strong economy. If Romney keeps hammering these messages, people will understand that he is the clear choice. Hearing from people interviewed in focus groups, they tend to say that Romney is a businessman and is therefore the better choice to lead the economy. However, I haven't heard Romney himself repeat this message enough.
I caught the end of one episode a few days ago. Final Jeopardy was something like “of this person's 22 Oscar nominations, only one, at the beginning of his career, was for acting”. The question was: Woody Allen. Everyone got it wrong, but the one woman who was in the lead was able to hang on. Was that her?
This sheds more light on the situation:
Contrary to legend, Caesar was not killed in the Roman Senate but in the lobby of a theatre built by Pompey the Great more than 2,000 years ago.The site is now Torre Argentina square in the centre of the Italian capital. The area is rarely open to tourists and is better known as a stray cat colony.Research carried out recently by Spanish archaeologists in the area has mapped out its layout and could help draw visitors to a site where there is only an old sign saying it was the place where Julius Caesar was killed.
And then there's this interesting little nugget:
An archaeologist working in the area told AFP that a mysterious garland of flowers is left on the site and on Caesar's tomb in the nearby Roman Forum every year on the anniversary of the assassination on March 15, 44 BC.
I agree with Donnie – I'm cautiously optimistic, but this is long from over. As a matter of fact, it's still an uphill climb for Romney. I believe he still needs Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and I think it's a dead heat in two of those.
