Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Get Your Dunkin Tuesday

Today is my last day off before the storm of retail booze madness. I'm actually looking forward to the chaos. I've been working on my lists for 2011. Hopefully I have them all prepared for the year is out. It's been a crazy year for us. There's a ton to talk about and tons to appreciate. I'm excited to hear from people about some of their faves. Don't forget to listen to the latest episode of the TATPodcast. We'll be chatting about our lists hopefully soon!

Here are your highlights:

Politifact fails it's most basic job requirement and in doing so gives Republicans an out

Nerds unite! 20 best video games of 2011

This mailbox can go into space!

A bit of an answer to Sully, ED Kain and Paddy K, A little bit more about Ron Paul

House Republicans go Scrooge

Pres. Obama signs Executive Order establishing a National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security



Paddy K said...

I'm entering theoretical land here, but I MIGHT endorse Paul, but only for the Republican nomination. Then I would have to see how he did in a one-on-one campaign against Obama, and then, and only then, would I make a decision (although I would be inclined to vote Obama again). I am not endorsing everything about Ron Paul, but I would select him as the lesser evil compared to everything else going on in the GOP at the moment.

That being said, I think we have to leave people -- even politicians -- open to the possibility of changing over time. It doesn't excuse Ron Paul or his racist newsletter or his bad hiring practices or lack of oversight or whatever... but I think we do ourselves real disservice when we claim that politicians have to believe, act, endorse the same way over several decades.

No one is the same their whole life. I'm willing to overlook things I don't like about Obama and that's why I voted for him in 2008. All I'm doing with Ron Paul is extending him the same courtesy, until I make my final decision.

As far as GOP folks go, however, I'd rather see Ron Paul win the nomination. Then the GOP, and the country as a whole, gets a real decision and has to mentally order their priorities when voting. If you get Romney... who knows what you're voting for other than "not Obama"?

Paddy K said...

As to Balloon Juice's main point in that post, it remains up to the individual voter to determine if a past eff-up -- or series of eff-ups -- means that the candidate's judgement is compromised going forward. This depends on how the voter orders their preferences on the issues, their values, and -- for me -- how long ago the eff-up occurred. Then it all has to be balanced against what direction you want the country to go. I don't see voting as picking the guy/girl you love; it's deciding which candidate is least repugnant to you. Other voters will make their choice differently.