Slashdot Mirror
Mitt Romney, Robotics, and the Uncanny Valley
Hugh Pickens writes "Brian Fung writes in the Atlantic that one of Romney's electoral problems is that he occupies a kind of uncanny valley for politicians, inexplicably turning voters off despite looking like the textbook image of an American president. Just as people who interact with lifelike robots often develop a strange feeling due to something they can't quite name, something about Romney leaves voters unsettled. As with the robotic version of the uncanny valley, the closer Romney gets to becoming real to a voter, the more his likeability declines. 'The effect is almost involuntary, considering the substantial advantages Romney enjoys from appearance alone,' writes Fung. 'But in person, his polished persona gives way to what appears a surprisingly forced and inauthentic character.' Political commentator Dana Milbanks adds that although Romney is confident and competent, in casual moments his weirdness comes through — equal parts 'Leave It to Beaver' corniness and social awkwardness. 'Romney's task now is to work his way out of the uncanny valley toward a more compelling style of humanity,' concludes Fung. 'But every day he lingers in it, the hill grows steeper.'"
Geez, one of the worst of the Washington Post shill-meisters. And it is Milbank, not Milbanks who has said "that the whole campaign-trail reporting gig is a complete waste of time and borderline fraudulent". How is this /. material?
By far the dumbest post I've read on Slashdot.
People strongly involved in religion always let me this strange impression that they are hiding something, as unable to really disclose what they think.
RON PAUL 2012!!
Speaking of uncanny appearances, Endorse Liberty (a PAC that supports Ron Paul) put out some web ads featuring other politicians, including "Fake Mitt Romney". One of the first things he says is "I'm Fake Mitt Romney, which makes me a lot like the real Mitt Romney". You can see it here.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
You mean in person he comes off as a hypocritical crook, you don't say ?
End of Line.
He kinda reminds me of the futurama guys:
John Jackson:"It's time someone had the courage to stand up and say: I'm against those things that everybody hates."
Jack Johnson:"Now, I respect my opponent. I think he's a good man. But quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said."
John Jackson:"I say your three cent titanium tax goes too far."
Jack Johnson:"And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough."
I guess the Men In Black need to improve the technology for their prosthetics and vocoders.
Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
The whole presidential campaign process in general is shaping up to an unfortunate dramatic comedy of a cast of misfits. Do these individuals really represent the US population?
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
He's a smarmy rich douchebag who made a fortune by wrecking companies. Yet he wants to pretend he's "one of us."
And what is the technical link to a blog like this? Does ther 'Atlantic' suddenly think Mitt is a robotic clone? Is he running under Apple IOS? Maybe they think he still uses Windows ME on his home computer? I don't know what the heck the purpose of the article is? At least - compared to Obama, the guy ahd a real job and has some real experience. Steve Jobs was weird too.
>> Just as people who interact with lifelike robots often develop a strange feeling due to something they can't quite name, ..and it has nothing at all to do with the fact that anything he says is inherently untrustable, and that he is only self-serving like the worst used car salesman?
Vote Paul.
Are you saying Mitt Romney is a robot planted to take over the country?
I knew it!
The truth is finally coming out. Willard Mitt Romney is really just another alias for R. Daneel Olivaw. Just like on Trantor, some are finally beginning to suspect.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
As a non-American who lived in the USA for 10 years, I find it amusing that you guys worry so much about your presidential candidates' private lives.
I remember the presidential blowjob incident. The SAME people who thought Clinton was a great president decided he was no good anymore because he screwed an intern.
Now we find out Mitt Romney is a dork when he's off the limelight. So fucking what?? Is he able to get the job done should he get elected?? If you think so, vote for him.
Finally, does your boss worry and judge you based on what you do in private, off the clock?? How about your customers, co-workers, subordinates, etc.??
No, no, and no, right? Then why the fuck do you care about the candidates' private lives.
Disclaimer: like I said, I'm not America, no longer live in the US, don't vote, don't care.
The reason he was impeached wasn't sex. It was because:
1. He lied under oath. We call that perjury and it's a felony.
2. He lied under oath in a trial where he was having to account for unwanted sexual advances on a woman.
3. As a matter of law, we try to make at least a half-assed attempt to protect women from aggressive, unwanted sexual advances.
4. Felonies are actually named as a basis upon which a President can be impeached.
If he had just admitted the truth, there was nothing the system could have done to him because it was a civil trial and Presidents cannot be impeached for purely civil matters.
Screw the author. There's nothing here that isn't simply political crap.
"Barack Obama is a socialist. He's trying to overhaul this country along the lines of Europe." (pauses while boos fill the hall).
"That's right, my friends. Now, Europe is a nice place to visit - I spent about five years there in France during the Viet Nam War. Bonjour, tout le monde! Comment allez-vous aujourd'hui?" (pauses, but is met by silence)
"And Switzerland is a great place to park your money for tax purposes, but I've found we have a better tax shelter right here in the Cayman Islands!" (pauses again.. scattered nervous applause)
"Not that I ever had much money in those accounts, contrary to what the elite liberal press has suggested. Maybe $30 million or so at the peak. But I am not going to apologize for being a successful businessman, I've created a lot of jobs during my career. There's Everett " (points to the someone in the crowd) "Everett worked for the printer we used at Bain Capital for the private equity contracts." (sustained applause)
"I'm going to repeal Obamacare. I'm going to win the debates - when the President starts in with one of his outrageous Keystone Cops statements I'll turn to him and say, Ten Thousand Dollar bet, Barack?"
"And when November comes, we're going to put Obama's dog on the roof of the car " (cheering starts to build) ".. and we're going to take it for a spin on the highway for a few hours, and then we're going to close down the union plant that built the car!" (wild cheers and cries of "Mitt, Mitt")
The man's top ten donors are all Wall Street blue blood institutions, he's the inspiration for Obamacare and more. The more conservatives get to know him, the more they start to think it doesn't matter if Obama wins because Romney not only shares the same core issue positions, but has the executive experience to quite possibly be even more "effective" in the ways they want to prevent. This race has become a case of the Republican primary voters and RNC once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. If they had drafted Rand Paul (not Ron Paul) or someone with similar values, Obama would get clubbed like a baby seal in the debates and polls.
Here we go. The hard and heavy wheels of destruction are starting to turn. Inevitable I suppose.
:-)
IMO, Romney is, intellectually and experientially, the most qualified candidate for US president that we've seen in the last two centuries. I'm not sure what kind of president he'll end up being, but he is certainly qualified for the role and infinitely more qualified than the current US president.
FWIW, I had the opportunity to work in fairly close proximity to the man back in 1994. Back then I got the distinct impression that he was generally the smartest guy in the room. But what really stands out in my memory was a meeting where various topics of quantitative finance were discussed...in detail. He was very comfortable with partial differential equations.
Oh, you'll laugh about it, until you meet one. You'll sense it, deep in your brainstem, that you're prey.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
If Romney is in the uncanny valley, let's eliminate the impossible and what's left must be the truth. He clearly is not a corpse, and let's face it, zombies are fictional, so he must have some sort of prosthesis. Not a prosthetic hand, but perhaps a prosthetic forehead.
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
Even before Iowa, people were claiming Romney was "electable". WTF? Why is a guy who couldn't beat a 100 year old loser in 2008 "electable"? More important, when has the "electable" candidate actually WON?? McCain was electable, and so was Bob Dole. On the other side, John Kerry was electable, and I'm pretty sure Hilary was more electable than an unknown 2 year Senator with a foriegn name.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
He is a sociopath like most folks who seek power.
Finally, does your boss worry and judge you based on what you do in private, off the clock?? How about your customers, co-workers, subordinates, etc.??
Actually, they do; hence why background checks include Facebook now.
Many companies will terminate you or at the very least talk to you if you do things in public that reflect poorly on the ompany - within the law of course. I remember reading about employees of a company started by an ex-Oracle executive getting into trouble for their behaviour - quite innocent - outside of work. And this was before Facebook.
Secondly, the Mormon chruch was founded by a con artist. It was formed in the 19th Century so there is a record - written record - of the founding, the founder, and his background.
I think anyone who follows a "religion" that is founded by a con-artist is either quite stupid, horibly misguided, or somehow involved in the con.
Gold tablets that were given to him by God and then taken away when someone waented to see them? And the precepts of the church are something a horny frat boy would come up with.
The older religions at least have the excsue that their founding was shared verbally and there was distortion and embellsihment - but something that was created in the age of the printing press? Please.
BZZZT!!! Bullshit.
We don't call lying under oath "perjury." We call lying under oath about something material to the case at hand "perjury." Clinton did lie under oath in a deposition about Whitewater to questions that had not a damn thing to do with the case, therefore not perjury. If you go back and check, he was completely acquitted of that charge--even by several Republicans.
Also, even if he were eventually found guilty, felonies are not named as a basis upon which a President can be impeached. "High crimes and misdemeanors" is the basis. Clinton had an affair. Stop trying to conflate that with giving away our nuclear codes to China.
By the way, you might want to know that as a matter of law, we do not prosecute people because of consensual sex.
And by the way, he WAS impeached because of sex. You can try to dress it up any way you want, but that's it, period. They tried to get him on Whitewater, and they couldn't. He was completely acquitted of all of those charges, too. Maybe you don't remember so well what happened during those days, but I sure as hell do. The Republicans made some shit up and hauled him in to give a sworn deposition under oath about Whitewater. Once he got in the room, they started asking him all sorts of sordid, slimy questions that didn't have a damn thing to do with the case at hand. Everyone in that room--especially Bill Clinton--knew that the testimony would be leaked and that it had zero to do with any actual crime. It was character assassination, pure and simple. Hell, they knew they didn't have the votes to actually find him guilty, so the end goal wasn't really to remove him from office, either. The point was to get Ken Starr's report out to the public and put all of the salacious details on people's televisions; to distract the public from REAL issues.
Clinton was by far one of the best presidents we've ever had. Eight straight years of relative peace, no messy expensive international entanglements, budget surpluses, record low unemployment, booming economy with little inflation, etc. Had the Republicans not conducted their little smear campaign, there's no way come hell or high water Al Gore could lose in 2000, it would have been a Reaganesque landslide. They were desperate, and as a result, Clinton for a couple of years had a very hard time carrying out his duties as President. I kinda wish he had been able to focus on things like, I dunno, say, Osama bin Laden, instead of having to testify about where someone consented for him to put a cigar.
So stop being such a tool and persisting with this bogus "but he lied under oath, waaaah!" bullshit. He was impeached due to sex, and it was nothing but a Republican ploy to take the White House in 2000, end of story.
Y'know that little thing called Occupy Wall Street? It will take exactly 2 milliseconds after/if Romney gets the nomination for OWS to realize that Romney IS Wall Street. He makes over 20 million a year in carried interest. How the hell can he possibly relate to a regular person with an income like that?
...when he said Romney looks like "the guy who plays the American president in a Canadian movie."
As usual reading Neil Stephenson is spot on for the average geek: Interface is about a slightly 'enhanced' presidential candidate that is the _perfect_ shill for big business.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
The deposition that Clinton lied about having sex with Monica Lewinski was for the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. I would think having sex with an intern would be material to this case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones
As with Nixon it was not the crime but the cover up. Only Nixon is synonymous with being a crook and Clinton is not.
And here I always thought Mitt Romney was a muppet, at least according to the Daily Show.
"The audience at the inauguration were puzzled by the beginning of President Romney's long-anticipated speech, in which he simply intoned: 'Attention all planets of the solar federation: we have assumed control, we have assumed control, we have assumed control..'"
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
equal parts 'Leave It to Beaver' corniness and social awkwardness
I wonder, what is his slashdot id?
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
If it's not pertinent to the case, why was it asked, let alone answered?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Mitt cannot harm a human being, or through inaction, allow a human being to be harmed.
What's really uncanny is the two or three editorials per day about Romney's massive electability problems. And I only read one mainstream outlet; this story suggests other papers are doing the same thing. All this babbling about his problems and how he can't possibly win, and meanwhile he's, you know....winning. At least the nomination, and he probably has as good a chance as any against Obama in the general election.
I don't like Romney at all, but I'm still profoundly unsettled by this desperate meta-campaign to convince people he can't win. Are news outlets delusional? Are they trying to shape public policy by falsely prophesying some inevitable result? It just plain creeps me out.
and look where it got us. Home prices are continuing to plummet, all of my health care plans at work are more expensive, unemployment way above the 7% figure that Obama "promised" we would never cross, etc.
These garbage posts are ruining slashdot anyway. If Romney was so unlikable he wouldn't have been elected as a conservative governor of one of the most liberal states and wouldn't have won Florida by double digits yesterday.
That's because they're trying hard to ignore the fact that he's a bigoted, judgemental, do-what-I-tell-you-not-what-I-do "typical" old-school politician. People who are uncomfortable with him just aren't willing to dig deeper and understand their own discomfort, but I do hope they'll trust their instincts and not vote for this warmonger.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
He does a pretty good normal human act but the mask slips sometimes. He does not appear to hold any positions on ANY political issues that cannot be flipped or tossed overboard when needed. He has never shown any compassion towards the companies and employees that Bain wrecked. Yes, some of there acquisitions turned out ok but about half led to the acquisition being screwed with massive debt and layoffs while Bain walked away with massive profits. The only thing he seems to cling to is the Mormon Church, a highly structured institution with rules and traditions on how to treat other Mormons. A lot of Mormon communities can be very supportive and good for their members. For a sociopath like Romney the structure makes for less problems with faking normal human behavior.
If it's not pertinent to the case, why was it asked, let alone answered?
Um, I'm pretty sure KingSkippus addressed that in his post. Wait, let me go back and check... Yep, it's right here: "It was character assassination, pure and simple. Hell, they knew they didn't have the votes to actually find him guilty, so the end goal wasn't really to remove him from office, either. The point was to get Ken Starr's report out to the public and put all of the salacious details on people's televisions; to distract the public from REAL issues."
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
And to survive as an investment banker on Wall Street, you need to be a sociopath (or at least afflicted with a severe case of Asperger's). You must believe, with every fiber of your being, that you cannot possibly make enough money -- and that it is entirely fair and just that you do so. Your morals must be self-centric, or at the very least easily suspended. (Confession: I are an MBA, so I know a little about this.)
The question is: Should someone like this, no matter how qualified, be president? I'd say no.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
This sounds like the author has never heard of the word smarmy before.
Define: smarmy
Adjective: Ingratiating and wheedling in a way that is perceived as insincere or excessive; unctuous.
Synonyms: sycophantic - adulatory - oily - obsequious - fawning
Define: smarm
Verb: Behave in an ingratiating way in order to gain favor: "I smarmed my way into the air force".
Noun: Ingratiating behavior: "it takes smarm and confidence".
Mitt Romney looks like someone who forced himself to smile so long that it is stuck on his face like a sticker. The guy probably sleeps with that grin. It looks weird and painful. It screams "used car salesman" which is the essence of smarmy. I suspect that everyone realizes this, but many don't seem to understand that this is a common shared concept and there is a word for it.
However the idea that a candidate can tell lame jokes and be a bit of a dork actually makes him more human and appealing. Maybe hes trying to hide his inner beanie. Im not going to vote for him but it doesnt hurt him with me anyway.
blah blah Romney is wierd blah blah. Newt is a sellout, presidents and congrss members can trade with insider knowledge it's true and there' only one thing to do about it: Not support any candidate and choose a leader outside the context of official ballots..
Honestly, I have a hard time giving any credence to analysis like this. There are two possibilities:
1) Someone who supports Romney and just isn't willing to think Romney opponents have any reason to hate him for his ideas--instead they hate him because he seems robotic. "Explaining" that your opponents disagree with you for some reason other than your ideas has a long and sordid political history.
2) Someone who opposes Romney and is willing to sling mud by saying that he seems like a robot. Attacking irrelevant features of your political opponents also has a long and sordid political history.
Stop trying to look intellectual. Everything is creepy at first, then we get used to it.
-- Boycott Shell
What are you smoking?
People are weird, get over it.
Life is too short. We need something exciting to move on. Meet some like-minded people, rediscover lost passion and find your better
partner. Check out ---casualmingle. 'c o 'm --- you will not regret for dating with sexy beauties in your area. just sign up free and
nothing will lose if you don't like it.
The Swat Valley is another valley where the Uncanny Valley of revulsion occurs at the site of a robotic General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper is locked onto your recycled Moto StarTAC
However if comment count is any indicator this story is a hit with /.ers.
This story scores in at 181 comments vs 95 for the second most popular story this morning.
Maybe this story is just everyone's morning cup of bitch. I don't know. I'm just saying it's an interesting note about /.ers. (Including myself here.)
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
But, something must be very off-putting about the guy in person. Maybe he's just an awkward person. I remember a news story about some debate where a bunch of candidates were in the bathroom talking about how much they all hated him and how they were determined to see him not get the nomination. We all have our quirks, but it's strange when someone's personality can universality flip certain switches.
I'd like to meet the guy just to see what the deal is. I doubt we'll ever see the real him in this campaign.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
There is this youtube video of a mini robot mowing the lawn and he's very robotic looking, but you can't help feeling sympathy for him as he struggles with the task: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv61MzF1n7k
So even though he physically looks nothing like a human, your ability to project your feelings on him makes him likeable. Perhaps Romney's likeability problem is that people cannot project feelings onto him. He's just some strange, clear-cut, very functional being in a domain we have little experience with.
Subject is a headline news blurb from TheOnion.
The Republican presidential candidates are so bad this year because the Republicans who are any good are sitting this one out and waiting for 2016. The current candidates are the second team.
If it's not pertinent to the case, why was it asked, let alone answered?
Because unlike a court room, a Congressional hearing has no Judge (who is ethically and legally bound) to to keep the questioners in line.
If the Chairman of the committee wants/allows things to go offtopic, there nothing you can do.
You don't have a lawyer to shout "I object!"
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"Everyone wants prosthetic foreheads on their real heads."
It's all there in that old book - except that US is becoming Transmetropolitan City way faster than Ellis thought. Obama and Romney are both Smilers of our days. One sad exception is that there is no Spider Jerusalem today - and even no possibility for him to appear.
Absence of proof != proof of absence.
Consequences can only be "unintended" for so long. We've known for decades, arguably centuries, that creating a large/popular black market will divert economic strength away from the general populace toward criminals. When you see it as it's happening, and maintain (rather than repeal) the laws that make that market remain black, it's no longer an unintended consequence. At the very best, it's a regretfully accepted/planned consequence.
You can't say "you have to break some eggs to make an omelet" and then call the breaking of eggs unintended. Oh you intended it, you just weren't completely happy about it.
Similarly, we shouldn't allow politicians a free pass on the known and anticipated consequences of the drug war. They can still support the drug war with honor, but only if they own those consequences. The authoritarian parties need to come out and say
and then finish that sentence with whatever amazing fact or political theory it is, that has been so preciously held from the public for so long. But don't fucking say, "We didn't intend to usurp your local government, overrule your doctor, disrepect people, and send money to Mexico.. we had no idea prohibition would necesitate all that," because that is just insultingly unbelievable.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
...I'd vote for him before I'd vote for Obama. Shit, I'd vote for a sack of rocks before I'd vote for Obama.
He's almost an Obama policy clone. The only difference is that Obama will listen to labor unions, whereas a Republican will have the military-industrial complex whispering in his ears. Given recent history, there's no compelling reason to put the GOP machinery back in place.
What's needed in this country is a Theodore Roosevelt. The closest thing we have is Ron Paul; but he's TR without the hale and hearty character, charisma, or common sense.
G.W.Bush was at first glance not a completely ignorant moron too. Maybe Mitt and his uncanneyness will not have to work as hard to rig elections either.
Romney has shown signs of being an anti-gun, or anti-gun for the little guy type person. And he's fucked because of it.
It's amazing out of the collection of trash the Republican party has been kicking around for the election they settle on the one that has this obvious problem. I know people that'll be voting for Ron Paul over this... which is silly, because that will hand the election to Obama, who is at least as anti-gun as Romney is. One would think before bothering to spit shine someone up for the pre-election stuff that they would notice this.
So little effort went into this product. It has the same specs as the Gorebot 2000 with just some cosmetic changes to the exterior and a firmware update.
The market for full-size Princeps is moribund these days. Mobile is where all the action is.
Romney's robotic performance makes me wonder if he is the male equivalent of a Stepford wife. Or in the words of some old hippy: Do you trust a man who's got implausibly white teeth and perfectly quaffed hair?
I lived in the same town as Mitt and my kids hit the Mitt up one Halloween. He handed out toothbrushes. Give me a break!
SG
so I still can't figure out how any questions about it were relevant to the trial.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
There's W of course..... well, maybe not that great. Herbert Hoover, there was a great...no maybe not. Don't worry, I'll find one...
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
The best thing the guy could do is to be more like his father, George Romney. He was governor of Michigan when I was a child. He was a self-made auto executive before that. The family didn't come from money. In fact, they fled from a Mormon colony during the Mexican Revolution and "struggled during the Great Depression". (Yes, I cribbed that from Wikipedia...)
Before running for governor, George Romney was CEO of American Motors, the underdog of auto manufacturers. When George Romney ran for the office of governor, he released *7* years of tax returns. He became a popular Republican governor of a almost-exclusively Democratic state. I don't recall any "mormon" issue, but I was a little kid, and I think awareness of Mormonism was pretty low. Nobody knew what that was, or else didn't care.
I don't know why Mitt refuses to take after his father, who seemed - to me, at least - an honest and direct man.
I suppose the problem is - he CAN'T be like his father. George grew up in a Mormon colony in Mexico and in Salt Lake City during the depression. Mitt grew up in Bloomfield Hills, which is one of Earth's Reality-Free Zones.
as governor. Actually a few million reasons, known as the voters of Massachusetts.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
The guy can't go two weeks without contradicting himself. I don't think he believes in anything, except that being rich really kicks ass. And Joseph Smith.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
You might not have a choice, just like his ardent atheist Father-in-Law. After he died, the Romney clan (having already indoctrinated the rest of the in-laws) had ol' father-in-law posthumously baptised and added to the Mormon roles - COMPLETELY against his explicit wishes. Citation? Gawker (yeah, I know, but doubt they made it all up)
How do you think the concept of Separation of Church and State would fare under President Romney? How about your rights to be left alone even after death?
At least Romney is going to win something!
But seriously, if you followed him at all, he quite often spits out meaningless BS that makes no sense place to place telling people what he thinks they want to hear -- just like a program in the those contests tries to fool people into thinking it is human.
2112 on many levels... well done!
Sig Registration Form 34c_766(a) submitted to Ministry of Signature Management. Approval pending.
John Paulson, hedge fund manager, Bob Mercer, Renaissance Technologies, Bill Koch, member of Koch family, and various other hedge fund managers and private equity LBO firms, etc.
John Paulson was the hedge fund manager who made an estimated $5 billion one year betting on the economic meltdown thanks to a supertanker-sized amount of insider information. (Remember that when Alan Greenspan left his position as chairman of the Federal Reserve, he went to work for Paulson at his hedge fund.)
To illustrate the direct wealth transfer in action: Paulson buys a credit default swap (CDS) for $1.4 million, which later pays out $100 million --- and he does that any number of times.
Paulson and the other banksters and hedge fundsters, now have their billions and A.I.G. and Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, et al., “must” be bailed out by the taxpayers --- who later lose their jobs and homes or residences, and must go on “austerity” programs because Paulson and Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase and GE bought those CDSes and AIG and the others who sold them didn’t have any capital on hand to back them up.
Bob Mercer’s Renaissance Technologies is an institutional investor in the major banks and oil companies which were heavily involved and responsible for the global meltdown as they speculated – or financially manipulated – the prices of oil, energy and commodities – jacking up the paper market price of oil to 13.8 times higher than the actual physical market by May of 2008 by super-selling oil futures to each other, forcing the price upwards.
They used the same scheme to jack up the prices of refinery-involved chemicals and oil transportation costs (using forward freight futures to raise the price of supertanker rental and bulk carriers, etc.)
Mitt Romney’s Fortune
Born into wealth, Romney would accumulate even more by selling debt, loading companies with debt and more debt by taking out loans against companies in leveraged buyout deals to reward himself.
He accumulated even more money by avoiding taxes; utilizing offshore finance centers in the Caymans, Switzerland, and other locations. (The leveraged buyout structure itself is predicated on tax avoidance and shifting the burden of taxation onto the workers due to the tax deductibility of debt payments.)
This is what plutocracy looks
like!http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/Romney.jpg
(And his Super Pac individual donors)
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00490045/763780/sa/11AI
...people who interact with lifelike robots often develop a strange feeling due to something they can't quite name...
Except for the people who get all horny, you mean. Unless that's the strange feeling you were talking about.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Isn't that 'canon' or do they really keep a big old gun in the temple? Huh?
http://www.acetonestudio.com
My first 'whoosh'. Yay!
http://www.acetonestudio.com
Republicans have sacrificed virtue for "electability" as have the Democrats. So rather than voting in the primary for people who really represent their beliefs, they vote for someone who is "electable" ...
The mathematical psychologists - as far back as the 1960s - had a term for this "Dishonest Voter". It referred to someone who, rather than voting for the candidate closest to his own position, voted for the closest within the constraint of perceived electability. It played HELL with the mathematical models.
This is why it's a bad strategy.
An example of how it can go wrong is the replacement of California's recalled governor (Gray Davis) in 2003. Jim McClintock would have made about the ideal rein-in-the-government Republican candidate. But his name recognition was a bit low. Then Arnold Schwarzenegger entered the race. A LOT of Republican voters switched because of his name recognition advantage and the perception that McClintock might not be able to win - which became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Arnold became "The Gubernator", self-admittedly JUST on name recognition. Later polling showed that McClintock WOULD have had enough votes to win handily had Arnold not entered the race.
It turns out that Arnold was one of the most extreme RINOs in existence. He was nominally a Republican because he'd been very impressed by Nixon as a new immigrant from Austria (perceiving him as anti-socialist in the Nixon-Humphrey debates). But he married into the Kennedy family (Maria Shriver) and acquired political connections and advisors (and ambitions) through them. It was noticed at the Inauguration that virtually everybody on the VIP platform was a noted Democrat. He appointed a Democrat as his chief of staff. Faced with a solidly Democratic legislature (thanks to a combination of a leftist-majority urban population and gerrymandering) he submitted a few government-cutting proposals to voters as initiatives. When these failed he threw in the towel and became a generic Democrat-equivalent California governor for the remainder of his term limit.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
IMO every one of the Republican nominees are pretty damned creepy, ...
Have you actually LOOKED at Ron Paul 's positions and voting record (rather than the Lamestream Media's smears)?
At any rate, we have no good choices. I'll probably vote Green or Libbie anyway, just because I find it incredibly stupid to vote for anyone who wants to put you, some of your friends, or members of your family in prison.
When both major parties hand you lemons, who cares which one wins? The only way to make your vote count is to send a message for next time around. Voting for (or writing in) a minor candidate says "Here's a vote you COULD have had if you hadn't run such a turkey." Voting for one with a position on his keynote issues is close to your position on YOUR important issues says "And here's what's important to me and which way to change to get my vote next time."
(I note that Ron Paul's position on the drug war is to end the federal part of it - which is all he'd have influence over. The drug war is mainly driven by the fed and pushed onto the states, so returning the issue to the states would essentially kill it - or at least both give you a smaller job to finish it off where you live and a number of safe havens.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Blame the Tax law for this not the man.
...except that he worked as a lobbyist to reduce the capitol gains taxes. So in this case blaming the law is blaming the man.
We can further deduce the nature of his character for using his political connections and power to reduce the taxes that he has to pay at the expense of others. The guy is scum.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I think it would be interesting to have a president that follows these guidelines as outlined in the Mormon Articles of Faith: We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. Full disclosure: I'm a Mormon.
This all seems a bit silly, comparing our distaste and distrust for Romney with how we feel about robots, so I'll give you a few other reasons people are not comfortable with him:
1. He's a Mormon. Most folks know little about Mormonism other than rumors and salacious details about other people who irrelevant, but there is a genuine distrust of Mormons by other Christians, right or wrong.
2. He's very rich. His wealth dwarfs that of Obama, Bush and Clinton. (Combined even? Not sure, but I think I heard that, which is what matters here.) Casual, spur-of-the-moment $10,000 bet, anyone? Seen pics of the guy's mansions?
3. Early on, he was hesitant to take a position on anything, and his RomneyCare vs. ObamaCare distinction is shaky.
4. Negative ads and attacks. Maybe he is better qualified than Gingrich, Obama, Santorum, or whomever, maybe not, but he has spent far more time cutting down the field than building himself up. None of those others are evil people who hate America, but Romney would tell you they are if he thought it would help him and he could get away with it. Negative, negative, negative. Again, maybe he has a point to some of it, but it is hard to listen to over and over. Where are HIS solutions?
5. Foreign policy, or more correctly a lack of foreign policy. Once the smoke clears, and after everyone else's ideas are shrugged off, what is his strategy? Is there one? Militarily, Bush wanted us to flex our muscles and take the fight to whomever wanted it as a deterrent. Obama has shown more of a desire for closure than ongoing wars, but has had some big scores as well. Both talked tough with Iran but wisely had some restraint, neither showed a lot of interest in commiting the resources necessary to close the border with Mexico, both handled China delicately, and both struggled with budgeting, debt, jobs, and our trade deficit. Romney's policies thus far have been vague at best, with no meat or potatoes.
6. Business as usual/Business first politician. Made tons of money with Bain, a company that was in business to make tons and tons of money, not save jobs, as he seems to think people will believe now. Does not "get" poor people, thinks it is okay (it is legal, but is it right?) that he pays a tax rate of 15% while people struggling to pay for one modest home pay 30%, was a Governor, ran for US Senate, and ran for president before but claims to be markedly different or a political outsider.
7. The guy is stiff. Not quite John McCain physically stiff and actually moving like a robot, but despite his presidential appearance he just doesn't come across like a guy you could sit down and chat with over a beer. Wherever you stand politically, you can not deny that many people think Obama, W., Clinton, George I, Reagan, and even Carter were all brilliant conversationalists or at least had a real charm that comforted people. Romney, on the other hand, is simply looked at as the best chance to beat Obama, out of a field of uncompelling candidates, or the shiniest turd. Would anyone just want to hang out with the guy and pick his brain, unless you enjoy talking about hedge funds or something?
I think there are enough reasons not to look at Mitt Romney as our next best hope to lead the world's lone superpower, without having to actually compare him to a fictionalized robot.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
romney is a pisces, we all go both ways at once, it is our universality...deal with it
Hey, I'm corny and socially awkward, too! Where the hell is my venture capital firm?
Seriously, I think Mitt's unpopular because he's one heck of a flip-flopper who says quite a lot of mendacious things, not because of the way he looks or acts.
At least that's true for liberals. I suspect that, with conservative voters, he's probably unpopular because he's just not conservative enough.
The candidacy of Mitt Romney is encouraging to anyone who has had his or her brain removed. All things are possible for them, also!
I figure A+B has to be greater than A (for non-negative values of B, in case someone is thinking about being a jackass).
0 is a non-negative value, and A+0 = A, which is not greater than A. (Sorry, just finished my topology work.)
I welcome our new 99% overlords.
knows he's a reptilian humanoid... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kofOtDJaCdc
Umm, yeah we do:
Google is your friend.
Check yourself. What are you asking? Are you typing in rhetorical questions to hear yourself type?
It's not what your Sig can do for you, but what you can do for your for your Sig.
Gary Johnson 2012. Mr. Johnson tried for the republican nomination, but the powers that be decided to exclude him from a bunch of debates, and his republican candidacy didn't get off the ground.
He was governor of New Mexico for... 8 years, and the libertarian party is organized enough to get him on all 50 states' ballots.
I think if he'd pick up some of those "reality sticks" lying around, his campaign would really beat the crap out of Obama and Romney (Wall Street's anointed candidate). I'd have him start with pointing out how our entire money supply is "borrowed from Wall Street". Then he could move on to point out how Wall Street rigs the health care industry to make it as expensive and ineffective as possible (Ex: Lipitor. Business Week had a story about 4 years ago about how no one actually benefits from knee-capping their body's cholesterol-generating mechanism...)
Drug laws are a big one too...
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com