E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Washington Post on last night’s GOP debate: “Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney tangled over Social Security, health care and other issues here Thursday in a debate in which the Republican presidential candidates sharply criticized the policies of President Obama and joined in an assault on the federal government.”
The New York Times: “[A]fter two hours of dueling it was unclear whether Mr. Perry had achieved his goal of knocking Mr. Romney off his fairly unruffled stride. It was similarly not certain that Mr. Romney had made headway in knocking Mr. Perry down a few pegs in what has been a relatively strong opening to his young campaign.”
USA Today leads its coverage with Romney and Perry engaging over immigration.
“The third Republican presidential debate in as many weeks showed the same dynamics as the prior two, with many of the candidates jabbing away at the Texan. In one exchange on immigration, Mr. Romney said he couldn't understand why Mr. Perry signed a Texas law giving in-state university tuition to illegal immigrants, something he said amounted to as much as a $100,000 subsidy for each,” the Wall Street Journal adds.
The Boston Globe’s Johnson notes the back-and-forth between Perry and Romney over flip-flopping.
BACHMANN: The New York Times reports that Bachmann’s campaign is having trouble raising money. Citing interviews with unnamed sources close to the campaign, the newspaper reports that Bachmann has refused to make cold calls in order to raise funds, “leaving it to hired financial directors who are under tremendous pressure.”
The newspaper adds: “Her change in fortunes from darling of the Tea Party to trailing in the polls represents a remarkable reversal for a candidate who used a strong debate performance… to start her campaign, before winning the [Iowa] straw poll, the first big test of organization and voter enthusiasm.”
And the Chicago Sun-Times reports a local Tea Party group feels snubbed after an event in suburban Chicago Monday was cancelled. Bachmann will be in Iowa instead. (The campaign tells NBC News the Illinois event was never confirmed.)
PERRY: Writing in National Journal, Ron Brownstein notes how Perry presides over a state that has been solidly Republican over the past 15 years, calling him “the Republican equivalent of a San Francisco Democrat, a politician molded by unshielded exposure to his party’s brightest flame.” More Brownstein: “That pedigree helps explain some of his greatest strengths – and potential vulnerabilities – in the 2012 presidential race.”
Leave a Comment:
A Country Without Character - America.
Tell me. Whatever happened to "character" in a person. Whatever happened to the "character" of the United States of America? Never mind money, never mind religion. What became of character, where honesty and a desire to look out for your fellow Americans is the basis for human decency?
We cheer for executions, we cheer for children who we want to send back to a country they hardly remember, we cheer for a fence, we cheer when we hear "leaders" want to end a health care system that protects our children. We cheer for an end to public education. We dismiss hard work. We cheer when a "leader" doesn't want to help our President with out of work Americans. We cheer because they are called lazy. We cheer when we dismiss highly educated scientists. We cheer when we see unions dismantled; we cheer for companies who don't want to be regulated, which regulations btw are only in place to protect we, the peple. We cheer for racism, still. We cheer for anyone who ridicules everything good this country ever strived for.
Whatever happened to character, where you stood your ground instead of pandering to the lunatics in this country? Where we have a media who refuses to report on the protesting going on against Wall Street. Wall Street, which almost single handedly destroyed us all.
Politicians who despise government, yet want to take all the perks it gives them. Perks they gladly take yet want nothing for we, the people. Rich white politicians who only care for rich white Wall Street. Who have never invested in anything but themselves. How low we have gone in 30 years. Whatever happened to real leadership in the GOP? It's gone. Completely gone.
____________________________
These two comments I found over @ HPost last night sum up what's going on within The GOP, better know as the Scam Party.
So let me get this straight. If we elect the right, we get to end Social Security, end taxes, end Medicare and Medicaid, defund public schools, privatize state univeristies, end the minimum wage, abolish the EPA, and secede from the union at our pleasure? And that will grow the economy and make us competitive in a world where China and India grow their GDP at 10% each year, and train a million new engineers each year at state expense? A world where socialist Germany has the second largest trade surplus?
There are zero examples of a nation that has succeeded without strong institutions. Can you think of any exceptions, a nation that has created a durable society through low taxes and libertarian policies? I can't. Universally, they're failed states with populations mired in poverty.
**********************
NO to jobs
NO to disaster recovery
NO to the middle class
NO to high-speed rail
NO to veterans
NO to health care
NO to the unemployed
NO to students
NO to seniors
NO to choice
NO to the poor
NO to gays and lesbians
NO to science
NO to children
NO to the homeless
NO to equality
NO to teachers, police, firemen, and first responders
NO to corporate oversight and regulation
NO to responsibility
NO to voters rights
YES to the corporate welfare
YES to the super rich
YES to Wall Street
YES to Big Oil
YES to Big Pharma
YES to Big Insurance
YES to peeking in your bedroom
YES TO VOTER SUPRESSION
Republicans have made it crystal clear what they are all about and what they stand for and who they represent.
VOTE THEM ALL OUT IN 2012
______________________________________
We will destroy America. And we have no one to blame but ourselves. We were silent while we were raped. One republican at a time.
Written by Dustin Ensinger on April 16, 2011 - 10:05am
According to ThinkProgress, Romney benefited from offshore tax havens during his time in the private sector.
The company he founded, Bain Capital, regularly rerouted investments through Bermuda and the Cayman Islands so that investors could avoid the 35 percent tax rate in the U.S.
In 2006, the investment paid him over $1 million, just a sliver of his $250 million fortune.
Both the arrangements are through P.O. boxes on the islands. Neither has any offices or staff overseas.
It does, however, undermine Romney’s claim that he got tough on tax evasion while governor. Romney is part and parcel of the hypocrisy that costs the U.S. government trillions of dollars in lost revenues.
The report found that the biggest victims of tax cheats are the American taxpayers and law-abiding U.S. companies that are forced to foot the bill.
American companies have flocked to the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes. A recent Senate Finance Committee report discovered that over 12,000 U.S. companies maintained a P.O. Box in one five story building in the Cayman Islands. A later GAO report found that number to be closer to 18,000.
_____________________________________
Nice Romney. Real nice.
Pat: I once asked a tax advisor the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion: 10-15 years.
What Romney did in avoiding taxes was, at the time, perfectly legal. The same thing applies to companies which, although US companies, move their profits to Ireland or the Netherlands to avoid taxes.
The fact that US law allows the companies to move their profits to a P.O. Box in the Cayman islands is the problem. Doing so is only smart business. Failiing to do so when they can would subject the executives and boards of directors to claims of breach of fiduciary duty.
dirp101 - Exactly! Expecting corporations to do something for the common good instead of their bottom line is insane.
And they will continue to operate that way until we change the tax laws.
Of course, with the TeaThuglicans in the House, the only acceptable change to a tax law would be one which lowers revenue.
The Republican Party really does want the United States of America to fail.
How absolutely pathetic that the party which brough us Lincoln and Eisenhower and even Reagan now has to rely on the likes of Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Rick Perry to lead.
Pat Boston: Well written my friend. We need to spread the message that these group of individuals running for office -that called themselves "Tea Party"- are only extremists. Good for you!! Let's hope that the majority of Americans understand what it's at stake.
Republican politicians are the kind of lazy ass, do nothing, know nothing, just suck off the government teat losers, and wait for somebody else to solve all your problems type of welfare queens they claim are riuning America, very strange message for candidates and a Congress that has not accomplished a damn thing other than to cash huge paychecks (and 24 carat gold benefits) at the taxpayers expense. They have about 13 months to show America they can do something positive and lower unemployment or they are in big trouble across the board. One other thing make no mistake about it big business does not solve any problems unless and until there is a profit to be made by doing so, most of our problems will take lots of money and lots of hard work to solve, any adult understands this as a fact of life, you get what you pay for, you get out what you put into your endeavors. You do nothing you get nothing, if you vote for more of do nothing, nothing is exactly what you will get. Allow yourself and the country to move forward vote straight democratic 2012.
I hope someone will fact check Gov. Romney's assertion that Gov. Perry gave a $100,000 "subsidy" to undocumented Texas students -- Gov. Romney may have been thinking of his own state. It appears that four-year tuition in Texas for an in-state resident would be about $20,000 and for an out-of-state student $50,000, so 1) the difference after four years is $30,000 and 2) it is not a subsidy, but the difference between in-state and out-of-state costs. Gov. Romney might be thinking of Massachusetts, where at U-Mass Amherst, in-state tuition would be about $50,000 for four years and out-of-state would be about $100,000. even there, the difference is $50,000, and is not a "subsidy," but the savings between the two rates.
Kudos to the First Read staff for bearing the unbearable while covering last nights 'debate'.
Will you be drawing straws for the next one?
"Where we have a media who refuses to report on the protesting going on against Wall Street. Wall Street, which almost single handedly destroyed us all.
It does seem odd that the Wall St. protest hasn't been mentioned since the single article last sat.
Here's a Guardian/UK piece.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/09/22-8
Richard, I thought the same thing: what happened to the coverage of the Wall Street protest?
Wall Street protests....what exactly are the braindead lefty losers protesting?
Do they want more Goldman Sachs executives to join the Obama cabinet?
Do they want Wall Street to give even more campaign contributions to liberals?
Do they want more 'too big to fail' government bailout legislation from the Dems?
Bob, from HPost/Occupy Wall Street website:
Here's your answer as to why they're protesting:
We are unions, students, teachers, veterans, first responders, families, the unemployed and underemployed. We are all races, sexes and creeds. We are the majority. We are the 99 percent. And we will no longer be silent. As members of the 99 percent, we occupy Wall Street as a symbolic gesture of our discontent with the current economic and political climate and as an example of a better world to come.
**************
Olbermann asked Moore, "that's 2,000 or 500 or 50 Tea Partiers there...it's on the evening news, isn't it?"
"Oh, absolutely," Moore responded. "It would be the top story." He said he couldn't understand why the networks and other media had not covered the story more fully, and called the movement "the very first attempt to take a real stand" in the years since the financial crisis.
______________________________________
TP condemns Mosque in NYC. Big news. TP condemns health care. Big news. TP demands birth certificate. Big news. {Actually it's not a Mosque, it's a community center. It was called Mosque for political reasons}.
Anti-war demonstrators - nothing.
Demonstrations against Wall Street - nothing.
Pat, I agree with you in this. It sort of reminds me of Elliot Spitzer's show on CNN. As soon as he started outing Goldman-Sachs with the help of Mike Taibbi (Rolling Stone magazine) his show was canceled.
The audiences and their reactions to debaters' comments during these debates remind me of "mob rule"
Mark,
ever hear about the Paul Wellstone funeral? Where the moonbat audience reaction at a memorial for a deceased politician , turned it into a political pep rally? Not a few, most of the crowd.
The progressives thug corrupt unions are the true "mob rule"...
When I first saw this clip, , it absolutely disgusted me. It shows the ignorance that still is alive and well in this place we call the United States of America. A soldier who is CURRENTLY IN IRAQ serving, fighting for our country, asked a question about what a republican candidate would do if he were elected president for the repealed law of DADT. After the clip, you can hear people booing (yes, booing), the soldier. Simply the fact that these people have the nerve (especially on national television) to boo an actively (or veteran for that matter) serving member of our military, who in every way, shape, and form is the reason these people are sitting in their seats listening to the debate, infuriates me. The candidate goes on to say that "any type of sexual activity has no place in the military."
The man in the video did not say, I am glad that I can now have sex with my boyfriend in Iraq. He said he was proud that he no longer had to hide who he was, and he did not have to worry about being fired (yes, fired) because of being gay. So does "no type of sexual activity" mean that he cannot have a picture of his boyfriend hanging in Iraq? Does that also mean everyone else cannot have pictures of their families around? Mr. candidate, I would like you to step off your horse that I call ignorance and realize there is a difference between sexual ACTIVITY and sexual ORIENTATION. I remember seeing a man and woman that met in Iraq that (I think) had recently gotten married. Now, if they were dating in Iraq, do you think there was any type of sexual activity? Should they be discharged the way that this candidate wants a gay man discharged because he simply SAYS he is gay? Or are they considered heroes because they defended this country in the most patriotic, non-selfish, risking their life every day type of way that gay soldiers do? The candidate goes on to state that we should not give gay people a "special privilege" by repealing DADT. Since when is loving someone a special privilege?
The thing that people fail to realize, is that just because a person is gay does not mean they are going to try and jump on every attractive man they see. If this were true then people like Brad Pitt would no longer be alive. Let's look at it in a different way. Do I jump on and get aroused by every woman that I see? Do I make advances at them and try to make them feel uncomfortable? If I did, then yes, I would expect to be disciplined, which I would expect to be the case in the military. But the fact that gay men and women who WANT to serve their country used to be discharged because someone found out they were gay is absolutely ludicrous.
Please look at this link too "Anti-miscegenation laws, also known as miscegenation laws, were laws that enforced racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage and sometimes also sex between members of two different "races"." Raise your hand if you knew it was a crime in the 60s (1960s not 1860s) for a black and white person to marry. Ignorant? Yes, it is. But this was still in effect just over 40 years ago in some states. Why does history seem to always repeat itself? I think it is because of one of three reasons 1) people are still racist; 2) people forget the past and/or don't teach themselves history (schools don't have a chance in hell at explaining things like this so it's up to us to educate ourselves); or 3) people somehow twist what is going on now to not resemble what has happened in the past with black people and women.
Dr. King once said that he wanted people to be judged by the content of their character, and not the color of their skin. If he were alive today, I would guarantee he would say the same about sexual orientation. And for those that disagree, one of his colleagues and friends was a gay black man. I believe the man's name was Bayard Rustin, but I could be wrong. Facts are a powerful weapon. But, so is ignorance.
So I sit here and wonder how long it will take for the majority of people to accept gay people. Being in the midwest, I know that I will find more people who are not alright with their sexual orientation, much like it is for black people in the south. I sit here and hope that one day Dr. King's dream will become reality. We have made strides, glorious strides, but let us not back track in the progress that we have made. Life is too short to be bitter and hateful, toward anyone, regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. etc. Much like Dr. King, I hope one day that my children will be judged by the content of their character, and not by the person, man or woman, whom they love.
Yowza1 -
Absolutely spot on post - it was disgusting to witness not only the crowd's reaction but the candidate's (Santorum's) response. I am afraid, however, that ignorance continues to run deep en masse and is sadly even more evident in the majority of today's GOP presidential candidates as evidenced by the responses in the debate.
To all the members of our military here and abroad - a hearty thank you for your service and sacrifice! You truly are the best!
Santorum and the others are hypocrites. They are always running their agendas on their distorted images of what is right and wrong. Look at Roe vs. Wade...It never fails. This is one of the perfect Karl Rove's weapons of dstruction in any Republican debate.
They want to cut social security and dismantle any kind of social safety net. So get me this straight: Have the baby on the street if you do not have health insurance? Talk about a bunch of a****s....
Before all those church goes hypocrites SOB's preach about their God, they need to look about how they are treating their fellow citizens.
If Romney becomes the eventual nominee there is a huge problem for the Republican party.
Romney's repeated criticism of immigrants is the one message that Republicans told candidates to avoid at all costs.
It's shocking when you consider Romney's campaign leaders said their #1 priority was to get some of the latino vote from President Obama. Now Romney threw them under the bus and there is a real problem with his electability.
The people or organization that is "selecting" the audiences for these Republican debates are doing a good job. The supporters of these group of crazy lunatics think just like them: cheering about killing 200+ in Texas by Perry...cheering at the thought of going back decades of years by dismanteling our social safety nets , cheering at the thought of letting a person die if they can not afford health insurance....mocking a Marine, a Soldier that is defending their a***s, and on and on...Are these morons seating in the audience being picked up and offered a salary for cheering?
What kind of people are these? I wonder if when they find themselves in their deisred "heaven" that their masterminds are creating for them they will feel the same way.