E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRomney hits Gingrich in interview… And he also gets snippy/testy, which could explain why he’s the favorite but still not the front-runner… Bottom line: Romney has a difficult time reconciling his past positions with where the GOP is today… Obama heads to Scranton, PA (Dwight Schrute country) to deliver speech at 2:45 pm ET… Cain’s death spiral… And Newt’s non-lobbying and his past paid speeches.
*** Romney vs. Gingrich: Five weeks out before the Iowa caucuses, Mitt Romney yesterday took a shot at the GOP candidate who has been rising in the polls: Newt Gingrich. It’s the latest sign that the Republican presidential contest might actually be turning into a two-man race (though we also remember what happened back in September when it was a two-person contest between Romney and Rick Perry). “Speaker Gingrich is a good man. He and I have very different backgrounds,” Romney said in an interview with FOX’s Bret Baier yesterday. “He spent his last 30 or 40 years in Washington. I spent mine in the private sector.” Translation: Gingrich is a Washington insider and Romney is not. The former Massachusetts governor also said in the interview that Gingrich’s immigration views -- allowing illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20-plus years to gain permanent residency -- amounted to “amnesty.” This was after Gingrich said that calling his immigration stance “amnesty” is an “Obama-level quality statement.” And Gingrich added that anyone who called his stance amnesty should not be a candidate for president. Folks, this could get testy.
*** Getting snippy with it: Yet perhaps the most revealing part of Romney’s FOX interview was his tone, especially when he was challenged on flip-flopping on key issues or on his Massachusetts health-care law. The New York Times called his responses “snippy,” while the Miami Herald said he was “icily peevish.” When FOX’s Baier noted that Romney had changed his positions on climate change, abortion, immigration, and gay rights, the GOP candidate responded, “Your list is just not accurate. One, we’re going to have to be better informed about my views on issues.” And when Baier asked him about Massachusetts’ health-care mandate, Romney replied, “Bret, I don't know many hundred times I've said this, too. This is an unusual interview. All right, let's do it again,” he said sarcastically before adding: “Absolutely what we did for Massachusetts was right for Massachusetts.”
*** Explaining why Romney is the favorite but still not the front-runner: If you want to understand why Mitt Romney is the favorite to win the GOP presidential race but is not the front-runner, just watch the interview. That’s why he hasn’t put this contest away, at least not yet. He is having a very difficult time dealing with how some of his previous positions -- like on health care -- that are inconsistent with where the Republican Party is today. Also, we now know why he has been avoiding these kind of one-on-one interviews. And given how yesterday went, we’re guessing securing one-on-one interviews with Romney on Sunday shows or with national reporters is going to get harder before it gets easier?
*** Disciplined vs. over-disciplined: Here’s one more point about the FOX interview: Mitt Romney's biggest improvement from his presidential bid four years ago has been his discipline -- he's going to talk about the economy and President Obama, and stick to those topics. In fact, his discipline is what has separated him from Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry. But is there a point when a candidate becomes over-disciplined? Indeed, nearly every time Romney has been challenged on a topic other than the economy and President Obama (like his own record or debate protocol), it appears to get under his skin. But if there’s anything we’ve learned about the U.S. presidency over the past 10 years, it’s that a president often doesn’t get to focus on the issues he wants to. Just when you’re planning to push for immigration reform, an event like 9/11 happens. Or when you want to talk about the economy, there’s a major oil spill in the Gulf Coast.
*** Getting snippy with it, Part 2: But Romney’s FOX interview wasn’t his only testy moment of the day. After reporters following him in Florida tried to ask him several questions, Romney responded: "Guys we have press avails and press conferences almost every day, and that's when I answer the questions. When I'm meeting people it’s not a good time to answer questions that are important. They're important and they require good attention and a thorough answer." But as NBC’s Garrett Haake points out, Romney doesn’t hold press avails and press conferences “almost every day.” In fact, he has held just six avails in the past two months (Oct. 11 in Lebanon, NH; Oct. 22 in Manchester, NH; Oct. 26 in Fairfax, VA; Nov. 11 in Mauldin, SC; Nov. 19 in Nashua, NH; and Nov. 23 in Des Moines, IA).
Here's an earlier look at Romney's temperment through this campaign:
NBC's Domenico Montanaro reports on Mitt Romney's flashes of testiness. That side of him may have come through at last week's debate, but it's familiar to those who've covered him on the campaign trail.
*** Obama visits Dwight Schrute country: At 2:45 pm ET, President Obama delivers remarks from Scranton, PA, where he will push Congress to extend the federal payroll-tax cut. Interestingly, Obama’s push on the payroll-tax cut comes as Republicans have indicated en masse yesterday that they’re in favor of extending the tax break. The big question, of course, is how to pay for it. Tied to Obama’s trip to Scranton, the Republican National Committee is up with a web ad that hits the president by using his own words from a 2008 trip to the Pennsylvania city. And a Romney spokesman has fired off this statement: “President Obama told Pennsylvanians they would be better off under his leadership, and they will hold him accountable for his failed economic record.” As for the GOP idea to “pay for,” the Wall Street Journal is reporting today that a few ideas being talked about include raising some airport fees or selling more spectrum.
*** Cain’s death spiral: By now, you know that Herman Cain’s presidential campaign is in a death spiral, especially after Cain admitted to his senior aides that he is “reassessing” the state of the campaign. But here’s a question we have: What does Cain have to gain by getting out of the GOP presidential race? A future political career? A vice-presidential nomination? You could make the case that by staying in the race – and having some positive debate performances down the stretch – Cain could return to the candidate he was back in August (that is, someone who’s on the stage, who can deliver some memorable lines and is likeable, but who isn’t a threat to win in Iowa or anywhere else).
*** Newt’s non-lobbying and his paid speeches: The New York Times is up with a front-page story that only buttresses Romney’s contention that Newt Gingrich is a Washington insider. “Newt Gingrich is adamant that he is not a lobbyist, but rather a visionary who traffics in ideas, not influence. But in the eight years since he started his health care consultancy, he has made millions of dollars while helping companies promote their services and gain access to state and federal officials. In a variety of instances, documents and interviews show, Mr. Gingrich arranged meetings between executives and officials, and salted his presentations to lawmakers with pitches for his clients, who pay as much as $200,000 a year to belong to his Center for Health Transformation.” And don’t miss Newt’s explanation why he wasn’t a registered lobbyist – because he made so money already giving paid speeches. “I did no lobbying of any kind — period,’’ Gingrich said yesterday, per the AP. “I’m going to be really direct, OK? I was charging $60,000 a speech. And the number of speeches was going up, not down. Normally, celebrities leave and they gradually sell fewer speeches every year. We were selling more.’’ Wow. Gingrich referred to himself as a celebrity? What would the McCain ad team had done with that line in 2008?
*** On the 2012 trail: Perry and Huntsman are in New Hampshire… Newt Gingrich remains in South Carolina… Bachmann campaigns in Iowa… And Herman Cain holds rallies in Ohio.
*** Wednesday’s “Daily Rundown” line-up: Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS) from the RGA meeting in Orlando… White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on the payroll tax cut fight… The latest on the British embassy being stormed in Tehran with NBC’s Ali Arouzi and Secretary Clinton’s trip to Myanmar with NBC’s Kristen Welker… More on GOP 2012 with the New York Times’ Helene Cooper, National Journal’s Reid Wilson, and former Obama White House Deputy Communications Director Jen Psaki.
*** Wednesday’s “Jansing & Co.” line-up: MSNBC’s Chris Jansing interviews Politico’s Ben White, New York Times’ Charles Blow, Steve Forbes, and Dem Rep. Loretta Sanchez.
*** Wednesday’s “MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts” line-up: MSNBC’S Thomas Roberts interviews Politico’s Jim Vandehei on Herman Cain’s Campaign, as well as former RNC Chair Michael Steele and former Gov. Ed Rendell.
*** Wednesday’s “NOW with Alex Wagner” line-up: Alex Wagner’s guests include The Nation’s Ari Melber, Politico’s Ben Smith, Comcast DC Bureau Chief Robert Traynham, and The Grio’s Joy-Ann Reid.
*** Wednesday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” line-up: NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interviews Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D) and Paul Ryan (R), the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, Politico’s Mike Allen, and NBC’s Stephanie Gosk.
*** Wednesday’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall”: MSNBC’s Tamron Hall interviews Phil Musser, Peter Mirijanian, and Michael Smerconish, as well as the Wall Street Journal’s Brody Mullins.
Countdown to Iowa caucuses: 34 days
Countdown to New Hampshire primary: 41 days
Countdown to South Carolina primary: 52 days
Countdown to Florida primary: 62 days
Countdown to Nevada caucuses: 66 days
Countdown to Super Tuesday: 97 days
Countdown to Election Day: 344 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
Leave a Comment:
Snazzy new format guys!
Nothing like TWO career politicians to chose from...
A serial adulterer & a human weather vane!
Decisions... decisions... lol
PS: Any word if Hermie is going to get back on TeeVee to deny the latest accusations like he promised?
Norquist Agenda:
Norquist debated moderate Republican Douthat on C-Span last night, on the subject of the Pledge.
He quipped that 99.9% of all Republicans at State and Federal levels have signed his pledge never to raise taxes. Norquist made it clear there will be no compromise from him or from those who signed this pledge. He gave examples of how he bullies Republicans who don't get in line right away, e.g. Senator Coburn.
Grover Norquist is the wrangler for the entire Republican herd at all levels and the Enforcer of the Koch/Big Money agenda.
But this is not just about tax code. Norquist/Koch/ALEC/GOP congressionals have shown they will fight to the teeth to protect 0.2% of the wealthiest Americans from paying a little more. The BIG PLAN is much, much more than their stubborn refusal to play fair on taxes.
The super-objective is to institute permanent domination of the 99% by the 1%.
I really hope Cain stays in.
Cain/Newt 2012!
It is so easy to hate FOX News; no honor, no commitment to the truth, and a slavish devotion to dogma. But FOX isn't about news; it's about entertainment. News is not a moneymaker.
Ratings are measured in dollars, not only in broadcast media, but in print as well. Today, newspapers are falling like dominoes. Magazines are dying. The world grows more complex, even as it shrinks. The majority of citizens have tuned out the larger picture, choosing instead to limit themselves to handheld devices that lend new meaning to superficiality. ("Hey, I'm breathing. I'm the center of the universe.")
Gone are the days of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, John Chancellor, "....reporting from somewhere in custody." From gravitas to zero gravity - Brian Williams, Katie Couric? The best radio comes from NPR. Yet the ruler of radio talk/foaming-at-the-mouth is a blustering blatherskite who was laughed out of Sacramento for his disregard for truth. Rush Limbaugh is the very wealthy proof that truth is a poor substitute for hatred and fear.
Are the major news network anchors empty suits? Probably not, but most assuredly they are proof that, for all practical purposes, an all-powerful left-wing/liberal media is a laughable, if not insidious lie. News divisions are the red-headed corporate step-children of Megabuck Mediacorp.
Advertising drives the media, whether print or broadcast. FOX caters to a demographic that needs simple answers for complex problems. FOX provides simple talking points that explain the confusion so many of its viewers feel. FOX is doing exactly what a successful corporation does. It is providing its customers with a very satisfactory product. FOX explains the world in 25 words or less.
This confusion isn't unique to FOX viewers. Strangely - or ironically - what we see with OWS is that same confusion. FOX portrays the OWS folks as dirty, lazy, criminal degenerates, which is not true. Indeed, they seem to be better educated than the typical FOX viewer. Yet, the OWS protestors cannot find a strong, common, binding message. That's because the problem(s) is not simple - 25 words or less isn't going to cut it.
Media could tell us, but they are completely dependent on Big Money for their existence. Do they dare tear apart Bank of America - a major advertiser? Do they dare expose Chase Manhattan? Do they take on the incredible pollution generated by Big Coal? Do they dare open an investigation into the barely disguised corruption in Washington, D.C.?
That's a large flock of geese and a lot of golden eggs. For obvious reasons, media news divisions are beholden to Big Money. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. That is de facto corporate control of the media, and corporations are decidedly to the right of the political spectrum. Liberal media? Please.
That we have any fora is remarkable. That we have space in which to air our views, opinions, and grievances is a blessing that is being eroded. We cannot waste our time arguing with those who start their day with a bowl of dogma food and a big glass of fool-ade.
I love the part about Mittens getting "snippy" and "testy" I notice he gets that way in town halls and debates if everyone questions him. Someone should tell him that world leaders won't kowtow to his wishes. Some of those dudes have even bigger egos than his!
Feisty---this is going to call for a lot of popcorn as we watch things develop.
I saw a quote about Gingrich----he is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like. I would love to see them all debate President Obama---kind of like a tag team---I think the President could take them all.
You know... the more I think about it, Hermie should pull out NOW!
He could have an ambitious career in the porn industry, he already has the 'mustache'!
Huge jump in private sector jobs (200,000 plus). Great news for President Obama and his upcoming election.
Things are looking up and it's only going to get better. Oh, by the way, Goodbye Mr. Pizza man. LOL. I love it.
Obama in 2012.
David.
Spot on.
Cable news is not news, and anyone who watches it to get news, will surely be dumber for it.
Fiesty.
Nine. Nine. Nine.
LOL!!!
Yesterday the Senate defied an Obama veto threat and voted 61-37 to give the military first crack at holding al Qaeda operatives, even if they are captured in the U.S. and are American citizens. As Senator Lindsay Graham said about the bipartisan vote (which included 16 Democrats): "We're no longer going to have the absurd result that if we capture you overseas where you're planning an attack on the United States, we can blow you up or put you in a prison indefinitely, but if you make it to America, all of a sudden you get Miranda rights and you go to federal court."
Well, well, well. Sanity prevails in the world's most deliberative body and overcomes the nonsensical position of the Obama-Holder crowd. A crowd that makes no distinction between a common criminal caught in the act and an enemy combatant hell bent on killing Americans. Kudos to Senator Levin (D) and Senator McCain (R) for crafting language that throws the administration a bone, but comes down firmly on the side of giving the military custody of anyone who has planned or carried out an attack on the U.S., or is deemed to be a member of al Qaeda or its affiliates.
After the vote, an administration official said the veto threat still stands – which sounds like an empty threat, since the language is part of the must-pass defense authorization bill. The president should just swallow hard and accept the wisdom of the Senate. After all, force fed wisdom is better than no wisdom at all.
David, I think the problem is more than just in depth, hones reporting. It is society as a whole. We expect everything now, and are not willing to wait for the deep backround that we used to get with newspapers. Folks just want headlines - not details.
Will zero increase in revenues from the super-rich - FOREVER - be OK with us?
Is No-Forever to tax increases acceptable to the American people?
Americans have stated loudly that we want those who have done so well for decades, whose incomes tripled while ours flatlined, to pay a little more - and pay it right away.
Romney v. Gingrich --
Wouldn't you like to see that match-up in tights?
Me, either.
And good morning, all.
What scares me the most about today's GOP/TP is their desire to get rid of all the labor laws and protections that helped build the middle class. By getting rid of unions (which really is a small part of the electorate) and now wanting to abolish child labor laws, they are sending us back to the 19th century. The days of the Robber Barons is their ultimate goal.
Bill.
Why is that position nonsensical?
The courts have been far, far more successful in tying and convicting terrrorists then military tribunals.
It would seem to me that the position applied in the legislation is nonsensical since both the amount of people tried and the success rate in military tribunals is very poor.
It would also seem that you, and many members of congress, are letting fear and emotion trump reason.
Bill,
They did not have enough votes to override a veto so if our President vetoes this bill will they have the two-thirds majority vote to override his veto?
I doubt it.
That's a great avatar, Feisty. I'm sure you won't have any problems with the moderators. I'm gonna get one that says ***MSNBC SUX COX***
Let's see if the libs here at FR can keep up their record of only deleting/banning righties.
David,
What a wonderful post. You captured so many of my own thoughts--particularly the complex vs. simplistic world views (Libertarians are particularly guilty of the simplistic view: If We Treat The Market As God Everyone Will Behave Rationally), and the myth that the news media is dominated by left-wing liberals (Hello! All the major ones are big corporations). Thanks.
Bill, Fairfax:
Is this one of those Constitution of convenience things? The military does not have legal authority - regardless of the vote - to handle "terrorist" matters within our borders. See Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.
Regardless of the proscription of the use of U.S. armed forces within our borders, the fact is the military is ill-equipped to handle what are clearly police matters. This work is for the F.B.I. in conjunction with police agencies.
The President is absolutely correct in his stance. He must veto this reactionary legislation.
It is illustrative that Romney cannot seem to move his polling upward out of the mid-20% range. The right wing neither likes nor trusts him. That is going to make for a tough general election race.
I have no trouble whatsoever believing that Mitty gets snippy when he is challenged. He has been raised to believe that he is amongst the entitled. When he gets out in public, and finds out that other people may not agree with that assessment, he is both outraged and incredulous. People don't like Crown Prince Mitty? How DARE they! He is unaccustomed to having his motives questioned, and is frankly dumbfounded that the lessors of this world think they have the right to do that. If Mitty wants to play President...who in this world has the right to gainsay him?
As to the right wing's utter fascination with Newtoid...there is only one explanation. These are people that are uncomfortable with the passing of time. They want to go back to the last century, where they feel like they had control and everyone else knew their place.
Sad.
phinephancy,
GOP/Koch/Norquist are creating extreme income disparity, as well as destroying opportunities for the 99% to get ahead.
1 1 1 We havin’ fun
2 2 2 I wants you.
3,3,3 Vote fo’ ME
4 4 4 I needs a….neva mind…
5 5 5 My campaign still alive
6 6 6 Campaign’s inna fix
7 7 7 Uh………………no, wait, ……..that’s a different one…………Er…………..
8 8 8 Mah plan be great.
9 9 9 we doin’ fine.
10 10 10 2016, “here we go again”!
David - Why do Republicans hate the US constitution so much?
And when did they become such compulsive bed wetters? They wet themselves at the very idea of trying America's enemies in America's courts.
Backhouse, that is why they want to get rid of all the labor protection laws. Lord only knows what they will go after next. They really seem to like the 19th century.
Ah yes, the celebrity politicians. Only in America.. let's see the incentives:
Palin: books, speaking tours, interviews, celebrity dancing
Trump: books, speaking tours, interviews, syndicated TV Show
Cain: books, speaking tours, interviews, booty!!!!
Anna Molly,
That is just too funny!
To Bill, Fairfax, VA - firs of all, good to see you again. I have a problem with your assessment of the bill in front of the senate, though. You seem to think that indefinite detention is a GOOD thing, and I disagree.
Vehemently.
The problem with this bill is this - AMERICANS can get caught up in this 'dragnet' and they will not be afforded the rights of Americans to due process. That's right - this is one bill that will strip AMERICANS of their rights if they are ever labeled 'enemy combatants'.
President Obama is right to veto this bill if it ever reaches his desk.
The thing that you seem to forget, Bill, is that the determination of an 'enemy combatant' is VAGUE and if any innocent Americans are 'associated' with a so-called enemy combatant, then they are deemed to be a National Security threat which would warrant indefinite detention (if the bill passes).
Am I the ONLY one that sees a PROBLEM here?
Surely, Bill, you can see the danger(s) of the sort of bill. What if you were mistakenly identified as an 'enemy combatant' and was arrested under what YOU are espousing? You would NOT be afforded any DUE PROCESS. You would be sitting in a cell, waiting for YEARS.
You have no access to a lawyer.
You have no right to face your accusers.
You have no right to remain silent (No Miranda for you, Bill!).
But you are an American Citizen, and as a citizen, you are GUARANTEED these rights. Too bad you let the likes of these Senators usurp your rights in the name of 'security'.
Be careful what you wish for, Bill, because you really have NOT thought this whole process out very well.
More trash talk from the sadly misinformed. Let's take a look at the facts. During the recent supercommittee deliberations, Senator Pat Toomey (a really conservative kinda guy) proposed a plan that would have raised $250 billion over 10 years by reducing deductions and tax credits for the wealthy. The Norquist pledge states that Republicans must oppose "any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing rates." While the Toomey plan would have reduced tax rates for all Americans it would have also raised $250 billion by closing some loopholes – a revenue increase that would have been in direct violation of the Norquist pledge. But there's more. The Toomey plan would have also raised $40 billion by changing the inflation measure used to adjust tax brackets and another $200 billion from additional fees on things like aviation fuel and spectrum sales.
So the truth – and we're all searching for the truth, are we not – is that Republicans in the spirit of compromise on the supercommittee defied their so-called "pledge" to Norquist and included a proposal to raise significant new revenues. You may also recall that back during the debt ceiling negotiations Boehner was discussing a plan that would have raised $800 billion in revenues. So the garbage coming from the left on this point is pure bull$hit. But that's their style, tell the big lie often enough and sooner or later the uninformed will believe it. And we sure see lots of leftist lies on this board every day.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-supercommittees-13th-member-occupy-wall-street/2011/11/28/gIQAIC9C5N_story.html
Both Romney and Gingrich have the ability and experience to wipe the floor with obama's ears in a fair debate! I guess in a perfect world they should share the Republican ticket against lmaObama and sleepy Joe...... can you imagine how much fun those debates would be..... I'm sure Barry would use one of his executive orders to prevent that from happening, lol!
But we don't live in a perfect world and we'll have to decide between Mitt and Newt to see who can get our great country out of the obama mess.... God help us that this happens before much more damage will be done by the liberal incompetents! Liberal incompetents.... sounds like a Vegas lounge act!
Pietro:
While I completely agree with your stance, I just wanted to make sure that we're on the same page. You do realize that the Patriot Act gives the government the power to do everything that you're describing. The Senate's vote basically just expands those existing powers to other regions. Either way, it's damn scary.
I thought conservatives hated Ben Bernanke --
And I guess they do, until they figure out a way to make a buck off the Fed --
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/30/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?iid=HP_LN
Right now the Dow is up over 400 points.
Take THAT, Newt. You, too, Rick Perry.
Because I'm sure you'll be among those in line to take it to the bank.
Bill.
The truth is that the Toomey plan was a gimmick, much like most the crap coming out of the GOP.
Gimmicks like:
9-9-9
The rebundled ideological wish lists labeled as economic plans.....even though no independent econmic analysis shows any of them would actually create jobs.
----------------------------------------
Norquist and his ignorant pledge restricts the GOP from discussing how to get real revenue. Pointing to a gimmick that never had a chance is not serious, and does not make your case....unless of course, it is what you desperately want to believe.
LOL!!! More like the right wing style....which is why the best sources they can come up with are opinion articles.
The facts rarely help their positions.
Again, Bill, you are missing the main point of ALL of this.
Why on EARTH is the Norquist pledge an integral part of ANY budget negotiation?
Who in the Blue Blazes is Grove Norquist and why is what HE says more important than what We, the electorate, say when we vote in our representatives to Congress?
Why do we even care what Grover Norquist wants?
Why are these egomaniacs we have voted in to represent US taking a pledge from some nobody like Grover Norquist in the FIRST PLACE?
You see, Bill, the context of your argument(s) ASSUME that the Grover Norquist pledge is a VALID PLEDGE for our lawmakers to consider. They are more adherent to Grover Norquist than they are to their real bosses - the American electorate.
Am I the only one seeing a PROBLEM with this, Bill?
So, if you take your argument(s) and REMOVE the Grover Norquist pledge, you can see that the Supercommittee has failed because of intransigence. The Supercommittee was destined to fail from the beginning because there is gridlock in Congress and NO ONE is going to budge.
Again, Bill, your arguments are all wrong because you include things that should NOT be included. Your conclusions are all wrong because your initial argument is 'contaminated' with extemporaneous (and irrelevant) 'facts'.
Well, Bill, you are two for two for being wrong today. Care to try for the trifecta?
Carry on!
And jobs are up, without ANY help from Republicans --
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/30/news/economy/jobs_challenger_adp/index.htm?iid=HP_LN
If conservatives will claim, as Scott Walker likes to do, that job losses were caused by the national economy, then I guess they'll just have to concede that job GAINS were also caused by improvement in the national economy.
Let's wait for the spin in 3 ... 2 ... 1.
Good question!! As far as I can see, the guy doesn't even know how the economy works.
I'd LOVE to see the smug little weasel debate President Obama.
Pietro and Wiser with Age - Can you imagine the wailing and screeching from the wingnuts the first time some redneck "Sovereign Citizen" blows up the holocaust museum or an IRS building?
"But...But...He's white!!!!!!!! And he speaks like Jud Clampett! He deserves his day in court!!!"
williard is herman cain in disguise..................they share a x-less cromosone
Wiser with age - yes, we are on the same page. I was not too happy with President Obama when he 'robo-signed' the extension with the Patriot Act. However, if the Patriot Act covered what we are talking about, why would we need an ADDITIONAL bill to cover detention(s)?
My theory is this - the Patriot Act is too vague on the question of WHOM can be detained. What we are seeing is that there are American citizens that want to join with others that want to harm American and Americans and the Patriot Act does NOT trump the Bill of Rights.
You see, if an American breaks the law, they are hauled into court where everything is documented. The court system we have now is more than able to handle situations where Americans break the law to harm Americans and America.
Too bad the panty-waists in Congress do not agree. They want a 'military' solution so that they would look 'tough' on terror, at the expense of YOUR (and my) rights as a citizen.
Nonethless, all of this stinks to high Heaven.
phinephancy,
Norquist clearly articulates that elites care only about getting richer.
He makes no bones about not caring for the well-being or future of the 99%.
From that perspective; $cost of winning not a problem. Pain and suffering to the 99%; no limit.
They want us to lie down and accept that compromise is a thing of the past.
Even a few republicans including the Sen. Kirk R from Illinois recognizes that Americans should retain the rights granted under the constitution. No president or administration should be able to declare a US citizen a terrorist and allow the military to be judge and jury and violate the right to a lawyer or a trial of their peers.
That said, I'm not sure Obama will veto this dangerous bill. Will Obama stand with the constitution and civil liberties or will he fold to advisors whispering that a veto will hurt him in polling?
Pietro good to see you again.
Backhouse, when did the GOP decide that compromise was a 4 letter word? Guess they (even though they have a so-called historian running) have never read our history. Great things in this country have been accomplished through compromise. When we stop doing that, bad things happen, i.e Civil War.
And their pledge to Grover? When did that supercede their oath to the constitution and the American People? Seems a bit odd considering that they are always proclaiming alligence to it.
But, But, But....we were told we needed the AJA or it was the end of the world. We were told we need the payroll tax cut extended or it was double dip time.
Or maybe government just can't manipulate the economy the way the geniuses think they can.
Either way I applaud this good news and hope for a great jobs figure on Friday. Good news for America!
Phinephancy,
For the GOP/Koch party, it is just about winning. And winner takes All.
Means: WIN AT ALL COSTS, NO COMPROMISE.
Another cheap shot AM, a tactic you're becoming quite proficient with. Dare I point out that everyone out there with a 401K or whose company has a pension fund benefits from a rising stock market – not just those evil rich folks lurking in the shadows of your mind.
But on a more substantive point, the real issue is the role of the American central bank in mitigating a problem made in Europe. Some folks might argue that if Europe goes down the global economy would slow (at best) or enter a deflationary spiral (at worst). Either of those outcomes would almost certainly have a negative effect on the American economy and therefore it is incumbent upon the Fed to do what it can to prevent disaster. Other folks might argue that putting American tax dollars at risk to save European countries who cannot (or will not) save themselves is a total non-starter – and I would be in that camp.
But what the Fed did today is a step short of potentially ponying up U.S. tax dollars. All the Fed did was reduce the amount it charges to exchange foreign currencies for U.S. dollars. That in and of itself is not a burden on the American taxpayer – unlike the more aggressive approach of the Fed stepping in and actually buying Euro bonds in a "quantitative easing for Europe" strategy which some have advocated.
So I don't have a problem with today's Fed action. But I would have a problem with any Fed action that increased their balance sheet by adding European debt. If they cross that line then they effectively offer the strength of the American economy as collateral for propping up the failed periphery economies in Europe. That would be unacceptable, and probably not just to conservatives.
Cable news is not news, and anyone who watches it to get news, will surely be dumber for it.
__________________________________________
MSDNC is "cable news".
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yellowdog - Mark D - good to see you again as well.
While I may agree with your post, the problem is that there is a bill that has PASSED the Senate that would usurp the constitution and the Bill if Rights for American Citizens in the name of 'national security'. What this tells me is that we have a bunch of bitchy little girls in Congress (with my apologies to little girls) that are afraid of their own shadow.
OR -
This is a cynical ploy to strip Americans of their civil rights for some OTHER nefarious purpose, using 'terrorism' and 'Al Qaeda' as the vehicle.
IN either case, American have to PAY ATTENTION and THINK. Like my friend Bill, Fairfax, VA has suggested, a political or 'security' solution does NOT warrant MORE legislation that usurps rights. The FBI and law enforcement are more than able to handle investigation(s) regarding crimes. The extra layers of DHS are NOT necessary and should be abolished.
Now if Rick Perry said that he wanted to get rid of the Department of Homeland Security in the debate, he would probably not be polling in the single digits...
Actually, Joe, I do something really old fashioned. I read the paper. Something I dare say, you wouldn't know how to do!
And once again, if you hate MSNBC so much, why are you always here? Hmmm, possible brain issues.
Careful Fox. I saw the movie and know what happens when someone named Willard gets testy.
And once again, if you hate MSNBC so much, why are you always here?
_________________________________________
I don't hate MSDNC. It has some of the best comedy shows on TV. I find it and FR very entertaining. For example, you couldn't make up the latest MSDNC Lean Leftward commercials. My personal favorite is da Rev. Al's where he talks about himself lying to his mother as a kid and then somehow translates that into the conclusion that Republicans are all liars.
I'm sure you and all the FR regular lefty liberals eat that up like it was blueberry pie!!!
Friends and neighbors, dare I say, my fellow Americans, let us take a moment and bow our heads in sad remembrance of the late, great, Republican Party.
The party of Lincoln, of TR and Eisenhower, even Reagan, is no more. The political institution that changed America forever, freed the slaves, fought the monopolies, regulated processed foods and so much more has evolved beyond it's 1960's image of parsimonious party-poopers into something that none of the party's greatest leaders would recognize today.
It is tragic. Grover Norquist, Dick Armey and the Koch Brothers have hijacked the party of Lincoln and turned it into the party of the rich. It is not even a shadow of it's former self. Nothing is left of the once Grand Old Party.
If you need proof just look at the array of their best and brightest.
Romney-which way is the wind blowing today?
Gingrich-I'm so rich I don't have to lobby, see you at Tiffanys!
Huntsman- Bimbo Eruptions!
Perry- duh, if you're 21 vote for me. If not get a job.
Cain-Where are the White Women? (Cleavon Little/Blazing Saddles)
Santorum-who?
Paul- certifiable
Bachman- Gay-ness can be CURED!
It's like re-make of of IT's A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD, WORLD only nobody is laughing.
What has happened to the GOP? What has happened to America?
Talk Radio and live streaming propaganda 24/7/365 is what happened. You can thank St. Reagan for that.
So, take a moment my friends and bow your heads in remembrance of what has been lost. The loyal opposition, a necessary component of our beloved two-party system, is no more. What is left is a thing of evil that, if not checked, will destroy this great country.
Thank you for your time and your consideration of my words. I am serious. I long for a Lincoln, a TR, even a Reagan to rise up from the ashes of the GOP. A real leader, not a demagogue, I fear we will never see their like again.
Obama/Biden 2012
Another cheap shot AM, a tactic you're becoming quite proficient with.
_________________________________________
Go easy Bill. AM has locked her retirement money up in CD's and is earning at most 2% a year on a 5 year "investment". A day when the Dow is up 3.5% is gonna make her a little "snippy/testy".
Nicely put, skip.
What's really amazing how Grover has completely gotten under the skin of the Democrats. Norquist is a private citizen with nothing more than an idea, and yet he has completely baffled the Democratic elites such as Obama, Reid, and Pelosi. Barack, Harry, and Nancy are all defenseless when Grover is around.
JoAnna.
What is really amazing and baffling is how one ideological private citizen has almost complete control over the GOP's economic policy, leaving it's members defenseless to use common sense.
Well, look who it isn't!
Actually, 99% of Republicans in Congress (as well as State and Local Governments) took and signed this ridiculous pledge, swearing their allegiance to an unelected nobody over their allegiance to the Constitution. It seems to me that the 'Democratic elites', as you put it, still answer to the American people.
I love how the JAS1 crew deflects from the real problem, which is that the GOPers/Tea Partyers are taking orders from 'a private citizen' with his own agenda and NOT from the people who elected them.
Skip - Exactly.
30 years ago I would have been a Republican, at least on economic issues. The party that refused to lower taxes one iota if it added a penny to the debt is dead, and Reagan killed it.
"Reagan taught us deficits don't matter," Dick Cheney speaking to the lessons of the conservative revolution.
The sad fact is that, "Tax and Spend," is a far, far, far more fiscally conservative position than, "Tax CUT and Spend."
Romney 2012 !!!
Pietro, the GOP promise of not increasing taxes was made to the representatives constituents, not to Norquist. I know it's foreign to you and that you cannot understand there are a finite set of resources in this country, there is a limit on how much a government can spend, and that limit is being exceeded in spades under Obama. This concept obviously is a mystery to you that the government is spending more that it ever can take in to pay for all of it's expenditures. Even going back to the "Clinton era" tax rates brings in about $370 billion a year in new revenue, hardly enough to cover the $1.5 trillion dollar yearly deficits, and also a huge raise in taxes on the middle class.
So what do you suggest to cover the remaining $1.1+ trillion dollars in the yearly deficit Pietro. Build a high speed train?
Explain how not raising taxes makes anyone not in allegiance to the Constitution.
Not really, Joe. My CDs aren't anywhere near that long-term. AND at this moment, up about 469 points from yesterday, the DJIA is still about 700 or 800 points BELOW where I got out.
If anyone should be testy about THAT, it would be you.
So, Bill ... exactly HOW is pointing out that conservatives keep calling for Ben Bernanke to be fired -- heck, Rick Perry even called him treasonous -- a cheaper shot than saying those things about him?
As highly principled-guy, Bill, I presume you don't intend to accept any gains that you may otherwise have made as a result of the Fed's recent action to loosen liquidity.
That would be accepting the ill-gotten gains of treason, wouldn't it?
Or maybe you should ask Rick Perry. LoL
If anyone ought to think through his/her rhetoric, it ought to be you, Bill, and your fellows on the right who say such silly things on a daily basis.
Because sometimes eating your words can be tough chewing, can't it?
Yeah, we heard all this nonsense after the 2008 election. How'd that work out for you again?
Skip: You NAILED it! Hope your Thanksgiving was a wonderful one!
Good grief AM, you really have gone off the deep end. How you twist my words to get to that is beyond me. But I do like your icon :)
Joe.
Yep. Sure is.
Why is that funny? Oh. LOL!!!! You think you made a clever point. Try again.
You bet it is. It takes lots of skill and years of practice.
Why thank you. Can't wait to see yours.
at this moment, up about 469 points from yesterday, the DJIA is still about 700 or 800 points BELOW where I got out.
If anyone should be testy about THAT, it would be you.
______________________________________________
Why would I be testy about you getting out at the top of this year's market??
I like it when I make money in the stock market. I also like it when other people make money in the stock market. Especially lefty liberals. I hope they make so much money they end up despising themselves for it. Especially when they sign that 1040 with lots and lots of 15% LTCG's.
JoAnna.
I see you have done nothing to deal with your spoon fed delusion.
But here is an oportunity for you to at least attempt to show you are more then just a blind, ideological parrot.
Since you have bought the drivel that this President is spending out of control, here is your challenge:
Please post the policies, along with their costs, from the Obama adminstration that has led to the massive spending you attribute to this President.
Good luck. LOL!!!
(If you had bothered to actually research the crap you were fed, you would know that the vast majority of the increase in debt is from the recession, and leftover policies from the last administration. Study up.)
Dumb, dee, dee, dumb, dumb, dumb...
So your position is the author of the "opinion" article I cited made up his own "facts"? And your proof of that damning statement would be where? Or is that just YOUR opinion?
Why is that funny? Oh. LOL!!!! You think you made a clever point. Try again.
_______________________________________
Clearly YOU have been watching waaaaaaay too much MSDNC news. I quote you from your original post:
"Cable news is not news, and anyone who watches it to get news, will surely be dumber for it."
LOL... war of the FLIP FLOPS you could call it.
We can either have a populist with no principals who only wants power and wealth or a serial globalist with ZERO integrity.
No thanks... I pick Ron Paul for an upset in Iowa.
Paul is the ONLY ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT candidate in the race including Obama. Plus, no one has worked harder to open the books of the FED and no one as been more right on our economy and foreign policy the past 20 years.
Joe.
Clearly you have an issue with cognative thinking.
(I love it when stupid people try to be clever.)
MSNBC is cable news, just as Fox is cable news. Both are feeding their viewers a narrative.
And if you watch either one thinking you are getting news, you will leave the TV dumber.
LoL Don't hold your breath.
And you need an avatar, too.
Joanna, I have you on "ignore" but sometimes I just like to see what you're thinking. Sadly, it's never worth my time. C'mon girlfriend, unless you are a paid troll even you must mourn the loss of true leadership within your party. Not even you, in your wildest rants, could seriously support the group of clowns your party has put forth as Presidential material. There was a time when I worked for GOP candidates. I voted for both Republicans and Democrats as a true independent should. I picked the best person for the job. But will not vote for a Republican today, even if I think they are the best candidate for the job because of the folks they bring to the party with them. I'm lookin' at you girlfriend and all your little ditto-head zombies.
Dawn, thanks, I hope your Thanksgiving was a good one. Mine was great right up until Sunday when my back went out. Bummer. Give Sey a hug, my three canines are a continuing source of delight.
Obama/Biden 2012
nils,
Actually, I've been saying for years that "Tax and Spend" is a morally correct policy as opposed to the Republican morally bankrupt "Borrow and Spend" policy.
Bill.
My postition is you would be far less ignorant if you did not get your arguments from right wing opinion articles, but instead actually paid attention and formed your own opinion.
Claiming the paltry revenue increases Toomey (that had no chance of passing) offered somehow trumps the GOP's line in the sand imposed by Norquist, is beyond laughable.
There have been far more cuts then revenue increases, despite the fact that revenue has decreased the same percentage as spending has increased, and despite the fact that the economic analysis shows there is minimal impact to raising taxes on the wealthy.
Study up.
- $800 billion stimulus plan
- $1 trillion dollar increase for ObamaCare
- State department increased 2008 to 2010 by 20% from $47 billion to $58 billion
- Labor department went from $57 billion to $179 billion is spending.
- $38 billion is venture capitalism, like with Solyndra
Just to name a few.
Google search keywords: Obama spending increases (you know, so you can actually find these things out yourself. Try it, even an idiot like you can do it - LOL).
Yes you are.
Yet another LibsRUs reject that just can't explain what 'ignore' means. Interesting I'm not 'worth your time', but then you go on yet another wild rant of ad hominem attacks.
Sorry skip, this election is about Obama and something he didn't have last time around - a record.
And get that 'Ignore' button problem of yours fixed. Wouldn't want you having to view a differing viewpoint from your own, it might cause you to actually think.
Pietro,
When did it become unconstitutional to sign a pledge that agreed to "NO NEW TAXES"!
I don't believe that it is unconstitutional to pledge anything as a government employee, except that you defend the constitution.
But even a bigger question for you and others, How much should someone have to pay in income taxes to the federal government? What is the limit? Who should have to pay income taxes?
What percentage should someone have to pay of their income to taxes--10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, or even 50%?
Don't get me wrong--I believe all loopholes in the tax system should be closed, but when does the taxation stop--when ever dollar is equally distributed amongst all of the citizens. To you and others, what is your fair share?
I asked the same question Big. No answer from the mighty Pietro, basically because he's wrong. The Pietro's of the world get their heads so polluted with leftist propaganda that they look like fools when they make their wild claims and are mildly challenged regarding their statements.
The Pietro's of the world want to raise taxes, but on who, and by how much, and what will it do for the deficit, and will it harm the economy? Again, no answers from the Pietro's of the world, it's just the same old rant "Tax the rich!"
BIgBear,
Do you really understand so little about how Norquist is holding Republicans' feet to the fire? Go spend some time reading up about this subject, then come back and see whether your first and second sentences make sense in the context of what is actually going on.
JoAnna.
BWHAHAHAHHHAHAHHAAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!!!!!!
I love it when the ignorant double down on their ignorance. And you are right, any idiot can prove to themselves what they want so very desperately to believe. (Thanks for the example.)
Ok. Tally at $800 B.
Wrong. Sorry. But you cannot use right wing, ideological projections to justify your delusion....at least not credibly.
Not to mention, even if your projection turns out to be valid, it hasn't happened yet. Dumb, dee, dee, dumb, dumb, dumb....LOL!!!
LOL!!! Ok. Add what, $30 billion? LOL!!! (Des-par-a-tion.)
LOL!!! You are now double counting. But you are desperate to preserve your spoon fed delusion.
BTW.
Your total isn't even up to a trillion.
Are you ready to admit your willfull ignorance, or are you going to keep this futile exercise up?
LOL!!! Nope. But you keep proving you are. Thanks. I like mocking stupid.
The ADP November report also states "Most of November's gains were from seasonal workers being hired by UPS."
Bill,
Suffice it to say that some people like myself are looking for the truth and then others like yourself have already dicided what the "truth" is and are merely looking for the news bites to support it.
Norquist controls the pub's who signed his pledge to help the rich with very real threats to their further job status and has given examples of (gloated over) his success using these tactics in interviews. Brazenly even...
Sorry, man, but you are dead wrong.
JoAnna.
It is not unconsitutional. But it is rather stupid of the people running this country to ignore reality in favor of some ignorant ideology.
Coming from you, who just got done looking like a fool with her wild claims about Obama's spending, that is pretty funny.
It is a rare occation when you can actually back up the crap you are fed.
Jack in Portsmouth,
I thought that it was the job of every politician to pledge something to their constituents. Didn't President Obama pledge "Hope & Change"? Didn't he pledge healthcare to everyone?
The pledge to "No New Taxes" is exactly the same. IMO. They don't have to live by it, and if they change their minds, they might not get re-elected, which is fine by me. But why do we need new taxes? So that we can keep spending out of control?
Until all of Washington quits spending, closes loopholes, and reforms the entitlement program, I too am against raising taxes, especially if they go into a general fund so any Tom, Dick, or Harry can spend the money.
I hope that we don't find all politician's pledges unconstitutional, because I am sure that those on here that support our current president would hate for him to do anything unconstitutional:)
The real question is: How much of someones hard earned wealth(property) are they entitled to keep?
"That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest."
James Madison 1792
JoAnna.
I know who and what are responsible for the debt, kid.
You clearly don't.
Your inability to actually name even a trillion of the $5T increase you attribute to Obama, and the fact that you double counted, proves you know NOTHING about this issue, and are merely repeating the crap you were spoon fed.
Dumb, dee, dee, dumb, dumb, dumb.......
I hope we do find them stupid.
LoL Don't hold your breath.
________________________
AM: Yeah, you're right. It will be the extremely rare lefty liberal that will ever make lots and lots of money in the stock market. I guess that's why they hate anyone that does make money in the stock market.
And you need an avatar, too.
__________________________________
Why? So I can be just like the cool kids on FR?
BigBear
Are you purposely being dense? The pledge isn't one they made to their constituents. In essence they made it to corporations. If you don't see a problem with that, then I can't help you.
As for the rest of what you wrote, why do you mention closing loopholes and all the rest of it--but say nothing about cutting Defense spending? That's the biggest entitlement program of all.
Smiffy:
[Norquist is a private citizen with nothing more than an idea...]
How do you feel that nearly EVERY GOP/Tea Party politician signed this "pledge"...this "idea" from just a "private citizen"?
Since when does a political party allow ONE individual such as Norquist, or "foundations" such as Americans for Prosperity and the Heritage Foundation set policy for the United States? Isn't that what the American people sent them to Washington to do?
Who, exactly, is the GOP/Tea Party beholden to? The American people, or Norquist and some "foundation"?
Wow, JAS1 crew, did you really think that I was gonna let THIS drivel slide?
It's funny that the GOP Congressmen and Women have called this 'the Norquist pledge'. They didn't say the 'Norquist constituents pledge', did they?
Your research 'department' is really falling down on the job on this one... or are the just out to lunch??
Again, the bottom line is this - the GOP - 99% of them - have taken an oath to put the wants of a nobody like Grover Norquist ABOVE the needs of the nation and above the Constitution.
What you cannot defend, JAS1 crew, is that the GOP/Tea Party Congresspeople have put their Constitutional oath SECOND to Grover Norquist's!!
Can you prove me wrong?
I knew you COULDN'T.
So you want to bring up the high-speed train argument AGAIN I see. I have defeated you THREE TIMES already on that issue. Like I said - there is only ONE of me and your whole research department COULD NOT defeat my argument.
I do LOVE the way the JAS1 crew likes to deflect from the argument when they ain't got NUTHIN'.
Fiesty - The "weather vane" made me LMAO...good assessment by the way.
Big Bear - where did I post ANYTHING about Grover Norquist's pledge being unconstitutional??
Where?
This is what I posted, and I quote: "Actually, 99% of Republicans in Congress (as well as State and Local Governments) took and signed this ridiculous pledge, swearing their allegiance to an unelected nobody over their allegiance to the Constitution. It seems to me that the 'Democratic elites', as you put it, still answer to the American people."
So where do I say that what Grover Norquist is doing is unconstitutional?
Sorry, Big Bear, you LOSE on this one, You are PROJECTING what you THINK I said and all I said is that the GOPers and Tea Partyers are putting the Grover Norquist oath BEFORE the oath they took to uphold the Constitution.
To the JAS1 crew - back to the character assassinations I see. Whenever you are beaten in your argument, you resort to name calling which means I have proven my point - again - and you CANNOT refute it.
It is really too bad your research department failed you YET AGAIN. I really cannot tell you what is wrong with your group - maybe you should start by understanding reading is fundamental...
Maybe it's the new math that just drives you crazy...
A little fiber in all of your diet may help with your demeanor...
But with all of the stupid things that your group posts, JAS1, we just CANNOT fix stupid.
Carry on.
Tea Party people: Do us a favor and go for Ron Paul if you can't go for Romney or Huntsman.
Newt Gingrich is the epitome of everything that is wrong. it's really pretty obvious. Save yourself another bag of hurt....
So I can see. Well practice this: reprint the post where I stated Bernanke was a traitor. Reprint the post where I supported Perry on that point. Reprint the post where I supported Ron Paul's call to abolish the Fed. Being the nice guy I am, I'll save you some time: there are no such posts. But that doesn't stop you from twisting MY words and attacking me for what others have said. Good grief, if every conservative thought exactly the same way on all the issues, then why are we having this drawn out fight for the Republican nomination? The answer is different folks have different views.
But since you've completely slinked into slime-the-opposition mode, such niceties aren't worth your attention. Heck, if Perry proposed sending a manned mission to your icon, you'd trash me for advocating the wasteful expenditure of taxpayer funds on a pipe dream. Get a grip, AM.
You used to be a semi-reasonable poster around here. What happened?
I can always tell when I score a direct hit. Joanna deigns to recognize my existence with a response.
She is my little "coalmine canary", my barometer, and my biggest fan!
Love you too Joanna
Obama/Biden 2012
That's why we need you around here, skip! Got to keep Joanna dancing! The exercise is good for her.
Sey is fine, hugs to your 3 too! Hope you feel better!
If Romney REALLY wants to win, his campaign slogan to win those Republican votes needs to be:
"He's just like Obama, except he's OUR guy."
Running away from his history just won't wash and there's no way he can run as a conservative as the GOP currently defines one as far extreme right of center. He can't run from the HCA being identical and based on the Mass health care plan he pushed through. He also can't claim he's just like the 99%, especially the middle and working class, which he clearly is not remotely in touch with.
He has to run as the rich white guy who won't any worse than the not as rich black guy.
I hate that we've fallen this low as a society, but that's where the bulk of swing voters who could tip the scales seem to be right now. I truly hope I'm wrong and that people will vote on the issues and Obama's impressive list of accomplishments so far in just three years. Taken on facts alone and the contenders, this election shouldn't be that close at all and a slam dunk for Obama.
Bob.
The irony is that the fight is about the right wing not excepting a nominee who doesn't think exaclty the way their ideology suggests.
Of course, he keeps changing his positions to make it look like he does....
Once again, unable to back up the drivel she was fed...
JoAnnaSmith1 runs.
LOL!!! Till the next time you chose to embarrass yourself then.
Well, I really lit a firecracker under Joanna today. Woooweeee.
And yet with all that verbage she didn't refute a single thing I said in my original post. Hmmm. What does that tell you?
Well, kids, my work is here done, I'll see you tomorrow unless my back gets worse and the hospital doesn't have Wi-Fi.
Obama/Biden 2012
(NISL) Why do Republicans hate the US constitution so much? ... They wet themselves at the very idea of trying America's enemies in America's courts.
* * *
Why do Democrats hate the U.S. constitution so much? Who in the hell wants to grant Miranda rights to an enemy combattant? Hitler and Gotti get DIFFERENT treatment under the law, even Democrats should be able to figure this one out. Otherwise, NISL, the Taliban would be pissing on you first thing in the morning. How's that for a wakeup call?
I thought a veto proof majority requires 67 Senate votes,...290 in the House,...
I feel certain a Republican will come along soon and tell me how 61 is close enough to 67 for hand grenades, right? They do have a quirky way with math and a calculator.
oh well, it's not like facts or details matter to the Me Firsters.
Greg.
It is more about using the system that works.
And the courts have been far, far more effective at trying and convicting terrorists then the military tribunals.
The only reason to go with the tribunals is fear and ideology.
You are a very scared little ideolog, it would seem.
Not bloody likely, but no. Just want to see what you would pick -- that's all.
I guess that's not bloody likely either. Never mind.
@ Joe -- I apologize for being a dip. I really had no ulterior motive. I was just trying to be friendly.
Have a lovely evening.
Pietro,
It is not a win or lose, you complain about Norquist, but he as anyone else can expect their politicians to pledge not to raise taxes. He has that right. And believe me, I know you well enough that you really don't believe that the Democratic leaders care any more about the people than the GOP. If you do, I feel sorry for you and anyone else that believes they care.
Jack in Portsmouth,
Until all of Washington quits spending, closes loopholes, and reforms the entitlement programs,
I believe that this is my quote from above. I personally believe that they should cut spending in all departments at 5% per year, some believe even more.
But as I have read throughout the blog, neither you nor Pietro have answered the one question that was asked of all. How much should people taxed on their income?
You all want to complain about tax cuts, spending cuts, but no one wants to answer the question of how much one should have to pay in income taxes. What should be the percentage that anyone should pay?
Too bad, I was hoping for some discussion on that. More fun than complaining, or just insulting people. But I have come to expect that from this website:)
Too simplistic. You'll never get the same answer from two people.
As long as you cling to the notion that how much is the agenda, you'll never resolve anything.
By the way, THAT'S an avatar. ;-)
Big Bear, the issue that I have brought up is that the GOPers/Tea Partyers are putting an oath to a NOBODY - Grover Norquist - BEFORE the oath they have made to uphold the Constitution and their oath of office.
That's all.
I am questioning what we are seeing here. The GOPers and Tea partyers are more concerned about upholding a 'tax pledge' when they KNOW that revenues are needed to help balance the budget and REFUSE to do anything to HELP the people who need the help - their constituents.
That's all.
I am questioning the wisdom of upholding a pledge to some 'foundation' while at the same time the GOP is turning it's back on 200+ MILLION people who they are DUTY BOUND to represent.
That's all.
I am questioning the GOPers/Tea Partyer's decision to uphold to the letter a pledge but refuse to represent the people who elected them.
Big Bear, this is a very simple argument. The JAS1 Cabal saw fit to try and deflect because they DON'T have an answer. No other conservative on this board will touch this argument because on it's face, this whole situation doesn't make sense and they cannot defend it.
That's all.
Notice neither Mr. Obama nor the Liberals will discuss the following during this campaign, just attack after attack on Republicans in general or any anticipated Presidential contender :
1. Mr. Obama 2008 Presidential election campaign promises broken: http://www.theospark.net/2009/09/video-7-lies-in-under-2-minutes.html
2. Mr. Obama 2008 Presidential election campaign – Acorn and friends will shape his Presidency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU&feature=related
3. Mr. Obama – our government will be TRANSPARENT (no pork barrel, no secrecy): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9GSBT_-JoQ
4. Mr. Obama never heard Reverend Wright’s rants: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySM63ES8t4U&NR=1
5. Mr. Obama – indicates that Wealth Redistribution is GOOD: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8Xz4CGuQT0&feature=related
6. Mr. Obama jokes about Shovel Ready jobs which cost the taxpayers $ 862,000,000,000 (PLUS INTEREST): http://exposethemedia.com/2011/06/13/video-obama-jokes-about-shovel-ready-projects/
7. Mr. Obama – there will be No Earmarks in legislation I sign: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV0Grra3QHs
8. Mr. Obama - SEIU agenda is MY agenda: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ1NJaCtIkM
9. Mr. Obama – Epic Failures: http://townhall.com/columnists/donaldlambro/2010/08/26/obamas_epic_failures
10. Mr. Obama – No LOBBYISTS will fund my campaign or work in the White House: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SlBlvirqA0
11. Mr. Obama - Mulling Amnesty for Illegal Aliens 'By Other Means': http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5638358/obama_administration_mulling_amnesty.html?cat=9
12. Mr. Obama approval rating hits new low: http://www.gallup.com/poll/148739/Obama-Approval-Drops-New-Low.aspx, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8Xz4CGuQT0&feature=related
13. Mr. Obama - 41 White House aides have failed to pay their back IRS taxes: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/09/congress-taxes-irs.html
14. Mr. Obama's Treasury Secretary owed $ 26,000 in taxes, but it's OK: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/01/obama-geithner.html
15. Mr. Obama follows Rahm Emanuel’s statement - You never want a serious crisis to go to waste: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yeA_kHHLow
16. Black Caucus: Tired of making excuses for Obama: http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/black-caucus-tired-making-excuses-obama
17. Mr. Obama's 3rd War (Humanitarian Assistance) cost the American taxpayers nearly $ 1,000,000,000: http://www.legitgov.org/US-Military-Intervention-Libya-Cost-Least-896-Million
18. Mr. Obama says Americans are Lazy? http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/89338/did-president-obama-call-america-lazy-video/
19. Mr. Obama’s new wheels – a CANADIAN BUILT BUS costing $ 1,100,000 while the Elkhart, Indiana RV plant closes: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/canucklehead_obama_bus_ted_gyztvw89k5MyKNS4B7Qp7O
Failed Stimulus, failed Omnibus, failed HAMP, failed Weatherization Program, failed cash for clunkers, failed cash for appliances, failed release of Federal Strategic Oil Reserves, failed Solyndra, failed Finland electric car,......etc., sure doesn’t look like Mr. Obama improved the economy, reduced unemployment, or even kept his campaign promises from the last election. So what will Mr. Obama promise this time around and stick to his promise(s)? Nah, more political rhetoric, more social engineered programs, more redistribution of wealth and the Liberals will eat it up.
Yep, gotta get on that Obamamitewagon.
But IDO,
It's OK! He's a Democrat.
Pietro,
The GOP is doing what they were elected to do in 2010--stop spending and taxing.
I am questioning the GOPers/Tea Partyer's decision to uphold to the letter a pledge but refuse to represent the people who elected them.
Weren't they elected by the Tea Party--TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY--to stop spending and taxing.
Yet, none of you has an amount that a person should be taxed? When will anyone give a percentage that you think is worthy of taxation?
Damn, Feisty you beat me again.
:o)
Sorry about that!
Feisty & crew kicking ass & taking names.....luv it!.....also the insane gop tea-bag clown car went off the cliff today with their talking points.......SEEMS LIKE WE ADDED OVER 200,000 THOUSAND JOBS IN NOVEMBER,STOCK MARKET STARTED WITH A 300 POINT GAIN,williard got his cherry pop by brett of all people,cain no shame,newt the wort...... Obama/Biden 2012
I love your avatar too, Feisty!! I especially love that it clearly got under the skin of a knuckledragger earlier.
First thing to mind was that Someone in Illinois is looking to cast her next porno film. Bow chick bow bow!
Hey Harry!
Speaking of avatars, is your fourth wife aware of you using her pic for yours?
Then again, having had the displeasure of seeing your pic, I can totally understand why that would be the best you can do! ;o)
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/?id=740233&t=a_look_at_members_of_the_%22hard_times_generation%22
Fair Warning that clip is going to be a little hard for some of you’ll to watch. Some of the rest won’t have any problem because they don’t care. It’s just an abstraction for them you see.
16,000.000 children live in poverty. Some are homeless, living on the street. Many don’t know where their next square meal is coming from or how they’re going to get it. Not in some Third World Country. Here. Now.
Some would fund the Weapons of War before they gave these Kids a dime.
Some would cut their Food Stamps and Assistance to Dependent Children before they would raise a dime in Taxes to feed them.
Since when did Americans stand idly by and watch our children become collateral damage.
Fix this if you don’t fix nothing else.
You are so right, IR. This brings tears to my eyes. And yet, those on the right would ignore this. This should not be about politics but human decency.
Thanks for sharing, IR. This is the real 99% and the people who the Republicans would deny assistance in order to balance the budget and wage a war on Iran.
Didn't you hear Floyd?
According to the Right Wing - it is all THEIR fault!
If Newt gets his way, they'll be cleaning toilets & working in labor camps!
That was powerful stuff & thanks for sharing!
IR:
For all the sadness you show, there is a silver lining. We now know that more than a million additional children children are receiving insurance coverage thanks to ACA. (On a personal note, that gives me added satisfaction. Choke on that, you vile right-wingers. That's another tangible Obama success.)
We have a long way to go, but we're getting there, my friends.
IR, David, this is a good example of why it is so important for the dems to get out there and support the party. The safety nets that are left will disappear if the Rebaggers take control.
IR: Why don't you remember? Newtie has the PERFECT solution! Forced labor in schools and reopening orphanages! Perfect for this time of year for those of you who plan on re reading Dickens' A Christmas Carol!
That's our Newtie, the Christian's foremost Christian!
That's exactly why they want to abolish child labor laws, IR. All those slacker little kids who thought childhood was a time for play and laughter should just go out and compete with everyone else for jobs.
It's time they grew up, don't you think, and realized that they can't expect everything to be handed to them?
I mean, really.
And when minimum wage is abolished, as Newt Gingrich advocates, plenty of jobs there will be. Pool cleaners, doormen, drivers, gardeners, maids, janitors, cooks, lawn mowers ....
There .... you see how simple it is? That's all the "job creators" are waiting for.
I can't wait to see the workhouses spring up.
Charles Dickens would be shocked to know that his works have become just another right-wing playbook.
16 MILLION children? I guess the GOP better start planning NOW various ways to suppress the votes of these kids in the coming future. Wonder how they will do it?? (I'd start by rasing the voting age to 21....Oh, wait- we seem to have done that one already...)
DBO, I am waiting for them to try and enact a law that only property owners can vote. Next step, only white male property owners.
Sorry to be such a downer this morning Folks but I thought we were about due for a reminder of what this election is all about. And yes all of my friends are right about the elemenation of all the protections we have given to Children over the years.
Well, let's see-
Poverty is at the highest rate it's ever been since the Census began tracking it.
Who's president, again?
Could have something to do with the unemployment level, no? Or the numbers in the Civilian Labor Force- down to 1983 levels, so millions are not counted in the unemployment rate.
Who's president, again?
No wonder Obama has promised the dirtiest, most negative campaign we've ever seen.
He sure can't run on his record.
Bin Laden - DEAD! Al-Awlaki - DEAD! Leaving Iraq. Millions of uninsured with pre-existing conditions covered. Now, what was that about Obama's record?
It is a terrible thing.
And look at the massive debt we're leaving them to pay for, that too is a tragedy. But as David Walker says, at least they'll have health care. Of course they'll be paying for that too.
Actually, IR -- like "A Christmas Carol," it's highly appropriate for this time of year.
Dead Dictators don't put food on the table.
9% unemployment. 14 million unemployed, 11 million under employed. $4+ trillion in new debt. $1.5 trillion dollar deficits. Poverty rates soaring. Food stamp usage soaring. Health care plan that will soon be ruled illegal. That's Obama's record.
hojo, it is you and your kind who want to get rid of any help and protection for these children. Hope you sleep well at night now. Gotta a feeling God won't be real happy with you later!
IR,
Great post.
About years ago I met a Libertarian who told me that the rationale behind Child Labor Laws was a myth--that kids had never been forced to work in substandard conditions. I stood there in shock, unable to believe what I had just heard. That was my first inkling that Libertarians are missing a gene.
For some strange reason, I cannot picture the nut job from NJ's 'princess' scrubbing school toilets...
....................And i was watching father Flanagan boys town last night(newts favorite movie)...............newt putting kids back to work;what will they be doing putting wrappers on pizza vegetable sauce containers?.........Obama/Biden 2012
Well, IR finally got one right- this election WILL be all about the economy.
And the fact that Obama has done nothing but make it worse.
His complete inability to accept that nothing he has done has ameliorated the situation- has, in fact, exacerbated the problems- is a fact with which the electorate is all too aware.
So, skyrocketing poverty- the highest it's ever been- skyrocketing unemployment, skyrocketing debt-
You think people will ignore or that because he gave a no-brainer order to kill bin Laden?
Moreover, he needs to keep away from the subject of just how badly he's failed in his foreign policy initiatives. Protesters in Iran begging for our help were ignored- while a group affiliated with al Queda was helped in Libya, after the "success" of helping the Muslim Brotherhood overthrow The government in Egypt- which just happened to have been our strongest ally in the region.
Why is it that whenever Obama picks winners and losers, he always picks wrong?
Our relations with Pakistan have never been worse. "Students" in Tehran have just taken over the British Embassy, and, surprise, are holding hostages.
This guy gets any more like Carter and he'll announce he's going into the peanut business.
Feisty, that is why she is in favor of abolishing the labor laws - she can own a child and force them to work! Trust me, even the GOP God won't be happy with her.
johanna smith reminds me of my third grade teacher back in 73 with the yard stick in one hand & a flask in the other(usually in the middle drawer in her desk)..listening to "hello walls"(she forgot that todays gop-teabag talking points have gone over the cliff with the gop ass-clown car since a host of good news came out today on the November jobs report)..............................where's archie bunker when you need him....................STIFLE SMIFFY......................0bama/Biden 2012
No Jo, since you track the president so assiduously, could you please cite his exact quote about promising the most negative campaign ever?
Do all of you feed any children with your own money?(besides your own) Its not hard find an organization in your area that provides these services and donate. I have given over $1000 to several prominent Detroit food banks this season and when I go shopping I make sure to buy a prepackaged bag of food in the supermarket that is designated to go to a family. Its easy and if you do you homework to find out how much goes to real people its more effective than the government avenue where they end up getting 50% of the money the expect. Before I take my yearly pilgrimage to one of my southern homes I (this weekend) 5 of us have decided to buy Christmas for 5 families from the tree to the dinner and presents. Im sure I will get blasted for this, but Merry Christmas or Happy holidays.
It’s such a shame in what the Radical Right and Big Business are doing to America and our Citizens. What is sad are the marching orders Big Business is given to this Radical Right supporters who are just being played.
The big shots pick a target, give the order and suddenly the FOX News folks and the Radical Right radio shows jump on board and the issue at hand is demonized.
Oh just wait, the Radical Right will spin the spin and the little foot solders will suddenly be taking up the fight and the Radical Rights target list will grow again in demonizing yet another target that the Radical Right and Big Business Bosses, want placed in the cross hairs.
It’s a fact that these little Radical Right foot solders don’t think for themselves but instead follow in the same pattern of believing anything these bosses tell them.
Just wait and see.
thank you for helping out jollyoldsoul1..even though i don't agree with your politics...........I give to the salvation army when they have the kettles out,that's all i could afford,but it's something............why don't you become a dem. its warmer over hear................just saying............MERRY Cristmas to you and yours
No Jo - NPR reported that iranians stormed the embassy because the British imposed a new round of economic sanctions. I don't know the fool proof answer on how to deter Iran from continuing to pursue nuclear weapons, but increased sanctions seem to be a viable option.
The iranians didn't storm the UK embassy because of any action Obama did or didn't do in their so called green revolution of 09.
Also, Pakistan is not a friend to the US, one of the few things I agreed with your guy, Rick Perry.
On the economic side IMO Obama has not exacerbated or worsened the economy. He has tried to apply band aids with a GOP centric tax cut policy.
Boy Harry - your sure can set the bull@!$%# meter off this morning!
Would those be the same 'folks' who according to YOU, know better then to 'bite the hand that feeds them'?
See, once you are certified as a LIAR around here, you will NEVER again have a shred of credibility!
You're better off sticking to your 'war stories' at least they're a touch more entertaining!
Whoa! Avatars! When did that happen?
Who really believes that Newton will be the republican nominee, and all the partisan clap-trap and Obama worship/hate aside, does any conservative really feel that either Newton or Romney can win a general election?
Romney can absolutely win. In fact, he's got the best chance of pulling in Democrats, as well as independents.
Can Gingrich win? Open question.
If he can control his propensity to speak before thinking, I think he can- but his self control is a open question for me.
I still think Perry has the best ideas on the economy and the border- but, face it, his inability to debate dooms his candidacy.
And. . .
If Hillary had won the nomination, we would not even be having this conversation.
Romney can't even convince his own party...and makes John Kerry look like the very model of consistency...He generates ZERO enthusiasm from the base and from the TP, who see him as no better than the President...
Newton has a permanent address ON "K" street, has earned millions lobbying for causes that spit in the face of conservative beliefs, and has written three dozen books that are Santa sack of oppo-research gold...The President's people would PAY to have him as their opponent in 2012
Rick Perry is a man/child who just isn't capable or smart enough to be President...that inability to debate is evidence of a lazy attitude that some would probably call adolescent...
Face it, It's Mitt. He is the best, most qualified candidate in the Republican field, and despite the whack-a-mole nature of the republican contest, the ultimate nominee...and that gives the President a better chance for a 2nd term than anyone on his team could have hoped for...
Speaking of clowns this group is amusing.
Back and forth as if there is any difference between the big government Republicans and Big Government Democrats. If you love Bush and hate Obama, or Love Obama and hate Bush you are living in your own dream world.
Most dems and pubs are part of the establishment. They are two sides of the same coin. One side likes MSNBC and hails to their heros of Chris Mathews and Al Sharpton, while the other FOX with their heros of Orielly and Hannity.
What a joke... if these are my options perhaps this is why I don't watch much TV.
Oh, on poverty, the saddest part of America, is that people have relegated EVERYTHING to the role of government.. INCLUDING CHARITY. Charity and love should be the goal of ALL PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and the more you toss that responsibility to the government, the less HUMANE the charity becomes.
What the poor need are jobs and opportunities and this will not happen so long as the CORPORATISM focus of our nation is on the wealthy elite. This is not a problem of RIGHT or LEFT but IN and OUT. I suffice to think that all in this blog are in the OUT. We should be working together.
Dangerfield.
As much as I would like to disagree with you, as always, I can’t. A lot of my fellow conservatives on here are enthusiastically sure Obama will not be reelected. I appreciate their stance and I pray they are right but I don’t share their confidence.
Yes, given conventional wisdom, indicators and circumstances, beating Obama shouldn’t be that tough, but the Repubs are/have screwed that gift up royally. IMO the only chance we have is the ABO mantra reaches a fever pitch and fills the enthusiasm gap left by Mitt and that those who voted for Obama last time stay home. Yeah, I know….if wishes were fishes.
I didn't know No joe was a comedian. That post above is FUNNY!!
Gotta agree with Dangerfield on this one. The GOP/Tea Party is GIFT WRAPPING the Presidency for President Obama by running Romney.
No Joe seems to forget what her BFF Ann Coulter has said, but I'll repost it for No Joe's edification:
"If [New Jersey Governor Chris] Christie doesn't run, they will put up Romney, and we will lose'.
Maybe no Joe's head will explode when President Obama is sworn in for his 2nd term...
Come on Fiesty you can do better than that! P.S. That was a goat my friend in Mumbai owned. It grabbed my sun glasses so I put them on him took a picture than we ate him! I'm not sure if you have lived outside North America but the rest of the world eats goats!
The roller coaster ride continues. The Republican Party primary electorate is still dissatisfied with the choices they have arrayed before them for their 2012 presidential nominee. Mitt Romney has by no means attained the level of inevitable candidate. Mitt has failed to inspire any sort of enthusiasm and has a firm ceiling in most every poll of 20-25 percent. The Tea Party is extreme, radical, and unwilling to compromise. Newt has a real shot at becoming the GOP stealth nominee. http://www.sunstateactivist.org
mattpfl - I agree with your assessment. The bigger question to ask is WHY this is what is being offered to the primary electorate. It seems pretty clear to me that the GOP/Tea Party is conceding the Presidency to President Obama, as the current crop of clowns and fools ensure that the Presidency is gift-wrapped.
So, WHY would the GOP/Tea Partyers concede the Presidency?
Inquiring minds want to know.
I think the GOP is not that worried about the Presidency. They are really looking to control both Houses of Congress. They will put the real effort in 2016.
FYI (and off topic), you guys will do great under Urban Myers at OSU. We miss him here in Gator Country!
Know what's funny?
Carter and the democrats felt the same way about Reagan- he was their dream candidate.
We all know how that turned out. . .
We all know how that turned out.
Yes, "Voodoo economics".
Ive already stated that I am at a point where Im just going to place my vote and see who wins. My curiosity has gotten the best of me. I want to see where the next four years REALLY takes us if Mr Obama wins. 4 years wont kill me as I can leave my career today and exist comfortably on my own. I know you can all tell me where we can go with this administration, but I want to see it on my own.
NoJoe
Seriously, What do you see as the path to victory for either Newt or Mitt?...
In an election year when the republicans probably could have run "Ham Sandwich" and won the white house, they have practically ensured the President's reelection with the weakest, most fatally flawed field in history.
This is looking like 1968 in reverse...what do you think?
Romney is no Ronald Reagan...What it took Reagan 30 years to do (morph from a liberal to a conservative), it only takes Mitt minutes...Mitt Romney is the "Zelig" candidate; he becomes whatever he needs to be to be "electable" and that what makes him such a weak candidate.
Romney is seen as having no moral center by the members of his own party, as evidenced by the "anyone but..." roller coaster that is the Republican primary field...
Look for Newton to build up a 8-10 point lead over Mitt, before he implodes...It just indicates how little enthusiasm the activist faction of the party has for Mitt...Your Republican nominee...
I think you're wrong, danger field- and here is why-
Romney may not be exciting, but republicans will vote for him- as democrats, for the most part, will vote for Obama.
Romney, however, is grabbing the independent vote, as well as a number of conservative democrats.
Gingrich? Well, that's a more difficult equation. I have yet to see any good polling on how he does with independents-despite evidence that he does have a more enthusiastic base of support from republicans.
It's the independents who matter most in elections.
The strategy coming from Chicago is that they are going negative- I doubt very much it will work. Trying to make the case that even Genghis Kan would be worse than Obama is a losing strategy- he simply has too many failures under his belt.
Shoen and Caddell were right- the only chance the democrats have this year is Obama stepping aside. He won't- cant ever admit he's failed- so you're stuck with him.
It's going to be a long, dirty election year- brace yourself.
NoJoe
You keep alluding to a "dirty" election...What do you mean?
"The strategy coming from Chicago is that they are going negative..."
The only comments I see about this are from the other side...Though considering the state of the economy and the national mood, I can't see EITHER side running a POSITIVE campaign, just listen to the "challengers"....
And what do you think the Republican nominee's general election strategy will be, "It's morning in America?" The only way that the challenger can win is to run a negative campaign AGAINST the current administration, so a negative campaign is obviously what we are going to see, but DIRTY?
Dirty implies "Illegal", smacks of burglarizing the national committee headquarters, a million dollar "slush fund" and worse.
No doubt this will be a negative campaign, but that's what you sell in bad times, whether you're the incumbent or the challenger. So yes, it will by necessity be a negative campaign as most are, and there will be some dirt as is par for the course, but IMO, this is 1968, but for the Republicans, and not 1972...
Come on, danger field- you are simply not that naive.
You think it's some kind of weird coincidence that not once, but twice, when Obama was down in earlier races, his opponents' divorce records were made public?
His strategy against Romney, as reported by Politico MONTHS ago, is to label him "weird"- which is code for "Mormon".
Don't tell me you haven't seen it- and, please don't tell me you have seen none of the numerous articles out there from Chicago outlining their negative strategy.
Let's be clear- pointing out that the economy is in the dumpster, the debt is in the stratosphere, that taxpayer dollars ended up in campaign donors' pockets, and that foreign policy is a mess, is a statement of FACT.
So, I might add, is pointing out that people have changed their positions.
Marital history, religion, and allegations of affairs are dirty tactics- and Team Obama is already engaged in hurling that kind of invective.
It's all he's got. He sure cannot defend his record.
NoJoe dear, you are among those who often begin with a conclusion before seeking evidence, as opposed to allowing evidence to lead you TO a conclusion. You provide a counterpoint to the Obama worshipers, but are just as wrong in your exaggerations as they are in theirs...
Axelrod and company are very savvy and cold-blooded campaign strategists, but they are no better or worse at oppo-research than their colleagues on the other side and have never been proven guilty of any criminality that I have seen.
"Marital history, religion, and allegations of affairs are dirty tactics"-
No, they are called "opposition research" and practiced by everyone. Dirty tricks are
From WiKi;
Dirty tricks are unethical, duplicitous, slanderous or illegal tactics employed to destroy or diminish the effectiveness of political or business opponents. The term "dirty trick" can also be used to refer to an underhanded technique to get ahead of an opponent (such as sabotage or disregarding rules of engagement).
Leaking secret information, digging into a candidate's past (opposition research) or exposing real conflicts between the image presented and the person behind the image are always subject to argument as to whether they are dirty tricks or truth-telling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_tricks
Pointing out negative stuff, true or otherwise is called "Negative Campaigning"
Again, let us actually DEFINE these terms...
Negative campaigning, also known more colloquially as "mudslinging", is trying to win an advantage by referring to negative aspects of an opponent or of a policy rather than emphasizing one's own positive attributes or preferred policies. In the broadest sense, the term covers any rhetoric in which one refers to one's opponent in an ad hominem manner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_campaigning
His strategy against Romney, as reported by Politico MONTHS ago, is to label him "weird"- which is code for "Mormon".
No it isn't, any more than the so-called code words for racism against the President, which you have on many occasions correctly pointed out.
His strategy against Romney will not be against his religion but his INCONSISTENCY, which is his obvious, glaring. Achilles heel. Neither Romney nor Obama will make religious belief an issue as they both have been shown to have vulnerabilities in that area.
The President will take a page from W's and Rove's strategy against John Kerry in 2004, almost play for play, as it was very effective.
What is naive is to deny that all political strategists/campaign managers don't read from the same hymnal and use the same tactics. They will all use whatever they can get their hands on in service of gaining electoral victory for their candidate, or they will be out of business...
@no joe no - As an independent with an independent husband, numerous independent friends along with Republican and Democrat friends - I hate to tell you but the majority are not voting Republican. You have NO candidate worth voting for and you just don't get it. The way the TPGOP has built up, supported then abandoned each candidate is hilarious. What is left of the Republican Party is not enough to run on. I used to sway to the right more than to the left but this C movie that we have been watching over the last few years has given many people pause. MOST people are not happy with EITHER party but like us are less unhappy with Obama. And there you have it.
You have handed the election to Obama on a platter.
I'm really looking forward to Newt Vs. Romney. Up until now I've had the impression Romney didn't think any of his rivals were even worth acknowledging. If Cain drops out Newt will be the not-Romney the Republican base (aka the tea party) has ended up settling for. This is good for liberals like me because say what you will about Newt, one thing he does know how to do is political warfare.
If Romney thinks he can ignore Newt he is in for a surprise. Before long Newt will have painted Romney as an anti-colonial Marxist whose world view was entirely informed by the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Newt doesn't just want to beat an opponent, he wants to destroy them. Mittens better watch his backside!
Well, nisl---it is hard to argue with Romney not thinking his opponents were worth acknowledging---I'm sure he wonders how those folks get the support they do after he has been running for President for 6 years.
Phine - No doubt. The question is how much value does Newt place in Reagan's 11th commandment. Also, does Newt really want to win? When he entered the race I thought he was there just to increase book sales and speaking fees. Has that changed now that he has realized he might actually win?
nisl, I think his (Newt) focus HAS changed. One thing you can honestly say about Newt is he has a super sized ego. And, I really believe, 11th commandment or not, he will try to destroy anyone in his way to winning.
Phine - I hope you are right, but I'm unconvinced.
If Newt'r does decide to go all out in the primary process the question becomes does Newt'r have the resources to beat Romney?
Another consideration that runs counter to the idea that Newt may heed Reagan's 11th commandment is this: Will the media allow it? If the media is covering every Newt'r speech I don't see how they don't catch Newt'r saying something highly intemperate towards Mitt eventually. Newt'r may be great at political warfare and character assassination, but he sucks at message discipline.
nisl, it is true that Newt is his own worse enemy (his mouth). As for the money, I really don't know, if he does well in the first 3 primary states, I think he will have the donors. Question is, what does the GOP establishment think of him?
what does the GOP establishment think of him?
Well, on the one hand they ran him out of Congress for being scum. On the other hand, if it is either Newt'r or Romney, Newt'r starts looking pretty darn good.
Phine and nisl - As much as I LOVED Hermie the Clown, either that Oaf Newt or Mitt 'weathervane' Romney would be an acceptable Republican nominee. It is pretty obvious that if the GOP/Tea Partyers are going to back Newt over Mitt, they are NOT serious about the Presidency.
I mean, seriously - Newt is the BEST they've got? Newt has got more baggage than the baggage claim carousel at the airport!!
Too bad all of the Right-wing Primary voters are being played for fools, but it has been quite entertaining.
Pietro - Good point, choosing Newt is a sign that the GOP may not want to win.
Phine - I just read a nice post by Neil Sinhabubu (h/t Andrew Sullivan) about who actually makes the calls for the GOP these days:
I want to recall something Jonathan was saying a lot last year. The people who really control public opinion and deliver primary votes in the GOP aren't elected officials. They're people who are basically paid like entertainers -- Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly. And while it's deeply in the interests of elected officials and staffers that their party win elections, since their career prospects depend on that, entertainers don't have such a strong reason to care. They can happily get behind the unelectable guy who says more exciting things. So if Gingrich doesn't win big endorsements of any kind from GOP officeholders, who cares?
At least we have Feisty to make the *popcorn* as we watch them play their games!
Phinephancy, your comment on Newt being his own worst enemy reminds me of a story. Two sportswriters were discussing the late Howard Cosell. One said "Howard Cosell is his own worst enemy". Sportswriter #2 said, "not while I"M alive!" Sir Rudolph Bing also had this discussion about Arturo Toscanini.
LOL. Love the story Auntie!
Phinephancy, so true. Feisty will be making and bringing record breaking popcorn, while the radical right will be bring the kool aid and and the nuts.
Is it true what I heard? That B. Hussein Obama's poll numbers have now dropped below that of Jimmy Friggin' Carter? Wow. Are you all sure you want to be on here doing all this crowing and gloating over an election that hasn't happened yet? Especially when your boy is now less popular than the Peanut Head?
After just increasing from the 30’s Carter at this same
time in his Presidency increased to 40 compared to our Presidents 43.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/politics.aspx
I saw the poll numbers on Morning Joe today. The basic question is "do you approve, or dissaprove' of how he's doing. See, I can say I disapprove, but the poll doesn't say WHY I disapprove. It could be because of the economy, Lybia, something else, OR the fact that he doesn't beat the hell out of nitwits like Boehner and McConnel.
SO, if I tell the pollster I 'disapprove', do you think it means I wouldn't vote for him next year?
Hardly.
SO, what's your bottom line point, Damage?? Do you have one.
A valid one, I mean.
Damage: You still can't beat Obama with nobody (which is why I'm guessing you are so consistent at trying to change the subject). Look at the poll numbers of how Obama stacks up against REAL candidates...Romney (the one who is going to actually win the Republican nomination by default) will have his hands full holding on to the states that McCain won--his negatives are quite high even among those looking for a Republican candidate (and you'll remember how McCain did). No matter how great the strategy, as Churchill said, you must occasionally ask yourself if it's working. Better start looking to 2017.
Obama is going to struggle to retain any of the Rust Belt states. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Indiana see the damage Obama has caused to their states and most if not all will switch to Red in 2012. Virginia and North Carolina will also not be won by Obama. That's over 120 electoral votes Obama cannot depend on in 2012. NH and Florida are also in play.
So what Red states will turn Blue in 2012?
Pols, aren't they fun?
A new poll from the Pew Research Center shows that support for the Tea Party — and with it the Republican Party — has dropped precipitously in the last year. Now just 20% say they agree with the Tea Party, less than the 27% who disagree. But the news gets worse for Republicans: their favorability has dropped even further in Tea Party districts.
This is part of an ongoing trend, with polls this year consistently showing a narrowing of support for the Tea Party movement. In April, Pew found that as recognition of the Tea Party grew, their favorability declined. Specifically, disapproval rose 15 points between March 2010 and April 2011. And as TPM reported in September, according to a CBS/ORC Poll, fully 53% of the public had an unfavorable opinion of the Tea Party compared to a meager 28% with a favorable view. By October, the Occupy Wall Street movement had eked out a higher approval rating than the Tea Party.
Despite this trend, the new numbers represent a new low not only for the Tea Party but for the Republican Party. Whereas before, the growing disapproval of the Tea Party came from Democrats, moderates, and even moderate Republicans, these numbers show that Republican favorability has fallen steeply in Tea Party districts, 41% favorable to 48% unfavorable. Just a few months ago in March, GOP approval in these districts was a much higher 55%.
Drive-by,
Exactly. I disapprove of a lot of things he has done. But I'm sure as hell going to vote for him.
The difference between Damage and us is that he (she?) would never admit to being dissatisfied with a Republican candidate.
Lock-step,
Don't look left,
Don't look right,
All the way!
Gingrich being a two time admitted adulterer, forced out of Congress for ethics violations. On January 21, 1997, the House of Representatives voted 395 - 28 to discipline him for ethical wrongdoing, was ordered to pay a fine of $300,000 and he resigned.
If he is disqualified to serve in Congress, how is he qualified to run for President?
Hermie is ass-cessing the damage to his speaking fees and book royalties and trying to figure out if any of that can be salvaged. He also has got his accountants looking for ways to funnel the millions in campaign contributions to his personal ass-cessment account: "There must be a loophole people! Ain't no way I'm spending all that money on advertisements in Iowa!!"
Newt's non-denial denial reminds me of a scene in the Mel Brooks film "History Of The World, Part I". It's an ancient Roman unemployment office and Bea Arthur is the bored service rep.
Arthur: "State your occupation." Brooks: "Stand up philosopher". Arthur: "Did you b@llsh@t last week?" Brooks: "No". Arthur: "Did you try to b@llsh@t last week?" Brooks: "Yes". Arthur (handing Brooks money) "Come back next week. NEXT!"
I think likeability is overrated in politics. This is the presidency of the United States and leadership of the free world, no some damn junior high class election! With that said, it looks like Mitt should try to beat the Christmas rush to Personalities "R Us!
hahahha,that was funny Auntie Fascist................made my day........
" This was after Gingrich said that calling his immigration stance "amnesty" is an "Obama Level Quality Statement"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Funny, I thought it's a Reagan-level quality statement.... after all, HE was the last president to grant general amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
Again, Gingrich, the serial adulterer & disgraced Congressman & lobbyiest, lying through his teeth.
God, the republiCon race is nothing more than a marketing tool for hucksters to sell books, pad resumes for the talk show circuit or maybe even, rise to the top of their steaming dung heap as a Fox commentator!
What in the heck has happened to the republican party? There used to be reasonable men and women who could govern in that party. Now, they've simply turned into shills for big business. It seems that all the values they say they stand for are just advertising gimmicks.... like “As Seen On TV”. And to see them cater to the most intolerant and bigoted minority of the US - the evangelicals (American Taliban)! Disgusting.
“He spent his last 30 or 40 years in Washington. I spent mine in the private sector.”
True to typical Romney form, this is not entirely true.
As Steven Benen noted..."Romney spent some of his career leading a vulture capital fund, breaking up companies and firing American workers, but he’s also been a Senate candidate, a governor, the chairman of the Republican Governors Association, the head of a political action committee, and a two-time presidential candidate. He spent his career “in the private sector”? Not really."
Most recently Romney has been a perpetual presidential candidate.
True -- he graduated from law school in 1975, and ran for senate in MA in 1994, so he had 19 years in the private sector, and has spent just about that same amount of time as a politician itching for office.
If I were in any way associated with the Republican Party, whether it be a Senator, House Representative or supporter/voter, I would be totally disgusted and ashamed. From the clown show( better known as Republican candidate debates), to the unabashed audacity of the current legislature to protect the 1% of this country, the GOP has lost it's way. And more worrisome is that it seems like they've lost their soul. No conscience or moral aptitude. Can't wait until next November after President Obama is re-elected and the House is taken back. You'll hear a huge, collective sigh of relief across the country.
Hi Dee,
So true. These debates are so funny, that SNL should just run this clown show.
David Walker--you're on fire today! Good work.
Even our conservative-dominated Supreme Court will strike down this provision if it survives in the final bill. I predict 9-0.
Romney would be as successful as the last three business men who were president: George W. Bush, Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover.
California Tom thanks for the great news!!
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The pace of job growth in the private sector accelerated in November, with U.S. employers adding 206,000 jobs, a report by a payrolls processor showed on Wednesday.
The ADP National Employment Report surpassed economists' expectations for a gain of 130,000 jobs, according to a Reuters survey. October's private payrolls were revised up to an increase of 130,000 from the previously reported 110,000, while September's figures were revised up to 116,000 from 91,000.
The report is jointly developed with Macroeconomic Advise LLC.
The Tea-Baggers/Republicans won't like this news!! So hear comes the Hate in 5..4..3..2..1..
Good morning First Read family!
You know what I think? I think that President Obama is gonna be re-elected! :o)
Yes. He. Will.
Run Newt Run . . . turns out the smartest thing you ever did was run up that Tiffany's bill to get some of your biggest . . . ahem . . . "supporters" in a silent frame of mind, eh? Too bad Herman Cain didn't think of that . . . oh well, First Read still thinks that Cain could be the VP . . . lol . . . works for me . . . Gingrich/Cain 2012 . . . let the games begin! :o)
Just imagine it, Nash----Gingrich/Cain---the family values ticket!
I know Steeler Fan . . . pretty much all the GOP stands for these days is "we don't like Obama" . . . too bad they aren't so likeable either.
And with regard to the accusation that the President has failed in his 'leadership' of Congress, the only way he's going to be able to make any progress in a second term is with a super-majority in the Senate and Democratic control of the House. Sadly this means another four years of inaction on the urgent needs of our nation. No wonder we're being eclipsed by China and the Pacific rim
So let me get this right. Newter can say anything he wants and when people point it out, he calls them liars. It's gonna be a long year.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must
work for without receiving.does not first take from somebody else.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work
because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
You know, one of the great things that was admired by the world in regards to the US, was the way we cared for those who could not care for themselves. We believed that what we do for the least of us we do for God.
Guess those words don't mean what they used to.
God?! You mentioned God! Don't you know that it is not cool or legal to mention God? You are going to be accused of being a Republican or racist if you mention God.
rjw, got a news flash for you. There are many of us Progressives who believe in God (or a supreme being). The problem isn't what you believe, but adhering to that belief - something those so-called God-fearing, religious right don't do! Hypocrisy, thy name is the GOP.
The GOP thinks they have ownership of God, and that God serves on their board of directors.
Weird, Job1, since they don't follow His teachings.
So true, phinephncy.
Quick question: I see a lot of people quoting the strong ADP payroll numbers today and it looks like the outlook for the official numbers that come out on Friday is somewhere in the low 100,000's. My question is this...would these numbers be driven by seasonal retail hiring? If so, I wonder how much of the numbers is really just a temporary blip due to the holiday season and how much of it is true full-time job growth. Would be nice to see sustained job growth. Thanks in advance!
Grimey, those numbers won't show up until January. I think today's numbers are real growth.
If you. Heck the history on the BLS website, you will noticed that there is always a pretty string increase in October/November, which flattens out in December- and then drops in January.
Yes, it's driven by temporary hiring, and yes, these are not permanent jobs.
Don't expect the media to educate you- or themselves. They will herald the news of job increases, and their effect on Obama's reelection chances- and go silent in February, when the January unemployment rate goes up.
It's like predicting that the sun will rise in the East. . .
"If you. HECK the history...."
No jo, that's pretty bad, even for you. Care to tell us what in the name of the wee man you are trying to say? Type slowly, breathe, type.
Try that!
Grimey----there is always seasonal hiring this time of year but it seems to me from the Black Friday/Cyber Monday statistics, spending is up and there might be more seasonal hiring than past years. I also saw a report that said a good start to holiday shopping meant that there would not be excess inventory that had to be discounted later in the shopping season. That means sales at full price and then a need to replace the inventory next year. All positive signs to me, even if some of them are seasonal.
Cain changing 999 plan! To 911
L O L love it!!
What ever you may think of President Obama Good, bad or indifferent! Be vigilant: Any elected GOP POTUS will be a carbon copy/clone of all GOP Governors elected in 2010. There is no recall for a POTUS
At least President Obama has moral and ethical values in his private, personal, public and political life,
And he is for the 99% and jobs
Not one of the GOP candidates has come up with a good jobs plan.
Really? What do you know about is personal life before he "appeared" in Chicago? Some choices he has made and issues he has pushed or supported does not indicate he has moral and ethical values consistent with mine.
Ranmarie, you are talking to the Klan and they will always hate President Obama! If they found out that God was of color they would hate him too! President Obama is great, and represents the good morals of our culture.
Tommy,
People are not dispondent of President Obama because of his color, they dislike him due to the policies, spending, lying and lack of administrative skills. The blame of this economy is not due to Bush, or to unexpected changes in the world economy, or to the Republicans or even his own party. The blame is on this President who is more interested in his rock-star status than providing solutions to effect jobs, spending, deficits, administration.
mad russian,
You must be smoking the hard stuff. The problems were BIG left by Bush, and that is a FACT.
I aggree Ranmarie. Mr Obama is being crucified because of his
color and because of who the other half of his parent was. Most of
the hate here stems from JEALOUSY of this black man...Look at what
bush did to this country.Americans were looked down upon and hated
all over europe. Now the gop clowns wants humpty dumpty the freak
in the white house ?? Hell no............OBAMA 2012...............
OBAMA 2012.
Let's get the Gingrich women started talking about Newt (minus his poor dead wife that he cheated on, of course)!! Ya know there's a chance guys like Newt and Cain are just a couple of scumbags in politics.................
Don't let it be the 'Gingrich that stole Christmas'!!
Can one of you clear this up for me. Did Newts wife really die. I see it stated all the time but I also see this, which is just one of the many postings saying she had a non cancerous tumor.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1709905/pg1
Yes, I don't think she's dead from what I've found on the web. It would be great is she does some interviews:
"The most notorious incident in Gingrich's marriage ... was when he cornered Jackie in her hospital room where she was recovering from uterine cancer surgery and insisted on discussing the terms of the divorce he was seeking. Shortly after that infamous encounter, Gingrich refused to pay his alimony and child-support payments. The First Baptist Church in his hometown had to take up a collection to support the family Gingrich had deserted. Six months after divorcing Jackie, Gingrich married a younger woman, Marianne, with whom he had been having an affair."
She isn't dead.
Romney, like Obama, is following a script and until yesterday had largely been unchallenged by the media and the other candidates. However, he's discovering that he won't receive the same amnesty from the media that Obama did.
The media is calling this a two-man race now, but I still think the Republican field is volatile. Romney had trouble finishing against McCain and I'm not sure everything automatically goes to Gingrich (too many big government tendencies) if Romney starts to fade.
Snippy and Testy Vs. Pudgy and Schweddy.
Good one! Thanks for the chuckle!