E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPreviewing tomorrow’s showdown in South Carolina… A Romney win would essentially end the GOP race… But a Gingrich victory extends it… Polls close tomorrow night at 7:00 pm ET… Bob McDonnell endorses Romney… A salute to Jan. 19!... Breaking down last night’s debate: Gingrich deflects the question about his baggage (his failed 2nd marriage)… Romney raises even more questions about his baggage (those tax returns)… And Santorum has a very strong performance.
Vote: Should a candidate's private life be open for scrutiny?
*** Showdown in South Carolina: Tomorrow’s Republican presidential primary in South Carolina will determine -- as Politico’s Martin put it yesterday -- if the GOP contest essentially ends or if it continues for the next several weeks or even months. A Romney win in a state where he finished fourth four years ago would make him the de facto nominee, proving that he can win in a conservative-dominated state, even if he benefits from a divided conservative vote. But with Newt Gingrich’s newfound momentum (his climbing poll numbers in South Carolina, his strong debate performances, the Perry endorsement), he finds himself in position to win this primary. And if that happens, the Republican presidential race will move on to Florida on Jan. 31 and beyond. Forty-eight hours ago, we all believed that Romney was about to make history, going 3-for-3 in the first three contests. But come Saturday, there’s the potential for another kind of history -- having three different Republican winners in the first three contests. That has never happened before.
*** Big stakes for Romney: As we wrote several days ago, Romney’s fundamental problem is this: He’s been unable so far to win over conservatives in a conservative state. And if he’s unable to beat Gingrich and Rick Santorum in South Carolina -- both of whom have their shortcomings -- it would send a flashing warning signal to party leaders. What’s more, it would produce chatter, fair or not, that the party needs to find someone else, just as Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is set to deliver the GOP response to President Obama’s State of the Union on Tuesday night. And chew on this: Did Team Romney make a mistake by playing so hard in South Carolina? As soon as his campaign gladly accepted Gov. Nikki Haley’s endorsement, it raised the stakes of a contest that was never going to be easy for him. In fact, it reminds us of what happened to Hillary Clinton there four years ago, when Bill Clinton was certain he was going to be able to help his wife in South Carolina and the Clinton campaign went all in. To paraphrase the immortal Admiral Ackbar, South Carolina can be a trap. Polls close tomorrow at 7:00 pm ET, and the GOP turnout in the 2008 primary there was 445,000.
The Republican presidential field may be smaller, with Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry recently dropping out, but that's not stopping the fireworks on the campaign trail ahead of South Carolina's primary on Saturday. NBC's Chuck Todd takes a look at what may be next.
*** Romney gets McDonnell’s endorsement: That said, Romney’s conservative -- and inevitability -- credentials got a major boost this morning when his campaign picked up an endorsement from Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, who’s a potential VP pick. Note that McDonnell’s endorsement comes a day after a fellow conservative governor, Rick Perry, dropped out of the GOP race. And do note that there are just two Republicans on Virginia’s primary ballot: Romney and Ron Paul. NBC’s Garrett Haake reports that McDonnell will appear with Romney on the campaign trail today in South Carolina.
*** A salute to Jan. 19: What a day in American politics yesterday turned out to be! First came the poll numbers showing Gingrich gaining on Romney in South Carolina. Then we found out that Rick Santorum -- and not Romney -- had won Iowa. Then Rick Perry dropped out of the GOP race and endorsed Gingrich. After that, ABC published its Marianne Gingrich story online. President Obama was in Disney World (!!!). The Republicans participated in their 17th debate, which produced some fireworks (more on that below). And the day ended with Obama signing “Let’s Stay Together” at a New York City fundraiser.
*** Gingrich deflects the question about his baggage… : Speaking of last night’s debate, our biggest takeaway was this: Gingrich did a much better job of dealing with his baggage (Marianne Gingrich and her charge of Newt wanting an open marriage) than Romney dealing with his (those tax returns). Gingrich used the media as foil to deflect the issue -- “I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that” -- and the crowd ate it up. As MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough has noted, Gingrich channels resentment better than Romney does, and the politics of resentment can be a winner in Republican primaries, especially in the South.
*** ... while Romney raises even more questions about his: Meanwhile, for a second-straight debate, Romney struggled to explain why he hasn’t yet released his tax returns. When he was asked why he won’t release his taxes now, Romney gave this striking answer: Because I want to win. “I want to make sure that I beat President Obama. And every time we release things drip by drip, the Democrats go out with another array of attacks.” (Just asking, but doesn’t that suggest there’s something there? If he’s worried about attacks, then there is something to hide, right?) Romney also looked uncomfortable when he was told that his father released 12 years of his taxes in 1967. Folks, this issue isn’t going away. And whenever these tax returns come out -- if they do -- Romney and his campaign team have now guaranteed it to be a BIG moment in the GOP race. And it’s an unforced error by the campaign.
*** Santorum’s strong performance: Perhaps the best news for Romney at last night’s debate was Santorum’s VERY strong performance. As he’s done before -- but not as well as he did last night -- Santorum made the case that he’s the true conservative in the contest (on health care and social issues like abortion). And he was very aggressive; a man on a mission. Why was it good news for Romney? Because a strong performance by Santorum on Saturday has the potential of bringing down Gingrich’s numbers. The higher Santorum’s vote percentage, the better chance Romney has to win in South Carolina.
*** Other thoughts on the debate: Romney had a strong moment dressing down Gingrich’s tenure in Congress… Outside of Gingrich’s first five minutes responding to the Marianne Gingrich interview, he seemed to disappear for large stretches of the debate… The Romney campaign eagerly seized on Gingrich’s line about “grandiose thoughts”… And Ron Paul struggled to break through and get questions.
***On the trail, per NBC’s Adam Perez: One day before South Carolina’s primary, Gingrich stumps in Charleston, Hartsville, and Mount Pleasant…Santorum hits Lexington, Fort Mill, Boiling Springs, and Charleston...Romney campaigns in Gilbert, Charleston, and Greenville…And Herman Cain (who dropped out of the presidential race) and Colbert (who is not on the ballot) will co-host a rally in Charleston.
*** Christie on “Meet”: NBC’s David Gregory will interview New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Sunday’s “Meet the Press.”
Countdown to South Carolina primary: 1 day
Countdown to Florida primary: 11 days
Countdown to Nevada caucuses: 15 days
Countdown to Super Tuesday: 46 days
Countdown to Election Day: 291 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:
7 Things Poor Voters Want Rich Candidates to Know
By Keli Goff
1:06 PM Jan 16th, 2012
When Mitt Romney offered a struggling campaign volunteer all of the money he had on him to help her with an electric bill, the moment stood in stark contrast to the man who dismissed those who have the audacity to raise the issue of economic inequality as champions of class warfare fueled by “envy.”
Call me a sucker, but I consider the moment sincere yet sad. Not just sad for the woman in need but for Romney himself. See I believe that Romney was sincere in his sympathy for the woman’s situation, and in his desire to help her. What’s sad is that he’s so out of touch that he believes that all Americans in her economic situation have a Mitt Romney they can turn to for help, and that those who don’t must be that way through some fault of their own. Furthermore, he’s naïve enough to believe that all wealthy people share the commitment to philanthropy and service that his family does, thereby making additional taxes on people in his income bracket unnecessary to help women like his campaign volunteer.
1) If you were born wealthy, you have not earned everything you have through “hard work.”
According to a Federal Reserve Study 2 in 5 members of the “1%” inherited money. This is not to say that if you were born into wealth you haven’t worked hard and that you may not have earned some of your possessions, property and money. But you didn’t earn all of it, and in fact probably not most of it.
2) If you have married into wealth, you have not earned everything you have through “hard work.”*
See number 1.
3) America is not an “equal playing field.”
I know pronouncements like this drive my conservative friends nuts. Sorry. But don’t take my word for it, just look at the numbers. Startling new data recently confirmed what many of us already knew: that America is one of the least economically mobile countries in the first world. One recently published study (there are several) found that 62 percent of Americans raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, while 65 percent born in the bottom fifth remained in the bottom two-fifths. The studies also found that parental education is a disturbingly accurate predictor of one’s lifetime class status.
4) Besides being born rich, or marrying rich, the only other way to really have a shot at significantly improving your class status in America is to be genetically or intellectually extraordinary…and most of us aren’t.
If you are not born upper middle class, odds are not in your favor that you will end up upper middle class, unless you marry well, win the lottery or hit the genetic lottery. What is the “genetic lottery?” Well if you’re born 7 feet tall and are reasonably coordinated, then you may have a shot at improving your class status in the NBA, or if you are a scientific genius you may become a groundbreaking neurosurgeon like Dr. Ben Carson or if you have the charisma and innate interview capabilities of Oprah you may be given your own talk show.
5) If you are wealthy and have called in a favor, or made a “donation” to get your already wealthy son or daughter a job they don’t need and didn’t earn, or a college admissions slot they didn’t earn, congratulations, you have increased the number of poor Americans.
But you know for whom college admissions and entry-level jobs can be a matter of life or death? Poor people, that’s who. So the next time an elected official says that it is easy for anyone who wants a job to get one—I want him or her to know that’s true. It is easy to get a job--when your dad or mom are elected officials, or wealthy and powerful people who have wealthy and powerful friends who are willing to give out jobs to the relatives of their friends.
6) Most poor people are lazy. WRONG.
This is a tough one for people hell-bent on preaching the “In America anything is possible for those willing to work hard and pull themselves up by their bootstraps” mantra to accept, but it’s the truth. Yes some poor people are lazy. Just like some rich people are lazy. (Reality tv is filled with them or else there would be no “Real Housewives” franchise.) But the majority of bankruptcies are caused by medical bills, not by people sitting around buying flat screens and plotting ways to con the government out of benefits. (It’s worth noting that Ruth Williams, the campaign volunteer Romney helped was plunged into debt by her son’s health problems.)
7) But you are very RIGHT about one thing.
Those of us who aren’t wealthy are envious. VERY envious. We should be. Most wealthy people who are miles ahead of the rest of us started miles ahead the day they were born. Why shouldn’t the rest of us be envious? That doesn’t mean we dislike the wealthy. In fact, some of my best friends are wealthy—and I say that without a trace of sarcasm. But, they are willing to acknowledge that they began their journey miles ahead of most and therefore while some of them may balk at their tax rate, they are extremely generous to those who have less than they do, because they realize, as the saying goes, “But for the grace of God go I.”
http://www.loop21.com/politics/7-things-poor-voters-want-rich-candidates-know
___________________________________________________________
Still say this is what this election is going to come down to when all is said and done.
And as my friend Amy has so astutely pointed out for you Republican/T.P folks so far it has been all about you’ll and just how negative you can be first to one another and then to the system.
I guess when you don’t have any positive accomplishments for the last 30 years to run on this is what your left with.
Unless I miss my guess though it’s not going to win you an election.
THE BIGGEST LIE ON THE PLANET IS THE GOP/TEA PARTY AND THEIR DEBATE.
Mitt Romney: I Have Lived In The Real Streets Of America. ROFL tee hee ha ha ha haha
Mitt Romney: "We started a number of businesses; four in particular created 120,000 jobs, as of today. We started them years ago. They've grown — grown well beyond the time I was there to 120,000 people that have been employed by those enterprises. ... Those that have been documented to have lost jobs, lost about 10,000 jobs. So (120,000 less 10,000) means that we created something over 100,000 jobs."
Newt Gingrich: House Speaker’s former wife told ABC News that Newt Gingrich asked her for an “open marriage” and told her that his mistress and current wife Callista was going to help him become president one day. “It didn’t look like help to me,” Marianne said of Callista. Newt Gingrich vehemently denied the story. “It’s simply not true,” he said, calling CNN “despicable” for even bringing it up.
Newt Gingrich: "Under Jimmy Carter, we had the wrong laws, the wrong regulations, the wrong leadership, and we killed jobs. We had inflation. We went to 10.8 percent unemployment. Under Ronald Reagan, we had the right job — the right laws, the right regulators, the right leadership. We created 16 million new jobs."
Newt Gingrich: called President Obama the Worst and Most Dangerous President in History.
South Carolinians: barely raise an eyebrow at the new tales of Gingrich’s infidelity and LIES; plus give Newt a standing ovation for telling LIES.
========================================================================
The mere fact that these conservatives call themselves Christians shows AGAIN just how hypocritical these people are. Newt could have been engaged in an orgy and the repugs would forgive him. Yet, President Obama is lambasted and unforgiven for anything he does; particularly Rev Wright and the so-called Bill Ayers associations which FOX NOISE'S Sean Hannity brings up nightly. No matter how many times President Obama's accomplishments been proven; the RepubliCONS LIE. Fox NOISE & the right wing CATO institute plus right wing nut job media will deliberately skew facts & LIE to the people.
3 Chics Politico gives mad props to President Obama on his accomplishments since being in office. It’s pretty impressive!
Pay close attention to-- Here is updated list of what I judge to be Obama’s most significant accomplishments in the less than 2 years since he was elected as President of the United States: As you read through this list, I ask you to weigh the totality of these achievements listed below against those accomplishments of Obama’s presidential predecessors, Democrats and Republicans, and then, after considering this, make your determination of whether you think he has done a good job.
http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
===============================================================================
Juan Williams booed for calling out Newt on his racist comments
Juan Williams asked:
Speaker Gingrich, the suggestion that you made was about a lack of work ethic and I've gotta tell you my email account and my Twitter account has been inundated by people of all races who are asking if your comment was not intended to belittle the poor and racial minorities ... you saw some of this reaction during your visit to a black church in South Carolina by a woman who asked why you refer to Barack Obama as a "food stamp president." it sounds like you're trying to belittle people.
http://www.thegrio.com/politics/juan-williams-booed-at-fox-news-debate-for-challenging-newt-gingrich-on-the-poor.php
=========================================================================
Voter Thanks Newt Gingrich For 'Putting Juan Williams In His Place'
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/voter-thanks-newt-gingrich-putting-juan-wil
=========================================================================
Why didn't CNN challenge Newt on his Food Stamps remark about Black People? CNN is a baby FOX NOISE that's why.
Meanwhile, the President has been in the comfortable position of not having to attack Mitt Romney, the likely nominee; now that dog, Newt Gingrich. President Obama's Republican challengers are doing the work for the President.
Nobody but Obama/Biden 2012
The OWS clowns are back in their clown car and it’s as funny as ever.
What these morons fail to understand is the actual text of the First Amendment. It actually says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech”
It DOES NOT say, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, except for corporations and any others that lefty liberal morons would like to muzzle”
If lefty liberal morons (yeah, yeah, I know that’s redundant) want the Constitution to say what they would like it to say, the founders put in Article V for them. Good luck with that.
‘'Occupy Courts' to hit Citizens United
By: MJ Lee
January 20, 2012 06:20 AM EST
Demonstrators are planning to “occupy” courthouses in cities across the country on Friday, including the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., in a show of protest against the two-year anniversary of the controversial Citizens United ruling.
In the nation’s capitol, demonstrators dressed up as Supreme Court justices are scheduled to perform and dance to songs by “The Supremes” and hold a photo-op a little before noon, and various activists are scheduled to speak near the Supreme Court throughout the day.
“Why the courts? Because frankly folks, that’s the scene of the crime,” said David Cobb, an organizer of Friday’s protests. “Corporate personhood and money equals political speech are court-created doctrines. We the people never decided it; our elected representatives didn’t decide it; ordinary people like me and you never decided it. The court created these doctrines and it’s going to take a movement to overturn it.”
Keystone Pipeline For-Reel: Conflict of Interest for Mr. Boehner.
House Speaker (R) Boehner has received more than $1 Million from fossil fuel companies.
He has invested personally (according to his financial disclosure forms) with seven companies that have a stake in the oil sands in Canada: BP, Canadian Natural Resources, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, Devon Energy, Exxon.
Boehner is also invested in Emerson Electric that"has a contract to provide the digital automation for the first phase of a $9.4 billion Horizon Oil Sands Project in Canada".
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/16/1055222/-John-Boehners-Keystone-XL-conflict-of%C2%A0interest
So that was quite a debate last night. I’m sure the lefties will be yakking about capitalism, tax cheats and extra marital affairs nonstop. But very simple the real news out of debate is that Republicans and I suspect most independent voters as well as many normal thinking democrats (few and far between I know but some exist (see Reagan)) are fed up with the attacks from the media on anyone that opposes or will oppose Obama in the general election. We the people will not tolerate being bamboozled again.
The people of this nation are screaming for a real leader and replacement of the failure that currently occupies the White House. Republicans, in particular are energized and geared up. That much is very clear!
That would be the back of the bus, right Bev?
Independent Redneck Va.
And as my friend Amy has so astutely pointed out for you Republican/T.P folks so far it has been all about you’ll and just how negative you can be first to one another and then to the system.
I guess when you don’t have any positive accomplishments for the last 30 years to run on this is what your left with.
Unless I miss my guess though it’s not going to win you an election
Independent Redneck Va.
I so agree with you and AMY. In their race to the bottom the GOP/Tea Potty is self-imploding; and this is a good thing. Your comment is a wonderful way to start the weekend.
Right Wingers need to take note that if they don't change their back-stabbing evil ways they implode.
IR, there's an anonymous quote that seems applicable to the article and your added thoughts: "Success is not measured by how far you've come but by the distance you travelled."
That would be the back of the bus, right Bev?
Feisty , considering Newt is a dirt ball; and South Carolinians have never conceded the Civil war is over it's hard to fathom.
After all, this is the state that still has the Confederate flag hanging in their state.
They are neo-confederates and want to challenge the government on article 5 of the Civil Right's Voter's Right Act.
Independent R, thanks for the great post,
The GOP/Koch party is making war on working and poor people & making no bones about it.
All the while it is we the ordinary consumers, who drive capitalism. We the consumers are the job creators of America. Romney can sit back on his 15% tax rate because of us.
All of these massive posts by the leftwing loons can only reflect their sheer fright of the upcoming slaughter in Nov.
I understand. If I was trying to defend a socialism against folks that believed in the American way of life, I'd be scared too.
As Rache Babe says.....Lean Forward Baby
Well another debate over. Thank God. These guys just keep spinning the same old crap over and over again. Now they'll be off to Florida to do it all over again.
WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO TELL US "HOW" THERE GOING TO FIX EVERYTHING, CREATE JOBS, BRING DOWN THE DEFICIT, ETC. ETC.
All talk and no action. What a bunch of Narcistic clowns. President Obama will have them for lunch.
Obama in 2012.
I know most of our Progressive Friends know how low this Republican Party has sunk.
That would be the back of the bus, right Bev?
________________________________________
Yeah, Nasty Redhead, the same place Barry has reserved for Republicans:
He said Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch and then stood by and criticized while Democrats pulled it out. Now that progress has been made, he said, "we can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."
It's amazing that the party of "Family Values" ignores those values whenever it suits their agenda and gives cover to their candidates. More of the do as I say do, not as I do.
Marianne Gingrich, Newts second wife, and floozy number one-----is angry at Newt and his third wife Callista, floozy number two!
Wife number one, is the only person with a case to make..........Hypocrits....
Beverly, great points this Friday morn.
Thanks for the link showing a smattering of accomplishments by this hardworking President:
http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
Barack/Joe 2012
Rob in ma-3189632So
that was quite a debate last night. I’m sure the lefties will be yakking about capitalism, tax cheats and extra marital affairs nonstop.
Rob, rightly so.
You missed one; Newt Gingrich race baiting. That is the only way Newt can make his poll numbers go up.
FYI: Ronald Reagan is a MYTH.
http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/TheAdventuresofReaganHood.jpg
Reagan's dirtiest trick was Robbing the Poor to give to the Rich
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/30/the-last-refuge-of-failure-is-myth-the-real-ronald-reagan/
Good morning, everyone --
Some news from the Heartland regarding unemployment, where Wisconsin once again lost jobs last month -- making the 6th straight month, and EVERY month since Governor Walker's budget was adopted, for a total of 35,000 jobs. While Wisconsin did net 3,200 job gains for 2011, ALL of those gains were made before Walker's budget took effect.
http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2012/1/19/
http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/newsreleases/2012/unemployment/120119_december_state.pdf
If you're going to talk about Scott Walker, then you'd better be talking facts.
And just for edification purposes, a couple of links, including one I posted yesterday, about how Mitt Romney and Bain Capital have freely accepted government assistance for the businesses they've invested in, and in many cases, most notably Staples -- Romney's biggest claim of success in creating jobs -- that government assistance was bought with campaign contributions.
For Romney -- or any other conservative who applauds these kinds of business "success" stories to accuse President Obama of "crony capitalism" -- like its a BAD thing -- as Romney did once again last night, is the very height of hypocrisy.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/romney-solyndra-bain-subsidies
http://www.salon.com/writer/lee_fang/
So, if you're REALLY opposed to crony capitalism, don't think that electing Mitt Romney will change anything.
Because it won't.
But I suspect you're not REALLY opposed to crony capitalism, after all. You're just opposed to a Democrat doing what comes as business-as-usual when you do it.
Put the crack pipe down.....it's burning your lips and making you think goofy thoughts.
Hey Idiot in Albany,
It's called context - you would be well served if you familiarized yourself with it! ;o)
"If you're going to talk about Scott Walker, then you'd better be talking facts."
Anna -- rule # 1 among republicans is IGNORE FACTS.
On the topic of Newt Gingrich refusing to answer John King's question about his former wife Marianne's interview with ABC news, accomplished -- he thought -- very neatly by a vicious attack on King and the media in general, a couple of personal observations.
Gingrich, who has been fined by Congress for misrepresentation, and has cheated on AT LEAST two out of three wives, is hardly the paragon of credibility. And if some of you are the same people who defended Herman Cain, also consider how the outcome of that debacle reflects on your own judgment.
Newt says that people around at the time are prepared to testify that Marianne is lying. But how exactly would any of them know what he said to Marianne, unless he's claiming that this conversation occurred in public.
And if so, what a guy.
If Newt admits he told Marianne that he wanted an "open" marriage (open for him, anyway), I suspect that revelation would come as quite a surprise to Callista. No doubt this is not the same thing that Gingrich was telling Callista at the time.
If Callista looked zoned out on drugs last night, perhaps that's why. Her own part in the whole sordid mess has now been thoroughly exposed. And why on earth she thinks that SHE can trust him is more than I will ever understand. Or maybe the bling is really just that good.
Because as a competent liar, Newt FAILS.
And ain't that the truth. As Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney exemplify.
Have a great weekend.
Backhouse
Beverly, great points this Friday morn.
Thanks for the link showing a smattering of accomplishments by this hardworking President:
http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
Barack/Joe 2012
Any time Backhouse,
It's absolutely essential we help our President fight back against the LIES. Otherwise, the United States becomes a country going to hell in a hand basket; since the RepbuliCON/Tea Potty doesn't care if the average American or poor people live or die as long as they can not contribute to the wealth of this country by not paying their taxes. As long as they can put their accounts in a fake mail box posing as business in the Cayman Islands RepbuliCON/Tea Potty people are as happy as plum pie.
Also, Our President brought the house down too @ THE APOLLO.
President Barack Obama sent a New York crowd wild when he broke into song at a fundraising event at the Apollo Theatre in Harlem.
Obama was reiterating his pitch for 2012 re-election, and touted his administration's record on issues, including healthcare, job creation and the end of the Iraq war.
http://www.itn.co.uk/home/37416/Obama+sings+Al+Green+in+New+York
And the President can sing too. Yeaa, let's "Stay Together"
Oooooh, look righties; there's the teleprompter!!!
One more thing about Staples, Romney's often touted example of Bain "good", when Staples comes to town, the Mom & Pop office supply stores are forced out of business meaning lost jobs, lost income. One example of Staples destruction happened where I live. Staples came, put the two long-established local family-owned office supply firms out of business; then packed up and left town in less than one year taking the jobs with them.
It's called context - you would be well served if you familiarized yourself with it!
_____________________________
So, Nasty Redhead, when Barry does it, it's OK. when a Republican does it, it's despicable??
That's your context.
That's why "lefty liberal moron" is redundant, it's the context.
I don't think the founders saw corporations the same as natural persons; otherwise, they wouldn't have put a provision into that ol' Constitution allowing Congress to regulate commerce.
If you're correct, it would be the other way around.
More simply put, and to quote my new hero, Mitt Romney, "You're wrong."
Oh, so wrong.
You can tell by their posts the tea people GOP republicans are running scared. When the start using phrases like Lefty loons, Liberal morons their scared to death of us Liberals, especially President Obama. That's all any of the tea people GOP republicans have posted this morning. They can't defend their goofy candidates so they name call.
BTW: Charlie, facts scare the crap out of the tea people GOP republicans also.
@AM
I'm not sure from your post but did the first 3 of these transactions involved money being lent or given to the company?
Or, did they cut them a deal on the taxes they paid? If so, then a local jurisdiction makes a decision to accept less taxes than it would under normal circumstances. This would be instead of having no taxes whatsoever because the company did not come in the first place. What exactly is your beef with that? Was it in any way illegal? Did it benefit the locality by bringing new jobs to the area? Is that not one functions of local politicians?
You keep referring back to Soyndra. The problem with Solyndra was that the DOE did not follow their own rules for granting a loan, and did not follow the government's rules on the conditions of the loan in that taxpayers get their money back first not other investors (who also happened to be Obama contributors).
It all doesn't matter. A politicians personal life is separate from his/her professional life. We've been taught that by our media and our culture. The media defended Clinton day in and day out. "Does it matter?" they asked, and the public said it did not. The media learned its lesson to not even bring up these kinds of things when John Edwards behavior was discovered by them. It wasn't even news, the media buried the story as Mr. Edwards ran for President, and later accepted Senator Kerry's offer to be his VP running mate. The media was silent on Edwards because it didn't matter.
And now with the Newt, the same rules apply. It all doesn't matter.
Beverly,
No surprise at that voice...cool.
For anyone who missed President Obama channeling his 'inner' Al Green last night@ The Apollo;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-hDt2E8MoE&feature=player_detailpage
PRICELESS!
Whoops!
My GF Bev beat me to it!
How are corporations different from other organizations that have the right of assembly and the right to lobby their government. As to the commerce law it was put in stop coastal states from imposing a tax on inland states when their goods were being transported to a port. It was not intended to force citizens to buy a product from a private company (btw isn't that the progressive view from candidate Obama?)
Just curious on this one, but why didn't the Democrats simply make health insurance premiums tax deductible so that if you had insurance you paid less in tax, instead of attempting to impose an excise tax that they didn't want to call a tax?
LOL....A black guy "brings down da house" at the Apollo is headline news?? Isn't that the same as saying Newt brought down the house at CPAC?
LOL....keepin it real homies
"IT'S PEOPLE LIKE YOUR PRESIDENT AND YOU...THAT ARE RUINING THIS COUNTRY." Mitt Romney responding to a question about the gap between the 1% and the 99%.
Good Morning kiddies and happy Friday. I had begun to think it would never get here.
Bursitis is acting up today and is distracting me so I'll try to be brief. Did anyone catch Mitt Romney's statement that the 99% are ruining this country? He was at a meet and greet in SC yesterday, shaking hands and kissing babies when someone in the crowd asked him, as a member of the 1% what he would do as President to close the gap between the 1% and the 99%. MItt's response was (and I paraphrase) "It's people like YOUR President and you asking questions like that, that are ruining this country." Atta boy, Mitt, way to connect with the middle class and those beneath your lofty station in life.
We have such a short attention span. Maybe it's the so-called 24-hour news cycle. But the Koch Brothers have once again slipped below the radar. Let's not forget we have some work to do there, ok? Don't forget kiddies, the shark is most dangerous when the fin slips below the surface.
Shoulder hurts, gotta go. Happy Friday everyone and I do mean EVERYONE.
Obama/Biden 2012
As Romney gets more and more exposed, your arguments become weaker and weaker, don't they?
"Well, Romney didn't do it ALL the time. Maybe."
LoLoL
To be truthful, the articles don't say. But whatever way a company gets tax breaks, other people pay for it in the form of higher taxes.
That's "little" people, in case you didn't get it.
And in this case, while other people paid for it, Bain drained companies and cashed out personally, leaving unemployment and misery behind for those same people who paid for it.
I would have thought Staples might have been enough for a reasonable person, but since you still seem to be reaching for any straw you can find to hold on to, why don't you just do a little research of your own and report back on what you find.
To ask an ex-wife about her ex-husband, and believe everything that she says, seems very naive to me.
Because you brought it up. If my arguments are weak I don't know what yours are. From what I can see you are picking apart every transaction Bain did and then attempting to draw a parallel to either to the government support of green energy in general and Solyndra in particular. The big difference is that Staples is considered a success and so far green energy in general and Solyndra in particular have failed and no one likes losers. Would you be doing this if Solyndra had turned out to be a roaring success?
They're not, and I never said they are. That's a strawman of your own invention. Like corporations, they can only act THROUGH persons. Those organizations -- I assume you mean unions -- also have rules to follow. They're not persons, either. Capiche?
But if you think that unions are people, too, then get off their backs and stop being a hypocrite. Stop criticizing unions for things you don't criticize corporations for.
They have as much right to THEIR say as any other person, and as much right to spend their "dirty" money as any other person or corporation has to spend their dirty money.
You don't like that?
Then there's only one way to go, and you know it.
I don't think the founders saw corporations the same as natural persons; otherwise, they wouldn't have put a provision into that ol' Constitution allowing Congress to regulate commerce.
___________________________________________
Gee, AM, the last time I read the Constitution it didn't seem to directly address the issue of "corporations the same as natural persons" at all. The commerce clause was put in the Constitution to allow the feds to ensure that the states did not get into trade wars among themselves. In 1803, Mabury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's authority to interpret the US Constitution. In 1886, the SC established corporations as "persons" under the Constitution in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. That's 126 years ago. Lefty liberals, including our constitutional law professor (LMAO!!!!) President are acting like it happened yesterday. I re-suggest that you and all the other lefty liberals, including our constitutional law professor President, that are whining about Citiizens United go and read Article V.
Unbelievable. The only relevant question is "would YOU?"
Or are you saying that crony capitalism is okay as long as it's a success?
In which case, Rick Perry ought to be impeached.
Ah. Stare decisis. Let's see how that plays out.
In 1973 -- that's 39 years ago -- the SCOTUS declared that abortion was legal in Roe v. Wade.
And yet your side still won't acknowledge it and does everything it can to block a woman's rights to control her own body.
Ironically, of course, you do that while arguing out of the other side of your mouth that it's "legal" for Mitt Romney to rape corporations and hold money in off-shore tax shelters, so we should just shut up about it.
In 2003 -- that's 8 years ago -- the SCOTUS struck down Texas's sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas, effectively legalizing consenting sex between gays and taking your nose out of other people's bedrooms.
And yet Texas's governor is still openly and defiantly homophobic, and your side still won't allow gays to live in peace.
In 1865 -- that's nearly 147 years ago -- the North won the Civil War. And yet a confederate flag still flies on the grounds of the State House in South Carolina.
And your point?
Joe, so I guess you think it's OK for America's gov. to be sold to the highest bidder? That the corporation(s) that can spend the most money blanketing the airwaves with attack ads in order to put their man in office should do so? Why then bother to vote?!? This is NOT gov. of the people, by the people, and for the people. I guess you think this kind of gov. SHOULD perish from the earth, and let the oligarchy begin. After all, corporate CEOs and the richest people in the country really know what's best for us little people, right? So they should be ruling us. I guess you agree wholeheartedly with all the state laws being passed, by Republican governors, to disenfranchise people who don't usually vote Republican.
Tweet- not for left leaning media journalists. I wonder if they made any effort to verify what newts wife said.
AM - I see your arguments are still based on your opinion, carry on...
California tom
Good luck with that thought. Obamas record is out for all to see as well as its results. So nice that obama thinks that a POTUS is one that needs only to give campaign speeches and to blame others far more frequently than to govern and unite America.
It will be interesting to see any of these four debate obama, obama should be afraid, very afraid.
BTW, I don't recall candidate obama having specific plans of his own, other than "hope and change" You are right in one respect, rhetoric is not a plan and we all know how well obama likes rhetoric.
OK. No crony capitalism should be illegal. I didn't like what Haliburton got away with in the last Administration any more than what happened with Solyandra. To me it is just another example of how little has changed since Obama has been elected.
I'll restate my position from yesterday. I don't think government should be in the business of picking winners either by company or industry. I gave the example of the Japanese and supercomputers, there is also the example of the ethanol industry in this country. As to tax breaks, at the federal level I think they should abolish business taxes. This would be pro-market not pro-business. It would remove much of the lobbying of the Federal government and by extension remove some money from national politics. Too many companies know how to escape playing taxes anyway so that is not fair. To make up the difference, dividends and capital gains for the individual should be taxed at the same rate as income.
At the local level it is more difficult as taxes paid by corporations distort the local tax base and simply exempting them from property taxes is not feasible. So, I don't see a positive way to change the system at the state and local level right now.
I accept that government should fund basic research
I think slammed dunk would be more appropriate. He was 100% correct to come down on Juan for leading out a debate with a question like that. Kudos to Newt for not taking the Liberal crap.
Has the money spent so far changed your opinion of who you will vote for? So far a Democrat has spent the most money ever to get elected. How did that alter your opinion.
This is the modus operandi of the Left. Too bad they didn't do the same vetting for the people they support.
We know AM is a far left liberal, and that's fine, we all have to be something. But there is an inadequacy about her and the Liberals arguments that drives them to find the questions to support the answers they already have their minds. The Libs like AM are convinced without a reasonable doubt that Romney is guilty of all sorts of things from his workings at Bain Capital. Now, like some perverted jigsaw puzzle, they have to piece together the "evidence" and cherry pick the "facts" to support their cause. Each piece they clumsily manage to fit together to them is the unmitigated truth that Romney is the biggest crook since Al Capone.
It gets to be a bit entertaining to watch them with their gyrations. It's kind of like watching Performance Art.
Agreed.....100%
I am sure that in an effort to remain consistant in your reasoning, you also disagree with the tens of millions unions and foreign "entities" (Soros = MoveOn, etc) provide to the likes of the President....correct?
JoAnnaSmith1
Post #1.47 = brilliance
Verify a private conversation between a man and his wife? Pray tell, how?
By the way, the media DID try to verify it, remember? John King gave him a straight-up chance to answer and he ducked.
He said other people could confirm his wife was lying, but how that's possible when it was a private conversation sure beats me. Maybe you have an idea.
Or, I know ... let's ask Callista. Maybe Callista was in his pocket at the time. I'm sure SHE would tell the truth, and she would have told the truth any time in the 8 years or so prior to that conversation if Newt had only handed her the phone when he called Marianne from their voluptuous bed to tell Marianne "good night and I love you."
You still think Herman Cain was wrongly accused, don't you? LoLoL
The day I see a fact dribble off YOUR keyboard and on to the screen is the day I done die and go to heaven.
lyndaAz - nice strawman argument of deflection, let me continue it...
The 1st amendment didn't limit the right to petition to individuals only.
If you insist that businesses are bad, why not nationalize them? I am sure that our very efficient government and bureacracy will create economic well being, right lynda?
90 miles south of florida resides the country of cuba, last year its leader decided to eliminate half of its state run jobs because cuba couldn't afford them. Interesting, right?
Fascinating.
Big fan of "The Young and the Restless" are ya?
JoAnna: on YOUR planet, bill clinton got a free ride?? No impeachment procedings? No national crisis? nothing? Even if that were ridiculously true, in that parallel universe all right wing moral authority candidates running for preacher in chief get a free ride from any scrutiny because they are NOT bill clinton? No wonder independents are running from the Republican Party in droves...with supporters like you...the party of extremism and no new ideas doesn't need any enemies.
Annoy a conservative...use reason.
First Read: The campaign thread for the extremists who have nothing better to do with their day.
I do approve of Independent Redneck VAs first post. And it is strangely non-pontificating. I know most of us here on First Read don't know what it is like to think we are better than other people, but Independent Redneck VA did a pretty good job.
I like Limbaugh's idea that he talked about yesterday. IT'S TIME TO START TAKING DOWN THE LIBERAL MEDIA. I first thought this in 2008 after the media put Obama in the White House. In fact, I remember thinking it needed to be done BEFORE that; when the media destroyed George Allen with their BS "Macaca" campaign.
It's time that conservatives start digging into the personal lives of liberal media figures. These pinheads like to claim that they are just "reporting" and that they don't have anything to do with who is elected etc... Bull***t. If the libs in the media are going to BLATANTLY go after right-wing candidates to bring them down, then they themselves are now fair game.
We could start with the liberal joke here known as MSNBC. Even Bill Clinton now admits that they are nothing more than a Democrat propaganda outfit. Problem is, nobody watches or even puts any serious thought into the network being influential. Though I WOULD like to see Tingleleg Matthews brought down just because he's such an arrogant, mindless, race-baiting, liberal SOB. I can tell just by looking at him that there's a sexual harrassment case just waiting to come out.
We need to also go after liberals favorite source for political news: Comedians. Namely, Stewart, Colbert and Saturday Night Live. Chevy Chase admitted that his skewing Jerry Ford to make him look as stupid as possible, was done to try to affect the election of 1976. It maybe worked. Tina Fey has admitted the same regarding her attacking Palin in 2008. She even won some BS entertainment award for it. A prize as dubious as Obama's Nobel and Eugene Robinson's Pulitzer.
I'm not saying blackmail. I'm just saying they need to be humiliated in public and taken down many pegs. It can't be that hard.
Oh well. Just a thought. More on this later. Whaddaya say, conservatives? Could it work?
Romney should release his tax returns today. We all know he makes a lot of money. It comes from dividends and capital gains and he pays 15% as the law allows. Get it out there, let the hysterical screaming begin, and get it over with. Americans like and admire success. I would much rather have a successful wealthy businessperson leading our country that knows what he is doing than the abysmal failure we have now.
Redneck, I don't quite believe your numbers, but you actually make a few decent points. Education is critical. Mobility is extremely possible with education. You don't need a rich daddy to get through a Big 10 or SEC or Big 12 or any other good state school. Any kid that wants to work hard can get through their local state school. Please don't major in communications or gender studies and then complain you cannot get a job. There is a need for engineers, accountants, finance, computer and tech majors. There is a need for nurses and physical therapists in most locales. Education majors with math and science backgrounds are needed. Get yourself a good union job in a good school district and you are set for life. These are all solid middle and upper middle class starting points for any kid that wants to work. Marry a spouse that has done something similar and you have a nice little family going. Please don't have babies at 15 and expect me to support you.
My disagreement with 95% of you posters is you believe the government has to fix everything. You believe there is a vast conspiracy designed to keep you down. Get an accounting degree from Michigan or UW Madison ( that's for you Anna Molly) Get good grades. There is no telling where you can go.
Stop expecting the government to fix everything. LBJ declared war on poverty. Poverty won. We have had 50 years of handouts and we have nothing to show for it. News Flash: Democrats want to keep you poor and stupid. It makes you dependent on them!
The revolution has begun. We don't want to become Europe. Don't know who will win the GOP nomination. We will keep the house. We will take the Senate. If we don't get the White House this year, we surely will in 2016 ( Who you got, Joe Biden?).
Stop Whining, Start Studying. Start Working. The world is going to change.
Except for that perjury problem Bill had and him being disbarred, the entire thing was a soap opera sideshow. The media peppered us every night with Team Clinton staffers telling us it just didn't matter, and in the end, the public agreed. Bill today the Godfather of the Democratic party, he's a hero, a rock star to the Left. As far as impeachment, that was just brushed off on those crazy Republicans not doing the "Peoples work".
Annoy a liberal - Work hard and be successful
I have to start by saying that when times are scary we see an exponential rise in manufactured boogiemen. The right's demonization of all things poor, brown, or gay, is a perfect example of easy to understand, easy to vilify, wedge issues, meant to boost the egos of simple people. If any of you believe that we will be building electrified fences, passing a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage, or that less regulations is all it will take to make everything better, or even that those are actually problems, YOU are one of those simple people.
The candidates who are spouting off about all of those screwy social issues, and "been there, done that" economic policy, are simply trying to associate their name, with your sense of self grandiosity. So you than tell yourselves... "Yeah, it's not my fault my life is inconsequential, it's all those Mexicans to blame! Newt sees that, so I'm gonna vote for him!"
They're playing you! They're using your insecurity to get your vote!
Just look at the hypocrisy, and you can see that they don't believe a word they're saying up there. And that's where the issue is. The problem isn't that Newt's a philanderer, or that Romney had undocumented workers at his house, it's that they do those things while talking about mass deportation and protecting the sanctity of marriage.
When I hear a candidate talk about Wall St. reform, and labor union reform. When I hear a candidate talk about tax reform and trade reform. Cutting discretionary spending and defense spending. Reforming entitlements and investing in our future. Limiting governments role in citizen's lives and the corporate world. Financial reform and political reform...
That's when I'll know he/she is on to something.
And to ask a candidate running for the highest office in the land about his ex-wife and believe everything HE says is... what?
No. My practice is soap opera enough.
I didn't make it up, by the way. Marianne is the one who said Gingrich told her he called her to say good night and I love you while he was in bed with Callista.
Of course, it was all legal, so applying the same high standards you apply to Mitt Romney, you can feel free to vote for Newt anyway, if you want, but ... well.
"Voluptuous bed" comes from the Bible, I believe. Seemed to work in nicely among the "sin and redemption" set, don't you agree?
Everyone that tangled with Anna Molly today lost , she is this mornings "whack a troll" champion.
Well gee that is because a corporation isn't a natural person.
We know it didn't happen yesterday, but it wasn't until the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision that gave "personhood" to corporations. All the decision stated was that the state of California illegally included the fences running beside the tracks in its assessment of the total value of the railroad's property. As a result, the county could not collect taxes from Southern Pacific that it was not allowed to collect in the first place.
However this decision led to the conclusion that corporations had equal protection under the fourteenth amendment. It did not bestow person-hood to corporations.
It's commonplace for states and localities to offer incentives for companies to locate within their jurisdictions. When a state or locality offers tax breaks or other incentives to such companies, they are investing in a future that will provide them with more workers (i.e. taxpayers). If the numbers are crunched correctly, then states and localities win in the long term. If not, then they made a bad deal. But in either case no one is holding a gun to their head. In the interests of promoting economic growth within their boundaries, jurisdictions voluntarily dangle these carrots. This isn't news, and this reality has no bearing whatsoever on Romney's narrative that he nurtured successful companies during his tenure at Bain. And far from being crony capitalism, this was capitalism where governments saw it in their interest to take a chance at participating in the future gains an expanded tax base would provide them.
Solyndra, by contrast, was an entirely different animal. In this case government proactively identified what they wanted to be an economic "winner" and showered the lucky beneficiary with tons of taxpayer cash. As well, the folks who managed Solyndra turned out to be some of Obama's best financial buds. This was a clear case of favoritism from two perspectives: government insistence on intervening in the economy for the purpose of advancing its green ideology, and a corresponding desire to provide a payoff to some of the president's supporters. So maybe you're half right, AM: we the people are certainly on the hook for the Solyndra fiasco. But to try and draw parallels between any of Bain's deals and the Solyndra episode doesn't even rise to the level of apples vs oranges. It's just over the top.
Which of course, is nothing new for you.
Beverly in Chicago
It is all too obvious where Obama set up his "volunteer" posting center, of course there could be others set up overseas where it is cheaper. He must be paying higher wages these days since some of these posters actually manage to sound intelligent. Of course the fact that they twist logic to support Obama belies that assumption.
Ah. Stare decisis. Let's see how that plays out.
_______________________________
AM: Nice try at deflection. Since you didn't/couldn't refute the 126 year old SC precedent that corporations are "persons" under the Constitution, we are in agreement that lefty liberal whining about Citizens United is futile and only a moron would continue to do so. See Artilce V.
The ongoing, multi-faceted character assassination attempts from the left are getting old. The U.S. voting public is already bored to level higher than ever before. Is this all the Dem-loving media can bring to the table ?
The issues of importance to our country are economic: Who has the guts to get a meaningful budget in place and live by it ? Who will make earnest attempts to improve U.S. competetiveness in the global economy so we can maintain more jobs here ?? Who will stimulate manufacturing once again by removing excess and burdensome regulations that are choking our private sector ??? Who will make significant efforts to eliminate fraud, and combine, consolidate and streamline government for more efficiency ???? Who will lead the efforts to secure the border ?????
This is not the Jerry Springer show folks, although many liberals seem hell-bent to make it so. This is time to focus on who will right the ship. We already have proof of Obama's incompetence and his penchant for class warfare. That is divisive.
The problems of our country are many. We need serious Republican leadership to face those issues instead of creating more domestic problems through the implementation of Obamacare, green job fiascos, suing states for trying to protect themselves and clu$ter@!$%# energy policies.
Except he did have specific plans, you just didn't pay attention to them. Also, The President's job isn't go "govern and unite" the country. The President's job is to lead the Executive Branch of Government, and to represent the country in front of foreign officials. He does not have any authority over the other two branches of Government.
Newt Gingrich did a fantastic job in last nights debate! BRAVO!
That's interesting, NEWT IS A PIG. When it was Bill C. in trouble, you people were saying that the private/sex lives of the candidates didn't and shouldn't matter. You obviously didn't care about character. Now you do? What gives?
LoL Did you even bother to read the blurb about Staples? It was CLASSIC crony capitalism. The other stories didn't say, but I'm willing to bet you'd probably find it there, too.
You make it sound like the city councils who are bought and corrupted by Walmart and other similar companies looking for a handout are heroes, even when they are knowingly lining their own pockets or stroking their own egos at the expense of the average working person who will have to pay more so Walmart can pay less.
Always, low prices.
Well, then, so is President Obama a hero, right?
Because not all of those ventures you talk about succeed, do they Bill? And a lot of companies to whom governments have handed tax breaks in recent years have failed.
So again, I ask you, in all seriousness, what's the difference?
@ Forrest -- a BIG hug and a thank you to you. You're my hero of the day.
Nice try, old buddy. A lot of people are continuing to do so, and some of them I recognize as having more authority on this subject than you do. (By the way, what IS your authority, again? Because, I don't think you've ever said.)
But anyway, now for the main chance. By making THAT argument all you've done is to reinforce Alan's inadvertent concession that unions are people, too. People who have a right to exist and spend their money any way they want.
So lay off unions, or otherwise, you're a hypocrite.
Can anybody recommend a good irony meter? Mine only goes up to 100%
No Damage, it doesn't matter about the private/sex lives. What matters about Newt's character was that he was carrying on an affair, while trying to impeach the President for doing the same thing.
Gingrich has an excellent chance to WIN South Carolina.
He always does a fantastic job on the debate stage.
He can always out those LibTards in their place so easily.
REAL Christians LOVE a repentant sinner! Those you raise themselves up after hitting bottom are the epitome of having good values.
Joe, as I tried to explain to you above, but failed miserably. The Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision did not give "personhood" to corporations. All the decision stated was that the state of California illegally included the fences running beside the tracks in its assessment of the total value of the railroad's property. As a result, the county could not collect taxes from Southern Pacific that it was not allowed to collect in the first place.
However this decision led to the conclusion that corporations had equal protection under the fourteenth amendment. It did not bestow person-hood to corporations. And the reason that Corporations were ever considered to have a "legal personality" was so they could sue and be sued.
Sorry. Accounting is not my deal. In fact, I decided that my LAW degree from UW Madison (during which I got VERY good grades), would be my last degree.
But thanks for the condescension.
Paging Forrest.
raddave,
Bill Clinton was impeached for LYING UNDER OATH to Congress about his affair. He was getting his Presidential knob polished by an intern and didn't have the guts to tell the truth.
Nice distortion by you !
Morning AM,
So now our major media news agencies have slid so far down the ladder to posting non verifiable facts, interesting. What is that old saying about "the woman scorned". Regardless, the inclusion of this by the moderator in last nights debate was WRONG. Was the moderator going to bring up allegations concerning the other three debators?
Lets review your thoughts from yesterdaY shall we... As a supposed practionor of civil law (or am I wrong?) The law is pretty much black and white but can be manipulated by a smart lawyer by arguing the case on current societal morals. Isn't one of the tenents of our legal system for one to be assumed innocent until proven guity?I tealize that you and other FR posters are willing to grasp at straws to bring the opposing side down, why not wait for the GOP to decide? We already know that you won't support any GOP candidate. But please do carry on with your constitutional rights to express your opinion.
As for Cain, seems odd that the allegations only came out when he was a GOP hopeful. Has cains wife filed for divorce yet based on these allegations?
Regardless I am sure that in my younger days some ladies could come out against me saying that I harrassed them, should I have remembered them? The only one I recall is when I made a pass at the bosses daughter. Don't recall the words though. Alas her mom put the kabosh on that, can't be seen with the hired help doncha know!
Whoever becomes the nominee, obama won't recieve any passes in debates come fall, should be interesting.
@Beverly,
That list from 3chics is so full holes it isn't even funny. I'm not saying he hasn't done anything good, but at least put an honest list up. Quite frankly that site looks like a New Kids on the Block fanboi site. Those ladies need to pull off the knee pads and move on in life.
As far as Newt and Romney, I'm about as much of a fan of theirs as I am Obama. <shrug>
Burn'em all.
Joe in Albany,
First, it isn't just Citizen's we need to overturn. It's Valeo v Buckley and Citizen's United. The case you're speaking of, was a stepping stone that allowed SCOTUS to leap way to far, with both Valeo and Citizen's, but not necesarrily a bad decision.
Santa Clara v Southern Pacific, applied equal protection or the 14th Amendment to corporations. They said that in some instances "person" could mean "corporation", and it was a unanimous, uncontroversial decision. At the time they ruled, they probably couldn't even fathom, what the corporate world would become, or the amounts of money and the stretch of globalization that we live with today.
Citizen's United, applied the 1st Amendment to corporations. There is a difference. The 1st Amendment deals with essential human rights that are bestowed upon us, simply by lieu of birth. The 14th makes sure we get treated the same, regardless of classification. I have no problem with corporations being treated fairly under the law, that doesn't mean they must be bestowed with rights meant for sentient beings only. Corporations and money are property and yes their owners deserve equal protection, they're not people or speech, those belong ONLY to the owners..
I'm a little confused why you keep bringing up Article V. How does that play into corporate personhood. Article V pertains to the federal governments jurisdiction over commerce, not 1st Amendment rights.
And please, don't forget, SCOTUS has been wrong before... See Plessy v Ferguson.
Newtie talked about how many jobs were created during the reagan years without mentioning the fact that more jobs were created during the clinton years. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081122203157AAtJpTw
The parable of the lost sheep was told by Jesus when the Pharisees criticized Him for socializing with sinners. Through this story of compassion, Jesus revealed his rescue mission for sinners.
Jesus told the overly judgemental this parable:
'Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the one lost sheep until he finds it? And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home."
Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, "Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep." I tell you that in the same way there will be MORE rejoicing in heaven over ONE sinner who repents THAN OVER ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent'" (Luke 15:3-7)
REAL Christians love a repentant sinner, and God holds them to a higher value. Just say'in...
Actually, that's true. The reference was in dicta (see, Gary, I did go to law school). Mea culpa for forgetting that.
It took Citizens United to engrave that dicta in tablet form.
I thought of that just after I posted my earlier comment. But you should know that there may be people here who still believe Plessy was decided correctly.
Does God place a limit on the number of times a person gets to repent for the same thing? Because Newt seems to be pushing up against what I might considerable to be reasonable in that regard.
And doesn't the repentance have to be GENUINE? Or does God have low standards in that respect?
Just askin ...
No, Bill Clinton was impeached for LYING UNDER OATH during a deposition for a civil case, which BTW, he asked for the complainant's legal team for their definition of "sexual relations." and oral sex did not meet their definition. That case had nothing to do with the investigation being conducted by Kenneth Starr. And Gingrich lied and hid his affairs as well.
Nice try, old buddy. A lot of people are continuing to do so, and some of them I recognize as having more authority on this subject than you do.
_____________________________________________
See Article V.
So lay off unions, or otherwise, you're a hypocrite.
____________________________________
Where and when have you imagined my criticism of unions??
Please produce a post of mine where I have ever criticized unions or admit you are projecting your lefty liberal anti-conservative biases on to me.
Anna,
Scary, ain't it??? I've really enjoyed your posts this morning, even if you are a Badger. Go Wolverines! I guess it could be worse though, you could be a Buckeye.
Do you happen to know what Joe is talking about with Article V and the Citizen's decision? I asked, but he didn't answer.
You are right damaged , personal life matters when is about republican candidates. Obama was elected base on lies of his personal life and false promises. The media never worry to dig in his past because he was the "chosen" the Messiah was going to take us to the promised land, people cheering and asking to pay their rents, gas for their car, people shaking their legs deliriously, every time he speaks. He lie about his father, the press diminish his relationship with Resko, Ayers. Obama never publish his Thesis from College , his underscores has a lawyer in Chicago and many more. The Democrat establishment working with the liberal media bias and millionaires donors from Hollywood who later in exchange receive stimulus money crearthe path for Obama. While hundred of lawyers and reporters invade the small town of Wasilla looking for Palin " secret life". However my comment wont stay here for too long the occupiers will try to collapse my comments again.
Joe, as I tried to explain to you above, but failed miserably. The Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision did not give "personhood" to corporations.
________________________________________
Sorry, but, the Santa Clara decision established that corporations were entitled to "equal protection under the law" as provided in the 14th amendment. Lefty liberals may not like it, but, corporations are entitled to "equal protection" of their right to freedom of speech under the First amendment.
See Article V and good luck with that.
LMAO@U!!!!!!
Should you? Not necessarily, if there were a lot of them. Otherwise, I would think one might remember incidents like that.
That's not the civil standard, which is usually "more likely than not" (preponderance of the evidence). In cases where there are no firsthand witnesses, then it comes down to he said/she said, and a jury gets to decide which one they believe. In some cases, like a lot of murders, there is no witness at all except the one who can't be made to testify, so they have to be determined based on circumstantial evidence. You can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt without a witness to the crime; it happens all the time. And you can surely prove more likely than not based on a simple decision of which side's testimony you believe.
For the reasons I stated above, I am more inclined to believe Gingrich's ex-wife. You're always free to believe what you like.
Is that your standard for belief? It's not mine. Mrs. Cain wouldn't be the first woman who stood by her man, whether he deserved it or not, and she won't be the last. Anthony Weiner's wife stood by him, too. But that doesn't make the accusations false. Whatever Mrs. Cain's motivations might be for staying, I won't judge them. But after admitting that he paid at least one woman money to support her, I wonder what it is you think Cain might have done to "prove" that her allegations, and those of all the others, were false.
Probably because he doesn't know, either. Or maybe he does. Article V is how you amend the Constitution, which is, of course, the only way now that the Citizens United decision could be overturned, unless the SCOTUS takes the issue up again some day.
In short, Joe is taunting. "Article V, baby ... if you think you can."
And thank you for the kind words. They help more than you know.
Do you happen to know what Joe is talking about with Article V and the Citizen's decision? I asked, but he didn't answer.
__________________________________
Try googling "US Constitution".
oskar, you actually believe that pablum? Obama's past was on display for the whole world to see. He had no personal relationships with Resko or Ayers, get it through your head. Your comment will get collapsed because it is stupid, not because someone is trying to silence you.
Joe,
I know what it says, genius, I'm trying to figure out what part it's playing in your argument for Citizen's United. In other words, how are you using Article V in support of Corporate Personhood?
Are you calling for an Amendment to the Constitution saying that corporations are people???
@ Sarah -- By the way, you're right about Buckley v. Valeo.
Money is not speech, any more than corporations are persons.
Money is completely content neutral. It is only the direction of the money, which subsumes a decision of how much money to direct, that has any substantive content.
And not even pure speech is without limits, as the SCOTUS seems to be saying about money in Citizens United.
In short, as long as these decisions stand, we're screwed.
No, it did not establish that coporations were entitled to equal protection under the law as provided by the 14th Amendment. The decision did not even consider this argument and based its decision based on what I posted.
It took Citizens United to engrave that dicta in tablet form.
_______________________________________
AM: you might want to check the 1819 Supreme Court decision in Dartmouth College v. Woodward where they recognized corporations as having the same rights as natural persons to contract and to enforce contracts. Santa Clara and Citizens United are a natural extension of that 193 year old precedent.
And I never went to law school. LOL!!!
What exactly are we suppose to see here? Or are you suggesting that we need to amend the Constitution for something that doesn't exist in it to begin with?
Anna,
I agree, if we only focus on Citizen's, there's nothing to stop the continued purchasing of our politicians. Non-profits like the NRA or labor unions, as well as individual billionaires like the Koch brothers, would still have an unjust say in things.
Joe,
We know.
This is a tough call; If the media had properly vetted our current president we would not be in the progressive nightmare we're in. I agree with Newt; the media is bias and hypocritical.
On the other hand, any man who has children, is in a 6 year long adulterous relationship, and proceeds to subject his children and his wife to that same woman by marrying her, and now wants us to trust his character and integrity while leading this country, is delusional. He may seek and receive forgiveness from those he damaged but I don't want him and his home-wrecking wife as my president.
I guess hope that the South Carolina crowd was clapping about his attack on the bias media, and not acting as if his character is not a valid topic.
Joe,
How so? And by the way, if Anna's right, and that's why you're touting the whole Article V thing, there's already been two or three written. They're in the works right now. We have amended it numerous times, remember?
Are you calling for an Amendment to the Constitution saying that corporations are people???
________________________________________
It's just like a lefty liberal to get it exactly backwards.
If you don't think Ctizens United was correctly decided, then you have the option under Atricle V to propose an amendment to the Constitution like I outlined in #1.2 above “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, except for corporations and any others that lefty liberal morons would like to muzzle"
As I said before, good luck with that.
It's been a fun morning, but, there are a couple of lonely Sam Adam's and some filet mignon for the grill in the refrigerator that need my attention more than FR. See you Monday.
raddave
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/04/fbi-asked-questions-on-rezko-land-deal/
No, Joe Citizens United was a perversion of that precedence.
oskar you have to do better than the "Moonie Times"
And Joe, the Dartmouth College v. Woodward decision dealt ONLY with contractual law.
The latter. And wittily and charmingly, wouldn't you agree?
But I use the term "you" in a more generic sense, as I tend to view you -- and maybe Fairfax Bill -- as harboring the very essence of the entire right wing's dogma all under your own usually charming mantle.
You've been a little testy recently, Joe.
You're carrying a heavy load, so please try to be worthy of it.
Well, of course, a definition for one purpose is not always the same as another. The definition of "employee" for example, includes some things under some statutes, and some things under others. Saying that corporations have the same rights as persons to make and enforce contracts doesn't exactly say that they ARE persons, does it?
But if they are, then that applies to unions, too ... right, Joey?
Just testing. ;-)
Enjoy those steaks and have a great weekend.
I always get a kick out of threads where Fiesty and her goofy lemmings are blathering on. Comedy!!
Why would we need a constitutional amendment to define corporations as people? Pick up a dictionary and you'll discover that that has already been done.
Chuck Todd and the like are all complete scum - plain and simple - it is one thing to watch this mainstream crap media ooooz with love for the most damaging president in our lifetime but to continue to post headlines that are completely false is pathetic. Attention!!! Chuck you are nothing more than a tabliod writer in the middle of a love fest for your parties leader.
"Gingrich deflects the question about his baggage (his failed 2nd marriage)"
Deflected??? really??? did you actually watch the debate? First it is insane for the other lover of Obama to make the first question of a presidential debate be related to bitter scorned ex wifes interview - that was so perfectly timed - it has rebounded in Newts favor. So when Greg Gregdouche moderates the big show in the fall - I hope he leads with a Solyndra question for Obloma. Not gonna happen.
But my point is he did not deflect - he showed his dislike for the question and slammed the gregdouche for starting the debate but he went on to explain his side of the story which of course abc had no interest in showing the opposing side. He even offered to abc freinds to talk to but they could care less about being fair. How many of you (50+ percent) who have an ex wife - would have her thinking of you as a wonderful person without fault???? anyone? People get divorced for many reasons - not many of them are because its all happy and peachy - otherwise those would still be together. Funny how the first wife supports him and it is of record that she is the one that filed for divorce - but you scums spin it the other way - all the time being complete hypocrites while you support a pres who got a blow job in the oval office and a kennedy who ran away from manslauter and Jack was a pig. Funny how you libs think. You people are so distructive. and blind. It is amazing what love can to do ones mind.
As long as Newt and the rest of the republicans feel they have a right to legislate what goes on in our bedrooms, they need to answer about what goes on in theirs.
What most people forget is when Bill Clinton was being impeached for an extramarital affair, Gingrich was calling for his impeachment while he was still married and sleeping with another woman... He later married the peace of a$$... which is now his third wife...Who is he poking on the side today?
But what sickens me most about last nights debate was the crowds reaction... Absolutly sick... This is not the republican party I use to belong to... So has the tea party caused this or just added to the republican downfall?
President Barrack Obama has no moral problems, with his marriage or any other personal part of his life... And that just irks the evangelicals...
Joe,
Again, there's numerous groups that have already started writting the proposed amendment. Lay off the Sam Adams. You need as many brain cells as possible.
And you never answered how those precedents of yours are on point.
Spider,
How so? Can you explain your point, and support it?
Sarah 304,
Right as usual.
Please accept a word of advice.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's waste of time and it annoys the pig.
Happy Friday
Obama/Biden 2012
Skip,
So funny, my mom always says, "Never wrestle with a pig, everybody gets dirty and the pig loves it!" Which can also be applied to arguing with engineers, or teaching Ohio State fans to breath through their noses instead of their mouths.
Michael1969...
Please tell me your post (1.10) is complete sarcasm...there is no way a non-institutionalized human being could possibly believe the contents! If this is real and you are actually no longer a "ward of the state"...then the GOP/TP has completely lost all sense of reality as suspected. LMFAO!! No...really LingMFAO!!
Yes, Bill Clinton was impeached but it was for lying under oath. However he wasn't preaching morality from the White House. Here is Newt, cheated on 2 wives we know of and has the nerve to preach morality to everyone. What does he know about morality he doesn't have any but what you do in your bedroom is his business.
Anna Molly, no condescension intended. I knew from previous posts you were a Badger. I am an accounting major from a midwest state school and proud of it.
Did your rich daddy get you into law school? According to your friends here on the board, the only possible way to be a success is to have rich parents. Hard work and ambition have no place in the liberal world. With hard work and ambition, some will end up with more than others. We just can't tolerate that!
BTW, why aren't you working now? You have wasted a couple of hours of your public sector salary goofing on this board.
I am self employed and taking a snow day. If I earned money today, I would just have to pay more in taxes.
Joe in Albany: "That's 126 years ago."
Exactly. And today, Republicans are trying to take something decided 126 years ago, and interpret it with today's circumstances rather than as it was intended. One of the great drawbacks of laws and the way they are written, they can always be interpreted differently by different people. So the Supreme Court made a decision 126 years ago for a specific reason, whose interpretation has now been broadened such that it can be exploited in a completely different manner.
THAT is why it is being addressed as something "that happened yesterday" rather than something based in a different era for reasons that are likely moot today, because it is being used as a tool today, by tools.
Gary,
I think you might be missing the point of those liberals. Can you actually quote a liberal politician making a statement in opposition of hard work or ambition? Who is this liberal spokesperson? Or is it simply that you're taking the liberal sentiment that our political and financial systems are unjust, and deliberately misconstrueing them in a way that sounds more negative?
We have a financial system who's interest lays in dolling out debt. Everyone tells us to "go to college", we do, we take out loans, and than there are no jobs. There isn't any capital to start businesses, because it's all flowing into China. Oh yeah, and we don't have any capital requirements for financial institutions, or transparency, or fiduciary duties. They basically bought the ultimate free pass from congress and robbed us of the American Dream. The multinational corporations have a vested interest in maintaining our rigged trade and tax policy, and SCOTUS has ensured that they are capable of buying Washington, to maintain those policies.
You can't teach a man to fish, if you don't have a pond.
Sarah, you prove the point exactly about liberals embracing wild conspiracy theories instead of facts. Our political and financial systems are unjust? Really You Say! 3 years ago, we elected our first black president, a democratic house and a democratic senate. Liberals won 2008 fair and square. Where is the injustice???
In 2010, people did not like the direction of the country and the GOP took back the house. Fair and Square. The 2012 election will be hard fought with lots of money, hysteria and screaming all around. Guess What? Whoever wins the electoral college will be president. The people will decide. You may not like the outcome. I may not like the outcome. But the voters will decide. What about the campaign contributions? Big Unions, Hollywood and Wall Street liberals will give oodles to Obama and the dems. Republicans will get contributions from their corporate buddies. All fair and square. Quite honestly they will likely cancel each other out. I have already started ignoring the commercials and it is only January.
Financial System unjust? Really you say. If you don't like Chase or Bank of America, don't patronize them. You have a choice. One third of all Americans own their homes free and clear. Don't like debt? Don't get into debt. More than half of all Americans pay their credit card balances off each month. Banks hate us, because we cost them money. Don't like credit card debt? Don't use it.
Nancy Pelosi said every child should go to college. She is wrong. Unless you have a pretty strong IQ and are good at processing information and taking tests, maybe college is not for you. Should you get training in a vocational field? Absolutely, but college no. There are shortages of welders and many other skilled trades today because kids don't want to go into that line of work.
If you do go to college, go to your local Community College and then your local state school. I did just that and graduated with no loans. Our daughter was accepted into several chi chi private schools, but she is going to a Big 10 school that is affordable. We will not let her get student loans. She has held a paying job every year since 9th grade.
I know it is so much more fun to blame China, or Wall Street or Barney Frank or Obama, or George W for all your problems.
YOU HAVE CHOICES. DO NOT CHOOSE TO BECOME A VICTIM!!!!!
Grow up and don't blame others for your choices. Herman Cain was flawed in many ways, but he was absolutely correct when he said "You choose to be either rich or poor".
AnnaMolly,
You deserve a standing ovation! You have done an awesome job throughout this entire thread. You have been factual, funny and devastating. For the most part, they don't know what hit them.
I just find it galling that Newt and all these right wingers are so 'appalled' by the question. What a gang of pious frauds they are, completely disingenuous and filled with phony, selective indignation. I know, that applies to the GOP in general, but Newt really kicked it up a notch with this BS.
Forget the question, reasonable people should be appalled by Newt's actions!
Why is it every time a "First Read" is published, the same people come on here sniping each other. The same people continue to make over reaching statements about the entire right or left base. You aren't going to sway someone's opinion by insulting them or an entire group of people. And please stop pretending your side of aisle can do no wrong...
As for the primaries, I really don't know if either candidate can beat President Obama at this point. The big topic continues to remain the economy, which like it or not, its improving and will continue to do so. The Republicans are going to have to do more than just continuing to say "No" to Obama.
Gary,
Fact: There are no capital requirements, leverage can be at any rate a financial institution wants.
Fact: There is no fiduciary duty to the bankers that make money off of our debt. They don't just loan it to you because they're nice.
Fact: There is zero transparency requirements for what happens to your investments or obligations once in the hands of a bank.
Fact: We give China MFN status regardless of their currency manipulation.
Fact: We will never be able to compete with the ease of labor standards in China, and there is no tax incentive, not to take advantage of their lack of human rights.
Fact: We continue to lose jobs, while corporations continue to see record profits.
Fact: Too big to fail, kills capitalism.
Fact: Wall St. makes more money by getting people into debt, than investing in inovation.
Fact: You have no clue.
P.S. Keep your faux (and most likely made up) inspriational stories, and your patronizing condescension and presumptions about my character, i.e. playing the victim, to yourself.
When you know nothing about someone, it's best just to deal in facts. See above.
To ask an ex-husband about his ex-wife, and believe everything that he says, seems equally naive.
So, who is telling the truth? What we do know is that Newt cheated on his first wife, got a divorce and married his mistress, then cheated on his second wife, got a divorce and married his mistress again. The fact that he kept having affairs while married indicates that he probably would love to have an "open marriage", it would avoid the hassles of divorce and remarriage. But would he say that to his 2nd wife / 1st mistress?
The real big question is: Is Newt cheating on his 3rd wife? Did his 3rd wife agree to an "open marriage"? Maybe she would turn a blind eye to indiscretions, as long as the bling from Tiffany's keeps coming.
Willing Sniper,
The follow up to your adorable little parable of the lost sheep is: ...then the shepherd slits the lost sheep's throat, drains its blood, skins it, then roasts it with rosemary and mint and EATS it. Then he tans the skin and makes a coat out of it.
Baaahhh!
Sarah 304
So true on all counts. Grandpa's gotta go take something for my shoulder, have a nice weekend kiddo and keep sluggin' you're doing a great job.
Obama/Biden 2012
Sarah,
Your first statement is not correct. Banks are examined frequently and they must keep a percentage of capital on hand at all times. It varies by the institution and the quality of loans in their portfolio. Most of your other statements, are opinions, not facts. Actually I agree with you regarding China's MFN status. Why hasn't Obama fixed that? Here are some real facts.
Fact: You do not have to patronize a bank if you don't want to.
Fact: You don't have to use credit cards if you don't want to.
Fact: You can pay cash for your house if you want to.
Fact: One can ( and should) go to an affordable college and not take student loans.
Fact: Your guy had the White House, House, and Senate for his first two years
Fact: Your guy has the White House and Senate until November.
Fact: He has done nothing to correct all the alleged abuses in your post.
Fact: He won't approve a job creating pipeline bill despite a coalition of unions and businesses that favor it.
Fact: I went to a community college for two years, and a State University for the final two years. I graduated with no student debt. Not sure why you think I would make that up. In fairness I went to school in the 70s and 80s before higher education costs got totally out of control. Of course we can blame the government and liberal professors, but that is a rant for another day. Not sure why that is so hard for you to understand.
Still looking for an honest liberal! You and Anna Molly have a great weekend. Careful of the snow. I am done.
Anna - Interesting synopsis on your part. I will maintain my opinion on newts wife #2 and the allegations against cain because of the amount of time that has lapsed and the timing of the allegations. One might even call it "reasonable doubt" and that as the prosecuter you have not made your case.
Thanks for at least trying to clarify your arguments yesterday concerning the law and morals.
I'm late on this but there is an important difference between corporations and unions with regard to the CU decision. While both can donate unlimited amount Unions can not use members dues money for political contributions, dues money can only be used for the purpose of paying the expenses of the local union and nothing more. Every dollar collected from members for political action has to be collected separately and voluntarily from members who wish to contribute for such cause. Where does the money come from when corporations donate? Do stockholders have a say if they want the corporations money spent in this fashion or not? Do they have a say in which candidates or causes are supported? Does the CEO or board of directors decide for them? Union members can donate or not it, it is a completely voluntary individual personal decision for each member. Dues money is never used for political donations that has been against the law for as long as I can remember, and still is, CU notwithstanding.
Sarah...
interesting that you reference no one from the left in your post 1.58 except perhaps in a very backhanded and obtuse way in your last paragraph.
I found it interesting that you implied that it was the right who...
No reference to senate leader reids persistent tabling of most house passed bills so that the senate wouldn't discuss them. Almost like reid saying that the house has nothing of value to offer, isn't that playing to voters insecurity on congressional gridlock?
How about obama implying that we wouldn't have such a bad economy if the wealthy and corporations would give just a little more. Isn't that an obvious ploy to deflect and use the insecurity of the 98% to get their support?
Talking about playing on insecurity to get votes why does obama keep complaining about the republicans holding his ideas back? Obama seems to be the only president in our history that hasn't found a way to work with congress in a bipartisan way. Isn't it the CEO's job to promote unity so the organization can move forward? Nice to know that obama didn't invite congressional minority leaders to the WH for a sitdown until 2010. Almost like telling the republicans that obama didn't need them.
With regards to your last paragraph, wishful thinking with this administration and congress. I found it interesting that obama and company didn't provide hard numbers on cuts, yet taxes will be raised automatically come 2013.
Sarah, gary made a much better case about facts than you...
I choose to take exception with your so called facts...
Fact: There are no capital requirements, leverage can be at any rate a financial institution wants.
Banks are required (either by law or sound business practices) to have a certain % of capital on hand to cover loans made. Dodd-frank increases federal capital requirements. Leverage implies the act of borrowing. Interest is what that borrowing will cost and relates to how the lender views the borrowers ability to repay the loan (risk). Where is it written that one can't turn down a loan?
Fact: There is no fiduciary duty to the bankers that make money off of our debt. They don't just loan it to you because they're nice.
Of course not, they have payrolls to meet, interest to pay, facility maintenance and utilities to pay, investors to pay, local, state and federal taxes to pay and coverage for any loan defaults. They are the ones (fiduciary if you will) responsable to see that these venues get paid within the letter of the law.
Fact: There is zero transparency requirements for what happens to your investments or obligations once in the hands of a bank.
You must ignore their fine print when you allow someone to invest your money. FDIC will insure your basic bank deposits to a given limit. Any other investments are subject to loss or gain. If fraud can be proven maybe you get money back, maybe you don't.
Fact: We give China MFN status regardless of their currency manipulation
Talk to obama and company.
Fact: We will never be able to compete with the ease of labor standards in China, and there is no tax incentive, not to take advantage of their lack of human rights.
On a straight comparison of hourly pay this is true. On a measure of productivity and quality standards some manufactures are already looking at bringing jobs back to the US to maintain profits, especially as oversea wages increase. You do realize that our concept of human rights stops at our border and that the US can do little to effect another sovereign nations human rights, especially if they are a major trade partner.
Fact: We continue to lose jobs, while corporations continue to see record profits.
Your point please?
BTW - We have job losses every year, good times or bad. Markets change, just think of all those cell phones sold in the 70's vs today. Buy a good buggy whip lately?
Interesting isn't it that businesses have for the most part deleveridged themselves from debt, while individuals are trying and the federal government is still going the wrong way. Of course you realize that productivity goes a long way in meeting current product demand without hiring.
Here is a fun fact on profits, last year when the big 5 oil companies were being grilled about high gas pump prices, CBS news compared their profits (oil) with those of computer makers and pharmaceuticals. seems that oil company profits were 5% on every $ sold while the other two industries were about 15-16% on every dollar sold. Percentages have their uses but one always needs to place them in their correct context.
Fact: Too big to fail, kills capitalism.
Explain please.
Fact: Wall St. makes more money by getting people into debt, than investing in inovation.
Quite a stretch here on multiple paths and you give no numbers...
When was the last time you walked by a bank and the banker forced you inside to take out a loan? or if you did, didn't the bank tell your the conditions of the loan and the APR?
Are you including payday lenders as well? Loansharks? Do you understand that wall st may or may not loan $$ to individuals depending on their charters?
As for investments in inovation there was a lot of that done in the 90's from both private and public sources. So much investment that we had the dot com crash at the end of the 90's going into the early oughts. But I digress... The facts are that there exists a variety of sources to provide investment capital, there are investment banks, venture capitalists, Angel investors, private equity firms as well as others. They are all willing to invest $$$ in hopes of an adequate ROI with minimum risk. Do you have a problem with this?
Fact: You have no clue.
Obviously you are referencing gary here, but it does point out your inability to look beyond the simplified statements you make as being factual in and among themselves vs what they really mean.
Bill in Fairfax - I guess you totally missed all the Media concerning Solyndra where the govt. HAD IDENTIFIED Solyndra as a bad risk. But they got the money anyway because of Obama's overt favoritism toward campaign contributors. They knew, but Obama got his way anyway, and all that money has been whizzed away.
It is despicable that Newt is still running with all his family values in the septic tank ???
Sarah, You were obviously on a roll on this thread... thanks for your energy here. I agree with you pretty much across the board. LOL... saved a BUNCH of typing.
Just to add a few thoughts...
Can corporations get married now? It says a great deal when the rights of corporations are such a higher priority than the rights of our true citizenry.
And it is an absolute pleasure watching all the Rovian Political Cannibalism (RPC) in action this week.
Thanks American, you said it better than I did. I was getting tired at the end of the day!
Peace Out
lmarct -of course corporations can marry. that is what M & A's are all about (mergers and acquisitions). Heck sometimes the federal government even annuls the marriage plans. BTW - without business in America the local, state and federal governments couldn't meet payrolls or finance programs.
Gary - not a problem, I like it when libs think they know it all and post what they think are facts, when all it is is unsubstantiated and thoughtless opinion. If I replied to them all I would suffer sleep deprivation, hunger and my work would suffer.
Gary, American, et al...
Let's break our system down first...
Than, we mix into this the political/legal side of things...
All of this added together means, no capital requirements, no transparency, no stoppage of manipulation/fraud. Our market has now gone from having aligned interests with the public, where banks invest in the most innovative and productive manufacturers, who are forced by the free market to higher standards, to the banks having their interests lay in dolling out as much debt to citizens as possible, regardless of the liklihood of that debt being paid back. Afterall, they're protected with tax payer money, and the Fed can always print more to cover up what's actually taking place.
Not by law, and why should they follow sound business practices if they're too big to fail, and we get to bail them out?
Congress stated that dervitives and their like are complex financial markets. They're complex financial markets, that my bank, invests my money/obligations into. I have a detrimental reliance on the lendor, to not to anything stupid with my investments or obligations. They're also dependant on my money to bail them out when they do screw up, ergo we have a right to know what's going on.
And we fund the FDIC. They're also allowed to insure themselves, giving themselves AAA ratings regardless of what they really deserve.
Obama didn't start this, and it's more than just him that makes this decision. The multinational corporations and Wall St have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are. They're making billions. Until you get money out of politics, this will not be fixed, by Obama or anyone who wants his job, or anyone in the legislature.
All this screaming about too many regulations and too much taxes for the upper 1% and corporations, is bunk. If that were true, we wouldn't be seeing them bringing in record profits, we wouldn't see the highest income disparity since before the depression...
Failure is part of Capitalism. If an instution can't fail, why should it produce a better product?
What is unsubstantiated or thoughtless, or even opinion??? You mean like Gary's posts about personal stories, and not needing credit cards?
Romney is the most arrogant and privileged character imaginable. Romney is a man that made hundreds of millions of dollars in bankrupting companies and laying off American workers for profit, shuttled most of his fortune to offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands in an un-American scheme to avoid taxes we all pay, and then has the temerity to thumb his nose at the press and the voters when they ask to see his tax returns like every pother candidate. This has made Romney uniquely unqualified to be commander in chief. He is a disgrace. http://www.sunstateactivist.org
If Romney releases only his taxes for the last five years, it will not tell us anything. He's been running for President for five years so those forms would have been cleaned up. The tax forms that matter are those the 10 years prior to 2006 or even back to about 1984 when he joined Bain Capital.
matt, Jody,
What do you call it though, when Romney comes out and says he won't release his tax forms till later, because "Democrats will hold it against him".
Gotta be a word for that.
Romney loves to run the smoke screen. Anytime you ask his about his taxes, he says you are attacking capitalism. What a joke he is.
Backhouse, it's probably the only true statement Romney has made.
He's not a joke Job1, he's goofy. Romney wasn't smart enough to clean up his tax returns the last five years Jody, if he had he would have already released them.
Jody,
His strategy for credibility is being 'openly' deceptive.
GOP/Koch 101.
You can't clean them up too much and simultaneously take advantage of all the breaks regular wage earners are not entitled too, he does not want to release them, because even dirt poor republicans are getting tired of picking up the tab for the wealthy, especially for a pro choice, state health care mandating, moderate, non Christian like Romney.
Your class warfare is very unattractive and make you look small and jealous of anyones success in life.
It's very UN-American to be "anti-sucess".
Matt-- Why didn't you just stop after your first sentence? We all know the real reason you hate Romney. It's the same reason ALL lefties hate him. He's rich. Go ahead, you can say it. Because Romney had the good fortune to be born into a wealthy family and you did not, this makes him worthy of your contempt.
Why don't you people spend less time worrying about how much money OTHER people have, and worry more about how much you can possibly make. Tell us, how much is "enough" for you? How much is "enough" for Romney. Last question...Who the Hell died and left your sniveling, envious self in charge of deciding who has "too much." If I ever meet Hussein The Jug-Eared Pimp in person, I'll be asking him the same.
Obama is rich, John Kerry is rich, George Soros is rich, Ted Turner is rich, Warren Buffet is rich. Try again wingnut.
Yepper... the left is sure salivating at the mouth to point the finger at any rich GOP candidate and what they chose for deductions. LMAO!
Ron paul made an interesting observation last night on why he (paul) wasn't interested in making public his returns. It would embarrass him in light of everyone elses wealth.
Were any of Obama's tax returns ever released? Just askin'...
Yes, Wally they were. American, it is the other republiCON candidates making Romney's tax returns an issue. stop blaming the left.
It's very UN-American to be "anti-sucess".
I am NOT anti success --- I am anti stacked deck where the richest of the rich hold all the cards.
Damage,
Why don't you just admit the reason that you admire Romney is : He is rich. He can tell fantastic lies and fantasies with a straight face which is very valuable in business and in presidential candidates. He hates Obama, and blames him for everything, and he doesn't like anyone who isn't rich just like the end of your comment shows you agree with. And how much is enough for Romney? There isn't enough money in the world.
And who died and left you in charge of name calling? Do you think that you're intimidating anyone in some way? Makes you sound, shall we say, less then mature.
btw, I do not hate Romney, and I doubt too many others on here will bother to do so.
However, the Haters on these posts WILL go.
So keep it up Dozy.
More...more...more...
Damage,
Why don't you just admitt that the real reason you like Romney, is because he's fooled you into believing you can be him someday, while Wall St and Washington stack the deck behind your back, in order to ensure that never happens.
If you admitt, that a lot of where we end up has to do with where we start out, well than how are you going to logically be able to justify vilifying all things poor, and than how will you boost your ego, and than how will you deal with the fact that your life is inconsequential???
Oh my God, you might end up having to be compassionate and self aware!!!
Yikes!
radave - then why is it that it is the lefty posters that are making such a deal over it, starting with the very first post?
Tell me why do you wish to pay over 30% on your hard earned income, when they pay 15% on theirs. I would say it is republicans that are punishing hard work, not liberals.
ya know, i had this whole argument written out, then i realized what's the point? you can't argue with ignorance
Most honest answer of the evening!
Oh, and. let's not forget about Willard firing his illegal gardeners because he would be running for President!
You really...really...really... CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP! lol
You really...really...really... CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP! lol
That crowd in the SC debate sure went wild. It looked like one of those fake wrestling matches.
This Republican Party and their supporters for the past several years to current day have not bothered to lay out the truth or perform any fact checks on what their people say or do. It's all tainted red meat as far as the actual record is concerned.
These voters have nothing but confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that as too who are the crooks, and that government is no good.
It's sad that this Party has sunk so low.
It's funny the media won't report, the tea people GOP republican candidate that is up in the poles is the one that is throwing the tea people GOP republicans the most red meat, the one that is the nastiest at the time. They don't care about policies, ideas or facts they just want some one who is angry with the world and can lie and be self grandiose. Who knows which one will be their favorite next week. Depends on which one is the nastiest, they'll all be vying for top dog.
Mo,
Don't forget one of the most important issues for the GOP/TP. OBAMA BASHING. Can't be a GOP hopeful without it.
Raddave:
"The President's job is to lead the Executive Branch of Government"
Can you please tell us when he is going to do this?
Anyone but Obama 2012
@Job1,
While you say how far the right has sunk, you might want to look down because your party is right next to them.
The only ones that haven't sunk are Independents.
But that might be because we think with our own brains and aren't drones to the media and party.
(Watch out for the cliff)
Chuck Todd and the like are all complete scum - plain and simple - it is one thing to watch this mainstream crap media ooooz with love for the most damaging president in our lifetime but to continue to post headlines that are completely false is pathetic. Attention!!! Chuck you are nothing more than a tabliod writer in the middle of a love fest for your parties leader.
"Gingrich deflects the question about his baggage (his failed 2nd marriage)"
Deflected??? really??? did you actually watch the debate? First it is insane for the other lover of Obama to make the first question of a presidential debate be related to bitter scorned ex wifes interview - that was so perfectly timed - it has rebounded in Newts favor. So when Greg Gregdouche moderates the big show in the fall - I hope he leads with a Solyndra question for Obloma. Not gonna happen.
But my point is he did not deflect - he showed his dislike for the question and slammed the gregdouche for starting the debate but he went on to explain his side of the story which of course abc had no interest in showing the opposing side. He even offered to abc freinds to talk to but they could care less about being fair. How many of you (50+ percent) who have an ex wife - would have her thinking of you as a wonderful person without fault???? anyone? People get divorced for many reasons - not many of them are because its all happy and peachy - otherwise those would still be together. Funny how the first wife supports him and it is of record that she is the one that filed for divorce - but you scums spin it the other way - all the time being complete hypocrites while you support a pres who got a blow job in the oval office and a kennedy who ran away from manslauter and Jack was a pig. Funny how you libs think. You people are so distructive. and blind. It is amazing what love can to do ones mind.
get out of the cloads liberals,
No, but it is amazing what hate can do to ones mind. There is that, and comment spamming, multiple accounts, re-regging, etc. Cya on the ban list real soon. ;-)
Santorum: "Grandiosity has never been a problem with Newt Gingrich," Santorum said. "He handles it very, very well."
Gingrich: "You're right," he responded. "I think grandiose thoughts. This is a grandiose country of big people doing big things. And we need leadership prepared to take on big projects."
“…. prepared to take on big projects”- Is Gingrich still carrying around Alvin Toffler in his vest pocket? Is he saying that America will have to invest heavily in infrastructure projects? Good historian or not, he is aware of what Eisenhower did for the post WW11 economy in that regard. Government creating jobs.??
Ideology,
Not to mention union (that hated GOP group) membership grew as firms changed from a war footing to a peace footing.
FUTURE SHOCK -- good analogy.
What Mitt means by "big projects" is probably dis-mantling public education, and tearing DOWN government infrastructure, while re-mantling the military so that it is stronger, faster, sleeker, and more shiny than ever and building even more duplicative and multi-plicative private health care facilities, so that people everywhere will be able to see exactly where all their health care dollars go.
At least, those people who can still afford health care after they get done paying for private education.
Ideology, good points.
I find Newt's "I think grandiose thoughts" to have been condescending to everyone else in the room, the guy's so full of himself.
very unedifying to watch Gingrich puffing himself up and preening like a plump capon.
phinefancy,
The unions are the reason GM and Chrysler had to be bailed out. Their incresing greed from the late 60's through the 70's and beyond pushed costs of domestic vehicles up, saddled the U.S. automakers with massive pension burdens and allowed foreign competition to get a significant toehold in the U.S. market.
Chrysler is now foreign owned. GM bondholders got screwed while Obama bailed out his union buddies and Gm stock is worth significantly less than what Obama gave for it.
Jim, mismanagement was the reason GM and Chrysler had to be bailed out. Stop trying to blame the workers for managements screw ups. People weren't buying those companies products, because they were producing crap.
And it wasn't Obama that bailed out GM, it was Bush.
Are you saying union workers were producing crap ? You missed the real point of my post. Union Greed from the past is why Detroit is about 25% unemployed today. I guess management is also responsinble for Chrysler's union employees getting drunk and/or stoned at lunch break.
Furthermore, if you liberals are always wanting to say that Obama "SAVED" the auto industry, and you say Bush bailed-out GM, which among you is LYING ?????? Self-contradiction is your name.
I'm from Detroit. My father was a Ford exec. It was BOTH. This is what I was talking about in my very first post...
It's not the big bad corporations. It's not the big bad union. It's the big bad corporation and the big bad union.
Plus, a failure to provide a product that suits the changing and developing needs of the people. A man can not live on SUV's alone. Especially when gas is over $3.40/gallon.
Oh, do try to keep up! The "auto bailout" law was passed and signed by President Bush Jr. in December 2008, the last month of his Presidency. He then turned it over to his successor to carry out the terms of that law, and Obama did just that. So, no lies, no "self-contradiction", both Bush and Obama were involved, but in different roles.
"And that's the way it is"....this week.
President Obama announced a plan to consolidate agencies, make government more efficient, reduce size, eliminate redundancy, and eliminate some departments such as Commerce. Boehner's reaction was typical GOP double speak, "President Obama grows government but we'll see what the plan is." One would think the they would jump at the idea of eliminating the Dept of Commerce, it's on the GOPer candidates "to do" list. Kinda makes ya think the GOP is all dress and no knickers.
GOP Senator Jim DeMint said this country needs a leader like Governor Scott Walker. Seriously, is DeMint demented?
Another failed Russian satellite fell into the Pacific Ocean off the Chilean coast over the weekend. Just in case in hit someone, the head of the Russian Space Agency pre-emptively blamed the U.S. when he said some other country might have sabotaged it--meaning us.
Liz Cheney emerged yet again to declare that President Obama is decimating the military capacity directly in conflict with the Joint Chiefs of Staff's desires--ignoring, of course, that the Joint Chiefs said "we have embraced cuts as good and necessary; it does not harm capability." Why is this woman given a mic? Everything she says is fed to her by dear old dad who has zero credibility.
Who would have thought a month ago that "Oops" Rick Perry and Barney Fife Newt Gingrich would be suggesting that the free market enterprise should have boundaries (regulations) and that not all capitalism is good for the country economically. Wonders never cease.
In 2008, McCain attacked Romney for being a "corporate raider", for "bankrupting companies and killing jobs". In 2012, the good Senator calls Romney's critics "communists". You can't make this stuff up.
In Texas about 150 evangelical leaders met to rally around one "real conservative" candidate to defeat Romney. The third ballot gave the nod to Santorum but they're still squabbling with accusations of ballot stuffing, the Protestants accused the Catholics of rigging the vote. They can't even agree when they meet with the purpose of agreeing--which is exactly why we have catholic, methodist, lutheran, baptist, mormon, 7th day adventist, islam, jewish, greek orthodox, episcopalian, and the various fragmented factions within each of those.
Jon Huntsman exited the campaign stage right. He gave a nice speech, "this country needs a new journey"--trouble is the Journey Road the GOP offers is the same dead end one we've travelled down for 30 years. He urged fellow republicans to abandon negative campaigning or risk fostering a "toxic" political environment, as if it isn't already toxic. Oh, and whatever bad things he said about Mitt, ignore it--Mitt's da man.
Monday gave us another GOP debate. Chuck Todd's tweet inadvertently summarized it, "those sand sculptures simply looked creepy...If I were candidates, I wouldn't be happy with it." The audience wildly cheered creepy things and booed odd things like the word "Mexico" and Juan Williams for asking tough, race-related questions (any many say Iowa GOPers are out of the mainstream?). Romney wants to open markets in China (didn't we do that already) but called China a "currency manipulator" (we knew that, too). Paul explained the difference between military spending and defense spending, well sort of. Newt doubled down on the "food stamp president", putting poor kids to work as janitors while firing their parents and said "only the elites despise earning money"--what the? Romney's Bain Capital job creation numbers rose from 100,000 to 120,000. Perry implied the federal government is at war with South Carolina. Santorum rattled Romney's cage landing several punches to Mitt's glass jaw. Mitt said Gingrich's Super PAC ad about Bain is "the biggest hoax since Big Foot"; he's confused, the hoax is the 120,000 jobs.
But it was Rick Perry who outdid his own ignorance Monday night regarding Turkey. "Obviously, when you have a country that is being ruled by what many perceive to be Islamic terrorists..." thus sparking an international crisis which required State Department intervention. Perry won the "Ignorance is Bliss" Life-time Achievement Award in the debate category.
When speaking about Martin Luther King's fight for equality, against poverty, for worker's rights, Reverend Al Sharpton finished with this, "it isn't the economy that's the problem, it's the inequality in the economy." Well said, Rev. Al.
Monday, Mitt Romney tried to give an unemployed South Carolina woman $50. She wasn't there to ask for money, Willard, she was there to hear your plan to create jobs. What an insult to her dignity but further proof that Romney just doesn't get it.
Chester Upland School District in PA could be shut down. The GOP Governor slashed $8 million from the district's funding yet found $39 million to give Chester Upland's private, charter schools. The GOP plan is visible for all who choose to look--eliminate public education and privatize it, it's why they want to eliminate the Dept of Education. Cheers to the dedicated teachers and staff of Upland's public schools who continue their work without pay. Jeers to the GOP Governor and his minions.
Business as usual, the nitpickers and whiners complained about the DNC and President Obama's choice of venue for his speech at the democratic convention. The idea of 70,000 cheering, excited people attending is one giant burr under the GOP's collective tail.
Needing only 540,208 signatures, the good citizens of Wisconsin delivered well over a million, 46% of voters signed, 3000 lbs of petitions to recall Governor Scott Walker, the Lt Governor, and four GOP legislators including the senate majority leader. On Wisconsin, on Wisconsin, to a victory!
On MLK Day in Michigan, citizens marked in front of Governor Snyder's house to protest the Michigan Emergency Management Law which dismantles cities and towns elected governments and replaces it with a crony. How long before democracy ceases to exist in Michigan because a Governor says voters are irrelevant?
The Indiana Lunch Pail Republicans joined democrats to fight against Governor Mitch Daniels and the GOP legislative leaders efforts to pass a right to work law. As David Fagan, Lunch Pail Republican Chair said, right to work laws are not a priority, no need exists to pass one, it violates "republican conservative principles of government by telling the private sector or workers that they cannot operate as they choose, that they cannot be pro-labor and pro-business." Fagan added, "if we can't defeat the Right to Work Law, we will defeat the republicans who voted for it." Republicans used to be pro-union; are we seeing the GPO finally discard Reagan's anti-union agenda? Let's just say, the state level is a good place to start. Hats off to Fagan and the Lunch Pail Republicans fighting for the workers of Indiana!
Speaker John Boehner and his seven-member congressional delegation returned from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Columbia and Mexico. Where is the right-wing outrage about the cost to taxpayers?
The video of President Obama sending Betty White a 90th birthday card was pitch perfect and another jab at the birthers. He wished her well and asked for a copy of her long-form birth certificate to prove she really is 90 to the tune of "thank you for being a friend".
Sarah Palin sort of endorsed Newt Gingrich and he promptly said she would be a major player in his administration. That makes John Bolton and Sarah Palin. Start digging the back-yard bunkers.
Gingrich, Santorum, Paul and Perry all signed the "personhood" law pledge. So much for Ron Paul's claim of no-government interference in personal lives. Dr. Paul's just another right-winger claiming to be for small government but supporting big, intrusive government GOP style.
Mitt Romney ran into some "taxing" problems this week--he pays around 15%. Remember, part of his tax plan is to eliminate the capital gains tax which is where he makes most of his money; that way, he could pay 0%.
Mr. Mitt continued to step in it by saying that $374,000 for a year's worth of speaking fees really isn't much. The silver spoon in his mouth interferes with his ability to process what is and isn't very much to ordinary working folks.
President Obama announced that he was denying the Keystone XL Pipeline because the GOP-mandated deadline did not allow time for a full review. Boehner and friends, and a few big oil democrats are huffing and puffing. Well, duh! Obama warned republicans not to add it to the payroll tax legislation, warned that more time was needed but the GOP decided to "jam" him anyway. In the process, the GOP cut off their noses to spite their faces. My guess is the Governors, state and federal legislators who requested the pipeline delay sent thank you notes to President Obama.
While the GOPers stew in their own juices and complain about jobs that could be, remember, attaching the Keystone pipeline approval to the temporary payroll tax cut legislation was the ONLY piece of jobs legislation the GOP allowed to pass after promising "jobs, jobs, jobs" to voters in 2010--they were desperate to look as if they actually did something the past year to earn their tax-payer funded wages.
Not sure which republican said President Obama cost us all that oil, probably all of them. Really? The only thing the USA would own is the land the pipeline crosses; the oil belongs to Canada, it would merely take a cross-country trip to the Gulf to be sold on the international market.
Speaker Boehner really has something to weep about. He invested $10,000 to $50,000 each in seven firms with a stake in Canada's oil sands and the pipeline. No wonder he tried to "jam" President Obama, Boehner's got skin in the game. Boo, hoo, Boehner.
Romney and the Cayman Islands is the icing on this week's road to the GOP nomination cake. Bain Capital established about 138 secretive off-shore accounts in the Caymans. Wonder how much buried Mitt Treasure will be found. Mitt's aids said the money is not in the Caymans as a tax haven. Oh, sure, the millions just enjoy the climate.
Rick Perry announced he was suspending his campaign and exited back to Texas. You know, the night of the Iowa Caucus he said he was going home to Texas to re-evaluate. By morning while jogging God told him to go to South Carolina--sadly, it was only the wind. Oh, and please ignore all the bad things he said about Newt Gingrich, 'cause Newt's da man.
Turns out Romney did not win Iowa, Santorum did by 34 votes. E.J. Dionne quipped it was like Florida all over again only this time, there was a recount.
Watching the messy GOP race this week with Romney's taxes, the Cayman Islands, Mrs. Newt #2, Perry and Huntsman gone, who knows maybe Santorum or Paul will win by default.
As for Thursday night's debate, you be the judge. When Gingrich's response to a question about marriage allegations was "the story is false", followed shortly after with "I am tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama" who has no Mrs. Obama #2 & #3--Newt sailed into pompous, hypocritical, blame everyone else but Newt-Land. If Newt's personal indiscretions are of no relevance today, why then did Newt set about to impeach President Clinton for his indiscretions at the same time he was having an affair with Mrs. Newt #2. At that point I exited stage left finding First Read's Tweets far more enlightening and entertaining.
On MLK Day in Michigan, citizens marked in front of Governor Snyder's house to protest the Michigan Emergency Management Law which dismantles cities and towns elected governments and replaces it with a crony. How long before democracy ceases to exist in Michigan because a Governor says voters are irrelevant?
OK Jody, do you have a solution for the crap hole that is Detroit and it's corrupt City Government?
Or is it easier to sit in cornfields of Iowa and spout off about things you know nothing about?
I'm dying to know...
Yes, WCA, invest in Detroit--both public and private investment; bring business back to the city. There is no better way to improve any city or town than to empower its people. As for corruption, that's the usual conservative talking point or rather the conservative excuse for all ills.
So Jody, did we all here just imagine Kwame Kilpatrick and Monica Conyers?
Maybe they shouldn't be sitting in Jail right now?
Do you have any idea how much money has been invested into the city, only to be looted by the City government Friends and Family program?
Throw money at it - a typical Liberal response.
Haha "Futureshock"...
Newton showed again why sometimes the best defense is a good OFFENSE, and didn't lose last night, which means he won. Mitt didn't win last night, so he lost. Santourm seemed to realize that last night was his last night, and his final debate responses had the feel of a valedictory speech.
Things have been moving so fast the past few days that every opinion piece is fish and chips paper by the time it hits the street/web, and NOBODY knows right now WHO is going to win SC...
It promises to be the 2nd most interesting event if the weekend and that's saying a lot!
dangerfield,
The results will be fun to watch on Saturday, that's for sure. And oddly enough, I am making fish and chips for dinner tonight. It is good to know I have plenty of newspaper to wrap them in.
And good luck to your G Men!
Good Morning Jody,
Fantastic
WCA.......what is YOUR plan to help, for so long all you have done is complain about your city. What have YOU done, if anything?.
GM, I voted for Rick Snyder and support his plans. That is what I am doing.
I work in the City, pay City taxes and get absolutely nothing for it. My office is surrounded by a 10 foot high barbed wire fence, due to shootings just outside the building in the past 10 years.
Greenfield and Plymouth Road. Come on over I'll show you what Decades of Democrat leadership has done to Detroit.
You guys suck at picking battles. Trying to defend what has happened to Detroit is like swimming up stream.
I would give anything to have Detroit come back. If it takes an EM than so be it. It would be nice to be able to walk around downtown again, rather than having to stay in the few "safe zones" that have been identified.
It would be nice to have children graduating from the DPS.
It would be nice to not have a 50% illiteracy rate for Detroiters.
It would be nice, for once in my life, to be proud to say I am from Detroit.
Jody, wowsers, so much stuff to mull over. Thanks for a great Friday read.
Governor Snyder in Michigan may be one of the worst: slashing education spending, outsourcing public teachers, assaulting collective-bargaining rights, hurting teachers' unions, pushing charter schools, etc.
As you wrote, dismantling & privatizing public education is on or near the top of the GOP/ALEC Governor agenda.
Sadly, for my state, Rick Scott is the worst. At least we rank at number one for the most unpopular governor in the nation.
blah, blah, blah, Jody. SSDD on this site.
WCA>>>>We all have or are working, we have paid or pay taxes.......you need to do more than bitch.....which you are very good at.
Actions speak louder than words. Instead of spending so much time on here everyday, why don't you find something in your community your time and talents will improve.
The State of Michigan, for the first time since 2004 has balanced it's budget and put $200 million dollars into it's rainy day fund.
You people know nothing of Rick Snyder. He is a fiscal conservative, period. He is exactly what my floundering state needed after 8 years of complete mis-management by Jennifer Granholm.
You people really, and I mean really, should stick to things that you know.
Whatever the hell that is.
Jody Thank-you for the great post. I award you 5* my highest honor! Seriously great break down!
GM, how the hell do you know what I do with my free time? Just another arrogant Liberal who thinks they know it all.
The voters in the State of Michigan get it. We do not want to turn into California or Illinois. Liberal bastions wallowing in debt.
But don't worry, I'm sure your buddy will be along shortly to defend you.
You don't have a solution so you attack me. Pathetic.
Jody--thanks for all your hard work on another excellent recap. Somehow seeing it all in one place makes it even more unbelievable that this stuff goes on.
As a witness to countless stories about President Obama and his birth certificate, as well as having read about Mr. Gingrich's own "post-colonial Kenyan nonsense", I wonder just how the media is "protecting" President Obama.
Well, WCA, maybe if you got off your duff and did something to help organize the Detroit community instead of whining about it, you could be proud. Voting to change the monkey on the tree doesn't change the tree.
Change begins from the bottom up...
Jody - Voting to change the monkey on the tree doesn't change the tree.
WOW!
Wonder if I had said that about our President how it would go over?
You have exposed yourself Jody as a Racist.
Words matter Jody.
I knew your buddy would be along shortly. So damn predictable Feisty. Can't stand to be left out, can you?
Thanks for the kind words; and for the discussion some items bring. Hummbird, 5* is appreciated. I look at WCA and Dirt's comments as at least provoking thought or in dirt's case, the post effectively annoyed!
Everyone, including WCA and dirt, have a nice weekend.
Jody - Thanks for the best post of the week! You always are on the top of the game -
Go Big Blue!
Jody, you have a nice weekend as well.
For the record, the racist thing was sarcasm, although I doubt anyone here will get it.
But you do have to ask yourself before using statements like that, just how they really sound.
WCA, figured you would leap right on that one--sorry to disappoint you but I'm not a racist, and you know it. Oh, the faux outrage from you is underwhelming. That's an old expression which by itself, without a name or individual attached to it, is not a prejudiced remark. You also know exactly what it means--until you change the tree itself, it doesn't matter who you put on it.
A lot did happened this week, good post Jody. Don't take this as criticism or anything only offering my take on some of your points.
Concerning the Walker recall, don't you think that this perpetual electioneering is tiresome? It could very well mean Walker is recalled, good for the state, but could it actually be a step back for the country? Are we going to see a rash of recall elections for both Democrats and Republicans. Walker, although I don't agree with his politics, didn't do anything illegal, criminal or negligient. Will every state with recall possibilities open the flood gates? Aside from that could the recall, energize the GOP electorate in November not only in Wisconsin but throughout the Rust Belt. Could this cost electoral votes for Obama? Things to think about.
Regarding the Iowa debacle, perhaps all candidates going forward should merely skip this caucus in the future. It is becoming more and more irreelvant. So much momentum for a supposed winner by 8 votes, but doesn't mean much for another that actually won by 24. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but could it be that the Rovian GOP types made it sure that the establishment type Romney originally won in Iowa in lieu of Santorum.
Kudos to Obama for deciding against approving the XL pipeline until the State allowed the permits to be reviewed and issued.
I admit I taped, "Big Bang Theory" and watched the debate. Perry gone, Santorum winning Iowa and the open marriage issue for Gingrich, Tax problems for Romney.
Gingrich although lucid at points, like when he talks about solving problems like immigration, is too obnoxious and condescending. His tirade against the moderator was typical Newt as were his claims that he alone caused the Clinton job boom and deficit reduction.
Santorum, I thought had the strongest debate. He is the purest and non flip flopper of the bunch outside of Ron Paul. He is earnest and thoughful about the issues he cares about. Unfortunately the things he cares about will do nothing to help the economy and will threaten civil liberties. Not everyone thinks like your Rick, you can't impose your values legislatively. Besides, the number one thing a President should care about is the economy not his social agenda.
Romney, simply looked uncomfortable about the tax issue. Should have just released them already, he said he isn't ashamed of his success, well then show me the money mitt. Still, though he at times seems the most polished, though I tire of his Obama is the worst President and has done everything in his power to wreck the country. It is simply not true.
Paul as usual was ignored by the moderator, despite him waving his arms for attention. His one mistake he rightly said was his lack of being a good communicator. He surely has big non status quo ideas, but he can't explain them in the 30 seconds they give him. I like Ron Paul on foreign policy and civil liberties, but can't abide his economic plans. Actually, it they gave him more time he would have to explain how cutting spending and reducing taxes helps the deficit. Does the good doctor, not understand that cutting a trillion dollars in spending, while cutting taxes to near zero would be disastrous? I get a feeling that his ilk want the economy to be a wild west type every man for himself endeavour.
My prediction for South Carolina
Gingrich and Romney go to the wire and Newt ekes out a win. South Carolina is ABR country.
Paul comes in distant 3rd
Santourm 4th. (It would have been different if he won Iowa outright - Winning 3 weeks after, too little too late)
WCA......lol! Words are cheap, show us what you can and will do for YOUR community.....here's a suggestion, give a few hours a month at a local elementary school, mentor a few students. Set a good example of being a good citizen. It is amazing the rewards you will reap.
Just do me a favor....Recognize there are two South Carolinas...THere is Charleston which is more cosmopolitan and then there is the rest which is much more redneck, Especially THe Greenville, Florence DMAs.
By the way attack the Confederate Flag all you want, it is my heritage, it represents the war and the rights of self determination (Not the revisionist concept it was all about Slavery...it wasn't, As Lincoln himself said). The fact that some redneck racists have adopted a bastardized version of the flag as their symbol is not relevant to me. That is not what it means to me at all. Same as when the Nazis stole the Swastika from the Hindus (In fact the word Swastika is derived from a Sanskrit term swastika the symbol has been used since ancient times as symbol of good luck) The confederate flag is square, not a rectangle (Except in as much as all squares are actually rectangles--but you know what I m referring to) And to the truly ignorant, the Flag does not fly over the SC Statehouse, it flies in a memorial on the grounds...where it belongs having been moved well over a decade ago.'FYI I am a democrat, certainly not a racist in any way, I stood on the grounds of the Statehouse in 1979 holding hands and singing with a large group of African Americans and was the only white person doing so, I won't give you the "Some of my best friends" line but I did take a Black girl to the prom, and that seemed to cause a bit of comment to say the least. But I never thought about that or that she was, she was just a friend and we went together...back in 1976 in SC and my school was 95% white and fairly wealthy. Though I probably should have taken that other slutty girl instead, she would have given me a ...oh...never mind.
Bigotry is in the soul.
Yellowdog, I never find your comments as criticism but rather additional thoughts. I certainly do not pretend to get everything perfect or to reflect everyone's opinion. No, I do not think the WI recall efforts are tiresome nor do I think it is bad for democracy or government. In fact, I think it is the opposite. Scott Walker did not campaign espousing any of the things he then set about doing. He and his fellow GOPers refused to meet, refused to discuss, dismissed the protesters as irrelevant--in other words, he and his decided to do what they wanted anyway. Kasich did the same thing and voters reacted. These governors and legislators work for the people, are paid by the people and the people have a right to object, fight, overturn and in some states to recall. What we are seeing is that voters have awakened from a 30-year sleep. I also know that ALEC provided the boiler plate for Walker, Daniels, Kasich, Branstad, and others to follow and ALEC is big and powerful businesses and conservative legislators. There is no better way for politicians to get the message that if they refuse to negotiate, refuse to compromise, refuse to listen, and instead ignore those paying their wages, then those citizens will fight back. In Wisconsin's Constitution it allows for recall. No, I do not think this will harm President Obama's re-election; in fact, I believe what took place in WI and OH will energize democrats, independents and probably republicans who have been shown exactly what the republican agenda means for working people.
interesting discourse between GM and WCA. Seems that WCA has stated his argument but GM thinks he needs to do more because he posts too much on FR. Interesting GM that you don't practice what you preach.
Side note to WCA, Been in a few iowa cornfields, by september you can walk into one and not see anything but brown, green and blue. Liberals and progressives talk alot about the elderly, poor, disabled etc. When it comes down to it though they are more than willing to pass off responsibility to someone else or to the government. Like obama they are long on rhetoric and short on personal action.
Keep up the commentary...
Greetings yellowdog, As an iowan, I don't see the GOP caucus as a debacle. I don't think that with 8 precincts not reporting per established standards and with the voting so numerically close, the iowa GOP should have declared a virtual tie until the votes were certified. best take away from such a close vote is that every vote really does count.
XL pipeline, more like just kicking the can down the road, the project was under review for over 3 years with a multitude of alternative routes. In essence, both congress and obama have chosen to pick politics over jobs and economic growth. Does America really deserve to wait another 3+ years for studies to once again be made with a new new permit?
White Collar,
I'm a Detroitor as well, and I also spent time working in the public sector for the city of Pontiac. I'm completely torn about Snyder and the EFM's. Having been in the cluster-f8**% that was a public union in a MI city, and having faced nepotism and cronyism that led to numerous federal lawsuits, and a complete lack of ethics and competance amongst city leaders, I have no concept of what, besides the EFM idea would work. And, don't get me wrong, that nepotism and corruption spread way passed the unions and public sector, right into the private sector as well.
When the problem is city wide, and only those who vote, are the ones that are relatives of or candidates themselves, how do you vote the bad ones out??? It was almost like a mafia type deal.
Some sort of check or oversight of the EFM, but by who, or what??? Thoughts???
You’ve come a long way, baby!
Remember when Reagan ran for president and there was worry over his ultimate electability since he’d been divorced and remarried? Silly times, because not only is Reagan considered one of the most beloved presidents, Nancy was one of the most charming and dignified first ladies.
Now look what we’ve got. Gingrich isn’t just divorced and remarried – he’s on his third wife, arguably a home-wrecker at that. A lot of folks might be attracted to Gingrich’s feistiness (he had that on full display at last night’s debate) but this is a package deal. The chubby historian comes with his “Jane Jetson” coiffed home-wrecker. Third wife, third lady...third class at best.
Remember the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan – the party of optimist, the party of positives, the party of Morning in America. Look what it’s become – a glorified, third rate reality show. Today Republican candidates are acting like spoiled children, screaming at each other, calling each other one name after another and threatening law suits against networks over campaign ads all while spreading nothing but fear and blaming everyone except themselves for everything wrong in the universe. Meanwhile – the only message they have to offer the American citizens is I hate Obama more than my opponent hates Obama.
Ursula - I never thought ronnie and nancy wre anything but a wh--re and a wh--remonger, she wrecked his home as well - no difference, and no love for either of them in my house. Adultry is adultry and more than one living spouse is adultry if you really are a Christian, which makes those evangecals in South Carolina so two faced.
I could never figure out what it was about her hair---Jane Jetson indeed.
My question to Mrs. Newt #2 would be--having had an affair with him yourself while he was married to Mrs. Newt #1, why did you think he would be faithful to you?
Ursula, while I agree with most of what you said, you also express the Reagan Myth. He was not a good president. Reagan was not even liked by republicans and by the time he left office, they were helping push him out the door. They didn't even like that he was their nominee. The Myth of Reagan was created, pushed, promoted by Grover Norquist and a couple others because his legacy was so tarnished, so opposite of what is told to us today. There is also a good deal of sympathy in today's "beloved" Reagan thinking. Even before he left office, it was obvious the man had memory issues and then when it was told he had Altzheimers, everyone put aside the truth about him and wished he and his family well.
Steeler Fan, your question to Mrs. Newt #2 expressed my thoughts.
Jody, myth - yes...but my way of getting a point across to a broader audience. I was hoping someone might bash me for attacking family members, but apparently no one has a high opinion of Calista.
Ursula, never had dealings with her or have aquaintances who had. Ergo no comments required. However, I see that most FR lefties have had dealings with her. Interesting that callista has such a large fan base from coast to coast. lol!
So to be clear, the Republican message to America is that WE should respect the family but it is optional for them.
And we should be responsible for our actions, but Republicans get to blame the media for asking them about the stuff they screwed up, because it is the media's fault that Newt screwed around on his wife for 6 years while simultaneously traveling the country extolling the virtues of Christianity and marriage.
Makes perfect sense.
Mitt Romney is nor responsible for plundering entire communities to get rich. All one has to say to brush that away is that one believes in "free enterprise". What more needs to be said?
That's right folks, a whole lot of rah rah talking points is going to bring this country back to its glory days! All we need is for black folk to get off food stamps, for the guvment to stop trying to protect consumers from corporate people, and for the oil companies to get to drill any damn where they like, with no interference from the government, even if the entire earth starts to shake inexplicably - nothing to do with the frakking clearly.
That's right folks . . . the Republicans are going to put us all in "our place" and save us from lazy elementary school children thinking they don't have to work. They are going to show us all how to "demand" a paycheck, maintain a family and a mistress in Argentina, all in Jesus' name.
Amen.
Here, here Nash. Gingrich stooped to new lows (as if that were possible) yesterday. How can this guy not be in prison?
Hi Nash......great post. I have yet to hear from any of them, a definitive plan
They are great at complaining and lying, but not so much at helping and doing.
They always have to have a 'bogey man' to blame, especially if they can 'paint' it as being different, whether that be, not one of us, God talks to ME, not American enough, etc. etc.. Their righteous indignation is hypocritical, ignorant fools who 'buy' this type of thinking do so, only because it suits their mindset.
Hay Nash -- I looked up hypocrite in the dictionary the other day. It said --- "see Republican".
Good one Nashville Fan - and Charlie- you are so correct, hypocrite =republicans=teapartiers-south carolina evangecals!
But Nash----it is the elite liberal media that spreads lies against the Republicans--we can't forget that.
Family values indeed. I'll take the values of the family that lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue--the one where the grandmother lives with them so someone is there with the kids, the one where they are each on their first marriage, the one where the sports teams which come to the White House to have a picture with the President first do a service project for the needy or the military, the one where performers at dinners first put on a clinic for young people---those family values are fine by me.
Nashville, great post. All that patriotic rah, rah, rah doesn't translate to jobs, jobs, jobs.
The only thing any of the GOP candidates offer to voters is "I'm not Barack Obama", they have provided no details, no specifics, no new ideas just anything but what Obama did. Oddly enough, that seems to sell well to the GOP base. Sooner or later they have to be FOR something with specifics not just AGAINST one man.
Charlie, good one!
As an Iowan, watching South Carolina republican audiences boo Mexico, Juan Williams; hearing some say Juan Williams had been put in his place; hearing them boo John King for asking the obvious question and then cheering and giving a standing ovation to Gingrich for lambasting the media, I cannot help but wonder why people think the Iowa GOP Caucus should not be first. South Carolina republicans make Iowa republicans look pretty darn good and definitely less wacky.
The "obvious question" was an "obvious" attempt at character assassination. It had nothing to do with issues facing our country.
jim,
Newt assasinated his own character with his actions. Sorry that is a difficult concept for you to grasp.
Great Post Jody of Iowa and Nashville Fan! And the "guvment" will also tell us women folk how to stay barefoot and pregnant because that is the "our" place! But, god forbid if we want to have social security, medicare, food stamps etc, because "big guvment" does not need to interfer in our lives! PULEEZE!
LMAO! It must be time for the FR liberal/progressive comedy hour! Best contact FOX to see if you can get your own "reality" series. Don't forget to wear your pointy foil hats and drink fiesties Hate-R-Aid, wouldn't be the same if you stopped wearing/taking them... Thanks for your preview.
Nashville fan,
The liberal media continues to pull Obama's train and libbies like you fall for it. The whole purpose of the question was to divert attention from the real issues facing our country and to discredit any potential challenger to our Rookie-in-Chief who has a dismal record in handling the economy, unemployment, national debt, inadequate border security and budget approvals.
Libtards should understand .... discrediting opponents is ALL OBAMA'S GOT ! Mr. Gingrich's personal marriage issues from many years ago is dredged up solely for the purpose of getting Obama re-elected. I'm sorry that you are unable to grasp that reality !
jim:
We have had a bazillion GOP debates, and none of these folks have presented a reality based plan. So it wasn't distracting from the issues . . . the GOP debates are NEVER about the issues . . . its more about lie about the President, lie about their responsibility for leading us into the cluster#@#$ we now find ourselves in, and lie about the solutions.
Oh, but there are some things the Teapublicans are definitely for:
They are FOR reducing/eliminating taxes on the very wealthy. Of course, that also means being for record deficits, but debt doesn't matter when Republicans control things, only when Democrats are in power.
They are FOR all forms of corporate welfare, while of course being opposed to all forms of personal welfare. It helps that they think of companies as "people" and poor people as non-entities undeserving of any help.
They are FOR re-defining the word "entitlement" from "something one has earned and deserves" to
"something greedy un-deserving people get". With that Orwellian re-definition in place, they can then tear down Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment Insurance, and divert all that money into more corporate welfare or tax breaks for the well-off.
They are FOR eliminating any regulation that might reduce the profit margin of rich and powerful corporations, and pay little heed to any pollution, destruction, unethical practices, unsafe products, unsafe foods, quackery, or fraud that might result from the lack of regulations.
They are FOR "Big Government" spending on military contractors, and FOR "small government" for any other forms of government spending.
They are FOR a "small government" that is too weak to investigate and prosecute crimes of the rich and powerful, and they are also FOR a Big Government that intrudes on your private lives and snoop on all your private activities and will prosecute the not-rich for anything they consider "sinful".
go Mitt, no I mean the Hoot, no Mitts the one, no Rons our guy, no Ayatollah Santorum, no we want Newt.....
Thank you Jody, for reminding us of what has passed...just in this week alone. And for the smiles your 'sly' wit brings. Kudos, and thanks for keeping it real.
Thank you, and you're welcome. It's hard to believe that much goofy and good can happen in one week.
Hey, gang! It's 9:40 am on another bright, brisk, chilly January 20th. And just think - exactly one year from this minute, we'll all have already been huddling in the cold on the Mall for three hours so we can get an up-close view of the second greatest Obama inauguration in history! Who else is meeting me there?
Wouldn't miss it JoAnne! :o)
Obama/Biden 2012
I'm there JoAnne!
Ahhh, what a plesant thought to start the day - thanks, Jo!
I'll even bring the Columbian Supreme and Sticky Buns
I'm bringing *popcorn* for all...
Obama/Biden 2012
Me too.
Yes let's all get together and celebrate the inauguration of the One, as he presides over a country in decline.
,'-D
15 trillion in debt, roll of Constitution toilet paper in the Clinton/Lewinski half-bath, Obombacare catastrophe, and on and on.
I know, BushBushBushCheneyBushCheneyHaliburtonBigOil. Blah blah blah.
It's going to be a Great Day. President Obama 2012.
Angry White Conservative,
It's not "BushBushBushCheneyBushCheneyHaliburtonBigOil. Blah blah blah" ...
It's RomneyGingrichPawlentyCainSantorumPerryPaulBachmann (did I leave someone out?) That's the real joke these days!
I'll bring wool socks and scarves!! Can't wait!
And I'll bring the cheat sheet for Chief Justice Roberts so maybe this time he can get the words right.
Remember, everyone - comfortable shoes and layers, layers, layers!
Angry White Conservative - You're more than welcome to join us. Hey, if I was a white conservative and had the choices of candidates y'all have got this time around, I'd be pretty angry too! :)
I'll bring the champagne for the celebration! I'm not kidding myself---we will have a fight on our hands once the Republicans settle on a candidate and spend all the money on attack ads against President Obama. It will make the victory even sweeter to defeat whatever lies they throw at him.
IR,...You KNOW I'm gonna' go THERE!
I will not miss the sticky buns for ANYTHING! And I would love to return to the scene of one of the most inspirational days of my life.
Inauguration 2.0 promises to be Bigger AND Better!
If you liberal big govt tax and spend, self serving, kick back, solyndra's ,global warming scamsters lying for more grant money to perpetuate your existence, much like the union liars who want more money and expansion of their ranks when 50% of them do nothing productive at work seven hours of each day.
A govt workers efficiency or real work effort vs. a small business self employed persons output is about 25%. The other 75% is a waste of tax payer money buying votes for democrat's via their kickback---ie a job. They know their jobs are a waste of tax payer money---why do they vote liberal liars in office? SELF PRESERVATION!!!
Even though they know the wasted money spent to prop up their useless jobs/departments is
BAD FOR OUR COUNTRY/STATES and will ruin our kids future---they dont care---give me my free handout. Take it from some one rich and waste it on my USELESS contribution to society to BUY MY VOTE!!!
In return for WIC ,section 8, and food stamps I'll train my teenage daughter to have multiple babies daddies to grow our voting base by appealing to the ABSOLUTE WORSE aspects of human nature, very much like the human nature traits that drive criminal behavior ---trying to get something for NOTHING.
The liberals will send govt SALES REPS to high schools to teach teenage girls of all the FREE goodies they can receive if they have a kid and the bonus's they get if they have two as long as they dont get married that is, but the babies daddy can stay with you- wink wink.
After all it buys votes and makes the absolute worst prepared girls have more babies than any prepared couple would ever want or have. That is the way to help this country; reward stupid behaviors and create generations of subsistence trash that will guarantee socialism and liberals maintaining their power bought and controlled by the liberal media in NYC and hollywood---which of course is owned by RICH liberal's ( 95% Jews I think?) and of course used by them to control ie buy power from washington, DC at the rest of americans expense.
Why do the rich jews vote liberal, because it makes them APPEAR charitable by being a democrat and they use their media propaganda to advertise their supposed generosity to buy votes for the the party they CONTROL. It is not about being charitable as much as is it about a MARKETING SCAM to BUY POWER from folks who are RICH enough to GIVE AWAY TONS of cash but support thr govt giving it away because its CHEAPER for them if TAX PAYERS are forced to give money away to wasted govt programs that sound charitable but really are wasted marketing gimicks. Thats why they vote liberal....it makes them look good to stupid people cheaply.
Fake media:
Desperate much? Geez Louise . . . time for a break from your computer . . . somebody call a WAAAAAAHMBULANCE . . . temper tantrum for $1200 Chuck! :o)
Yeah nash,
15 trillion and growing, Fed supporting inflating dollars to help germany pay for the euro bailout while destroying our dollars we have in our savings accounts. Anything goes as long as we are out of office when the sh#t hits the fan.
It really is a hoot aint it? Very amusing post on your part never the less, LOL.
JoAnne in PA....Sounds like a plan!!!...Something to look forward to.
No Fake, what is a hoot is your inability to match the proper cause with the undesired effects. Anybody can rant and rave, what are you proposing to do about it? Based on what you typed, it sounds like you just want to complain and have folks nod their heads in agreement.
Enjoy.
OK nash,
Be specific, list your proper causes of the undesired effects:
Reagan was 100% correct--- The GOV'T IS the problem.
Buying elections is the problem.
JoAnne, what a great thought to end the week! It will be wonderful to gather on the mall with friends to celebrate! Looking forward to the meet up.
Fake:
Maybe I am mistaken, but you are the one who came aboard the Obama Inauguration 2013 bus rambling about things that concerned you, and blaming everyone not named you for the state we find ourselves in.
Very convenient, no? How about you quit parroting talking points and think about how we actually got here, not just what folks tell you to distract you from the truth.
Anywho, I will see you at one of the President's Inaugural balls in January Fake . . . I'll be the lovely lady in the blue dress with the red koolaid! :o)
Typical liberal argument nash, all talk and no points. Continue to vote for the party of kickbacks for votes at the cost of RUINING the country.
Doing whatever is needed to win elections even if it is BAD for the country.
Just like a parent that lets a kid do what ever they want because it is fun and easy(eat mcdonalds everyday) instead of training them to work hard and do what is the BEST for their future, even if it is not the easy path to take.
Little did I realize that watching the CNN Republican debate would result in my barf bucket being filled to the brim as we got to watch the mythomaniacs in full swing last night. The normal stalwart Paul tried in vain to recall the idyllic days before Medicare where the entire country was covered medically on the kindness of freelance doctors. Revulsion over Newt attacking the media for exposing his serial adulterating ways. The fabrications of the basking billionaire Romney claiming he alone created hundreds of thousands of jobs while eliminating just a couple (the cost of business). The incensed Santorum claiming Obama is cutting medical aid for veterans.
That is just a sample of the full fledged lies propagated by the Republican candidates last night. I'm still cleaning the bile filled barf bucket.
We were doing 'shots' of Pepto Bismal at our house... lol
Tsk, tsk .. that must have been a lot of Pepto .. you've gotta have a heck of a pink hangover today. The crap hurled in that debate makes a Pig Farmer wading through muck seem like a dream job.
It doesn't take much to impress that Republican bunch.
RedDev, I couldn't even watch the whole thing; it really was sickening. No doubt the Iowa hog farmers will agree with you.
It appears that the FoxNews effect is alive and well. The republicans want, or should I say demand, to be coddled by the media. No tough questions allowed. They want a media that promotes their agenda. That is exactly what Newt said. It may work in the primary but it will backfire in the general election.
It's all about "Herman Cain" in South Carolina.
Last night, Gingrich was outraged that the opening question was about his former wife. What goes around...comes around. Think back to the 2008 debates when the first question out of Charlie Gibson's mouth was about Obama's former pastor. And that was after he'd given such a remarkable speech on race.
To his credit, Gingrich delivered a remarkable "story" about loving his country and working so hard. Don't like the questions? Deal with it, Newt.
To his credit, Gingrich delivered a remarkable "story" about loving his country and working so hard.
Yes -- I understand. I've been working so very hard, day after day, long hours -- it just never stops. And I do love my country -- very, very, very, very much --- SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ----- I think I'll find some hot honey to boink.
How is that more outrageous than REPEATEDLY demaning proof of citizenship from someone who has already proven it?
How is that more outrageous than telling lies about a person's religious affiliation?
and hopefully Tiffany's will give me a big credit line.....and I gotta talk to Mitt about those off-shore accounts!
It's been fun watching these repukes rip each other apart, make total fools out of themselves and show the entire nation what hypocrites they all are. But I have to admit -- it's getting a little boring. How many more "debates" are on tap before this is all over and Romney looses to Obama?
Oh I know. I can't wait until Romney has to debate President Obama, and the President kicks Romney's butt.
Go back to Democratic Underground with all the other vacuous bobbleheads, you moron.
"Santorum's strong showing"? Of what, that's he's "overly sensitive"? Ha.
What I find increasingly hilarious is the total media blackout of Ron Paul, who was pointedly avoided during the debate. What, let's pretend he doesn't exist because he's too smart to play the "rip each ofther apart" game?
Or am I wrong, and the news outlets are tacitly supporting him and afraid any press will lead to burnout of their secret favorite candidate?
ERIC
As someone pointed out earlier, the crowd came to see a "world wrestling federation" type show, and if Ron Paul wasn't going to perform why call on him? LOL people don't watch WWF for wrestling, it's the brawls people pay for.
I bet that when Newt was confronted by his wife about his affairs, he treated her to the same aggressive belittling attitude he displayed last night to John King. Nothing is Newt's fault. He is in fact a great legendary figure.
Scott - we've had politicians-a-plenty with immoral "willies". Gingrich's point was accurate and, in my opinion, he was right to call out the moderator for beginning a presidential nominee debate with this question.
Is this really what keeps you up at night? Even Bill Clinton - the greatest democratic leader of the modern era said it best - "It's the economy, stupid."
Scott, you noticed, didn't you, that although Gingrich wasn't going to go negative on his former wife, he basically called her a liar? Just out of curiosity, how do Gingrich's daughters and friends know what conversation Newt had with his wife about sex?
Does it matter whether the question was the first or the last or do you wish it hadn't been asked at all?
Wow, a debate with 4 people, and one of them not even mentioned in this article.
Chuck Todd was gracious enough to give his interviewee all the time he needed to single out Republicans and the Tea Party for "forcing" President Obama's hand at delaying the pipeline build. Hey Chuck, a great journalist might have asked a follow up question such as "why is three years of evaluation (out of taxpayer funds of course) of the pros and cons of this job producing project not enough time already?
Pathetic journalism and further proof that most are in the tank for the dear leader without having more focus on perfecting their so-called craft. This was, without a doubt, a political maneuver. I wish people would just state the truth for what it is.
Or the follow up question about the REAL number of jobs being estimated (2,000, not 200,000...and those are estimated to be temporary)...and the fact nothing is going anywhere until Nebraska's own legal case against the pipeline is played out...and the fact that the R's forced a false deadline PRECISELY so you red meaters would have something more to add to your over-fed bellies...I wish people would just state the truth for what it is.
All good questions indeed and should have been asked as well to present well-rounded insight into the matter. For the record, I am an independent. My point was all Chuck Todd did was give the man a soapbox to spin and trash politically. Most cable media programs are about that today.
Why won't Willard Romney release his tax return and his birth certificate?
Why won't Barack Hussein Obama release his college transcripts ? Does he have something to hide ??
If Mitt wins, the primary is locked up? Sounds kind of unfair to the rest of states.
Voting for Gingrich now is like voting for Obama next fall because if he (Gingrich) is the Republican nominee then Obama will certainly be re-elected in a landslide.
It's is absolutely amazing to me, the lengths to which both the liberal and conservative main stream press will go to avoid giving Ron Paul any recognition. Too bad the American public is so very easily manipulated by that main stream media.
absolutely amazing how you guys in the media a so conscientious in your complete black-out of Ron Paul.
Blah, blah, blah ...Romney.....blah....Gingrich...Santorum.....Romney.. .. .blah....yakk....tak...Romney ....Newt...Santorum......blah, blah, blah .....
You RARELY even mention Ron Paul! It must be obvious, even to those who aren't aware that the MSM is hopeless, that you're purposely avoiding even the merest mention of his name.
No one mentions Ron Paul because he is irrelevant. The only thing he is going to do in this election is get Obama re-elected if runs as an independent.
Skup - Since when is it the medias responsibilty to decide what is best for the populace? That was not supposed to be their job. Good or bad they were to report it ALL, and you go along with it because it doesn't fit your point of view. If you cannot see the social manipulation going on then you have my sympathy.
Ron who?? The Teabaggers are on the run! Romney will win and be the candidate ! Screw the "conservatives", bunch of hypocritical loser's - family values - Newt, sure!!
Chuck Todd and the like are all complete scum - plain and simple - it is one thing to watch this mainstream crap media ooooz with love for the most damaging president in our lifetime but to continue to post headlines that are completely false is pathetic. Attention!!! Chuck you are nothing more than a tabliod writer in the middle of a love fest for your parties leader.
"Gingrich deflects the question about his baggage (his failed 2nd marriage)"
Deflected??? really??? did you actually watch the debate? First it is insane for the other lover of Obama to make the first question of a presidential debate be related to bitter scorned ex wifes interview - that was so perfectly timed - it has rebounded in Newts favor. So when Greg Gregdouche moderates the big show in the fall - I hope he leads with a Solyndra question for Obloma. Not gonna happen.
But my point is he did not deflect - he showed his dislike for the question and slammed the gregdouche for starting the debate but he went on to explain his side of the story which of course abc had no interest in showing the opposing side. He even offered to abc freinds to talk to but they could care less about being fair. How many of you (50+ percent) who have an ex wife - would have her thinking of you as a wonderful person without fault???? anyone? People get divorced for many reasons - not many of them are because its all happy and peachy - otherwise those would still be together. Funny how the first wife supports him and it is of record that she is the one that filed for divorce - but you scums spin it the other way - all the time being complete hypocrites while you support a pres who got a blow job in the oval office and a kennedy who ran away from manslauter and Jack was a pig. Funny how you libs think. You people are so distructive. and blind. It is amazing what love can to do ones mind.
@ Skup, If Ron Paul was irrelevant, then running as independent would not impact Obama's re-election chances. You are correct that Ron Paul, if he does not get the R nomination and does run independent, would likely mean 4 more years of Obama. That is something the R party needs to carefully consider before treating Ron Paul so rudely as CNN did on yesterday's debate.
g.o.o.t.c.l,
happy days.
"Romney gets McDonnell’s endorsement. "
Not surprising; this was planned to be done at the most opportune time....
That is good enough for me. Governor McDonnell is a solid conservative and a fantastic leader.
I am voting for Romney in the Va primary. (the only other candidate on the ballot is Ron Paul, so it doesnt matter much, does it?)
Interesting that they don't mention:
4 SC senator endorsements aren't newsworthy yet 1 from another state is?
i agree. I think more questions put to Ron Paul about his racist newsletter are in order.
Let's set the record straight about last night's debate by focusing on the two front-runners starting with Gingrich the intelligent manipulator. Newt took-off on CNN moderator, John King when asked about his 2nd ex-wife's comments about an open marriage and asked, by King, if he would like to respond.
This was the opening sequence of responses by Gingrich the master manipulator; NO, with a pause. This caused immediate applause and hoots to erupt from the rebels without a clue sitting among the audience. The manipulator now had a barometer on how far he could take this and began his rant; The target of the rage was John King as a representative icon of the media elite and how they all revel in accentuating the negatives of Republicans to help serve their pro democrat bias. Gingrich ended by calling moderator John King despicable! This tirade generated more and louder reactions from the clueless. The facts of the campaign should count for something.
Didn't Gingrich himself bemoan the ferocious negativity of the candidates' Super-Pacs. These Republican Pacs, supported and run by Republicans, have spent millions and millions on nothing but negative ads. John King asked about his ex-wife's comments about his sexual infidelity and preferences. Gingrich considered it a despicable question to begin a Presidential debate. This from a speaker that supported impeachment of a sitting President initially begun over sexual infidelity. The bombastic hypocracy of Newt Gingrich's feigned outrage is almost as big as his ego! Romney comments to follow.
The Clinton impeachment wasn't for the infidelity, it was for lying about it under oath. Newt doesn't seem to have any problem admitting he's a dirtbag.
Good one!
Nailed it.
Michael:
If the media would even attempt to put half as much energy and effort in addressing issues concerning Obama and other Democrats as it does in playing "gotcha" with Republicans over non issues like their previous private life, then your statement might hold a bit of water, but you are the clueless one. It is so blatant and obvious and the American people are tired of watching this one sided charade go on and will vote accordingly. John and Juan got verbally spanked and deservedly so.
Wally--I'm amused by those who rant about how the "liberal media" gives Obama a free pass and then list all of Obama's faults and indiscretions--which they learned from the "liberal media."
the media aren't the ones who made personal affairs an issue...Kenneth Star did that
so why won't Ron Paul make his tax records pulic...if all the others have to then he should...seems they all have something to hide they don't want public...
So why won't Barack Obama reveal his college transcripts ? What's HE trying to hide ??
If he was, as he appears to be, as the commander in chief, those grades would certainly be embarrassing. The taxpayer paid for his education, and the education establishment gave him his grades, apparently.