XOX

It is clear that the DNC has gotten out the "Brokered Convention" Memo to it's minions.

Other than trying to 'Create" a situation that does not exist, why is the left trying so very hard, this early in the Primaries to insist that the GOP will require a "Brokered" Convention?

Will MSNBC - FR Be complicit in joining in this directive from the DNC powers that be to continue the illusion that this primary season is any different than 2008?

Will MSNBC - FR, throw away their "ethics" and choose to speculate on something that has very little chance of happening only to bouy the minions here that tow the DNC Company?

Remember when Journalists reported the news instead of making it up?

First it was the pushing of a third party candidate. When it became clear that was not going to happen this "Brokered Convention" nonsense started.

With that said, It would not surprise me in the least ot see the FR, errrr, journalists, jump in on this. See, the get the memo's too.

Wonder what's next?

What time on Friday will kathleen sebelius reversed the decision to have catholic organizations violate 2000 year old tenets of their faith?

The Obama administration can't expect a second term after declaring war on the jews and now declaring war on catholicism can they?

Sorry that's two questions. Pick either or.

How comfortable is MSNBC with being a free SuperPac for the Obama re-election campaign?

Shouldn't your organization be more interested in reporting news, rather than creating it in support for Obama?

White Collar Auto - I don't know whether or not the DNC is pushing that as a talking point, but if so, I'd like to think they got it from me :)

Rob - since we're getting into religion questions, may I suggest: is magic underwear available with batman and bart simpson patterns, or does everyone have to have the masonic symbols?

WCA, your memory is short. The same "brokered convention" discussion took place during the Obama/Clinton campaigns. It is logical that because what is happening in the GOP primary somewhat mirrors (except democrats actually liked both candidates) the one in 2008, the topic will be discussed.

we talk about a brokered convention because it looks more and more like a real possibility,... and i must say,.... as secretary for my county level GOP,.... we're talking about it....... hell,..... we're praying for it,.... more fun than professional wrestling and we wont have to PPV it!

Now, that the right wing political activist Justices on the Supreme Court have upheld the voter suppression ID law, and the Pope sitting in Rome running America with his religious ideology how will this affect election?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24351798/ns/politics/t/supreme-court-upholds-voter-id-law/#.TzIpeeR7SSp

If the Catholic Church can use it's religious philosophy to shove down the throats of the American people as a political issue, why shouldn't the Catholic Church lose it's tax exempt status?

Will the folks with the cash in the GOP allow someone like Santorum to win the nomination knowing he will absolutely lose the general election? What can they do to stop it?

They'll spend that cash on negative advertising against Santorum, if they feel the need. Negative advertising works. If it didn't, Newt would be the frontrunner now.

It's easy. Reagan's kid watched the attacks on Gingrich and said those ads could have made his dad not look like a "Reagan conservative."

That's a good theory Paul, except that I am sure Romney spent a lot more money in all three of those states. There was low voter turnout as well. That favors radical, conservative candidates like Santorum. Perhaps Romney will go all negative all the time, which will hurt the party in general.

I don't think Santorum has been hit hard yet. I saw a reference earlier (maybe Monday?) that Romney was starting to focus on Santorum, but haven't heard of any ads.

The really bad ones will come from a PAC, and be augmented with establishment activities. If Santorum is seen as a threat, it's coming. Not sure what angle they'll take - maybe the pork king thing. Maybe they've got something else in mind. Who saw an effective "Gingrich isn't conservative" campaign coming?

Good point on hurting themselves. I'd guess the call at this point is to give Romney until Michigan to make last night look like an outlier, and if he can't do it where he ought to have some home field advantage, then the destroy Santorum effort starts.

Obama flip flops yet again.... the year is getting very exciting!

Granted that a front runner was known by this date in previous primaries, but technically it is still early. Santorum is likely the new flavor of the month, and will now be vetted. Depending on all the pros and cons voters see by the end of this process, particularly electability (polls versus President Obama), there will be a final front runner -- still projected to be Romney.

As others have already posted, the right-wing (establishment, Evangelical, Tea Party, Ron Paul Libertarians) will hold their noses and vote AGAINST President Obama. However, there is a possibility of a lower turn-out due to the enthusiasm gap -- And YES there is an enthusiasm gap much greater now than for McCain/Palin and previous nominees.

Of course the key is the moderate/swing Independent voters, and changing demographics such as the growing Latino vote etc. that will play an important part, along with liberals who are enthusiastic (but less reliable just the same--hopefully the Occupy movement will help get young voters out again).

Romney ran to the Right of McCain, and now Santorum is running to the Right of Romney. This shows how the Republican Party keeps moving further to the Right, to a point so extreme they cannot win a general election. A case in point is all candidates support "Personhood," which couldn't even pass in MO (as well as pledges to Norquist, backing the Paul Ryan plan to privatize Medicare, etc.).

Not to mention this time candidates are too flawed or so weak -- but Republicans selecting someone who is conservative enough (for them) out of principle will cause them to lose--and rightfully so. The POTUS must represent all of America, not just the GOP/TP base.

What is encouraging about the Santorum surge are the issues of Super PAC money and negative campaigning. It shows Romney can't buy love with money, and must make a good case of why voters should vote FOR him--a very good sign, because his personal desire to be POTUS isn't a compelling reason.

No Eva, that's your guy Romney!

good question dangerfield, my take would be if no other GOP stepped up to the plate by now, they are either waiting for 2016 or a VP nod to break any deadlock.

Amy B. Portland, ME

What does a brokered convention look like?

LOL, that's a good one.

I'd say Ron Paul looking spooky while his cult members cheer on his warped ideas.

Mayhem and with a mouthful of nails too!!!

Mayhem and with a mouthful of nails too!!!

GBM - you forgot to add with a dog tied on the roof.

Thanks to Mark & Domenico for taking our questions. Along those lines---when was the last brokered Republican convention? Would they hand out Nicorette since there are no longer any smoke-filled rooms?

To young to care about goldwater and carter was the democratic nominee in 1980, not kennedy.

Like carter, obama still has to run on his record, in particular his economic record, although his foriegn policy may bite his ass as well. His whining about "I deserve a second term" could very well be an albatross around his neck. Who ever thought that a POTUS would be a begger?

Beat me to that question. But I have some pretty vivd memories of the '68 convention and the usually unflappable " Uncle Walt" exclaiming on air "Looks like a bunch of thugs down there." Yes, I would like some seasoned reporters answer that question,

Feisty, good one.

Jody, up above you state that this primary "Mirrors" 2008. Now you think asking if they have ever seen anything like it is a good question.

So which is it?

WCA, it's both; above we were talking about a brokered convention and why that is being discussed. What Feisty is asking is not about a brokered convention but rather if FR has ever seen anything like the up/down, first one then the other candidate, and none of them seem to reflect what the GOP wants nationwide.

to Feisty: Of course not, you dodo. This year we clean out the White House and get rid of Mickey Mouse. It's a huge job, and one that frightens the big-wigs in the Republican Party. (What if we lose?) So there never has been such a year as this in politics. My Gosh, it seems that America is alive and well after all. And Santorum is a Fresh face to most voters, which makes it all seem eery, but sowhat? Visit your therapist, Feisty, andlearn to take it all in stride. You are going to lose, and lose big, in November, so you are going to needtherapy as never before.

lisa s-1749992

Would the candidate be on every Presidential ballot in every state.

lisa,

I hope your question is answered since I read somewhere the state of Georgia has said President Obama cannot be on their ballot. I read about a year ago this was another strategy, in addition to voter suppression, which started in Arizona. If the RepubliCONS can have several states disallow President Obama's being on the ballot; then they will win the White House; so they think.

Can they do that?

Beverly, I did read somewhere that the state of Georgia is challenging whether President Obama can be on the ballot but I am not sure on what grounds. Maybe Mark and Domenico can answer us?

Late last week, four plaintiffs, one represented by none other than Orly Taitz, in Georgia argued before a judge that President Obama was not eligible to be on the ballot. The Judge found their claim to be unsubstantiated and without merit and found in favor of President Obama, the defendant.

The right-wingers may wish to keep President Obama off the ballot but he was on it in 2008 so they really have no justification other than their birther claims which even the most conservative judge cannot support as evidenced in the recent decision.

Jody,Iowa Thank you for the information.

Thanks Jody,

I needed to hear that. Orly Taitz has a serious mental problem. She is relentless. It should be obvious to her by now her jive is not going anywhere. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of voter suppression we must really be vigilante in taking our country back from these thugs. The last thing we need is more Koch bros bought and paid judges sitting on the Supreme Court like Clarence Thomas and Antony Scaila.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24351798/ns/politics/t/supreme-court-upholds-voter-id-law/#.TzIpeeR7SSp

Republicans: Making Lies Out of Nothing At All - YouTube

AMEN to that Bev...

I believe we should give them back some of their own medicin - NO more double standards!

Help me subpoena the Koch brothers!
kochbrothersexposed.com
Let's get some truth! The Kochs' allies in Congress are working to make the Kochs richer and stop any investigation into the billionaire brothers' position on the Keystone XL oil pipeline. Watch the informative video, then sign the petition to subpoena the Koch brothers at http: / /KochBrothersExposed...

Stupid, pretty sure that the phone numbers for the FBI, IRS and SEC are in your local phone book. I also understand that their exists a "whistleblower" reward as well. Go for it...

Are Republicans shooting themselves in the foot by cozying up to the Religious sector. Do you feel they are losing more independents this way.

un - american 2051576:

Go for it...

Here is a FLASH for you...

there is already a group actively "going for it" - I (and thousands of other true American citizens) are willing to support and help.

I believe the Koch heads are going to eventually learn that wealth will not save their soul, nor shield them from truth and justice... hope so anyway.

Additionally – Of the total delegates how many are or will be uncommitted (# and %)?

Ron, Dennis--more really good questions.

That would require an obvious amount of voter fraud, to allow JEB Bush to reach the White House and unseat a popular President in Barack Obama.

What purpose would it serve to vote for JEB, when his brother's crimes are already, and still, being covered up by Obama and Eric Holder?

What are the chances that this country would elect a third member of the Bush family as President?

When 'W' becomes a great-grandfather, maybe then this country will be ready for another Bush in office!

Until then... the bad taste will linger!

I think Palin has hinted at it a few times. At least that's my read on a couple of her statements over recent weeks. But I also think she would tend to think of herself as a more obvious alternative than perhaps others might - even others from her party.

More than likely, things like this would be done completely behind closed doors and when we're closer to the convention. That's when a backlash by party members would look more real. Right now, it just looks like different guys winning different primaries and beauty contests.

Jeb's biggest problem is George. He'd be a pretty attractive nominee, otherwise. Christie? Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I don't think he'd play with independents nearly as well as some Republicans seem to think.

Here's a few others, though. Colin Powell. If the Republicans could still get him, that would be game, set and match. But I'd say look at governors like Virginia's Bob McDonnell for likely alternatives, though.

Paul,

What about Mitch Daniels?

Yeah, maybe. I don't know much about him, but he seems to be above the clown show designation. He had OMB before, right? If so, could play up on the budgetary experience.

Why didn't he run? I know he was talked about as a potential candidate this time around.

Why didn't he run?

Maybe his wife running off with her lover not once but, twice had something to do with it...?

Mitch Daniels has a slight Problem with him Commiting VOTER FRAUD! He does'nt live in the Govenors Mansion, but Votes in that Precinct. Voter Fraud seems Rampant in Indiana!

Occupy SoggyBottom!

Mitch Daniels looks ok at first glance but if you think Romney if a flip-flopper, just put Daniels under the national microscope.

Just last week he signed the right to work bill into law while campaigning on the right for union organization, including closed shops, in past elections. And that is just the latest.

The only people wanting another Bush to run are his family and maybe some republicans in Florida. No way this country is ready for another Bush; not sure they ever will be.  Dynasties aren't popular in the USA.

No way Mitch Daniels could play up his OMB job--he was the architect of Bush's disastrous budgets; he's the one who badly underestimated the war costs plus kept them out of the budget and off the books.

That would require an obvious amount of voter fraud, to allow JEB Bush to reach the White House and unseat a popular President in Barack Obama.

What purpose would it serve to vote for JEB, when his brother's crimes are already, and still, being covered up by Obama and Eric Holder?

___________________________________________

Paul: I see you have fooled the shrinks at the asylum into giving you a day pass. And the first thing you do is go to the grocery store and buy some tinfoil for a new hat, and then rush to the library to post on FR.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Amy...Betcha the FR crew will be asking for a raise! MSNBC will be swimming in super pac $.

That's a good question Amy.

I think more discussion on obama's flip flop on the Super PACs is appropriate!

This brazen about-face for Team Obama is a goldmine of campaign lies, contortions and epic hypocrisy. Let us count the ways.

-- A bundle of contradictions. "Bundling" is the rustling up of aggregate contributions from friends, business associates and employees, a practice to circumvent individual donation limits that Obama has long condemned. When he announced his presidential intentions in 2007, candidate Obama decried "the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests who've turned our government into a game only they can afford to play." He indignantly singled out "the best bundlers" who get the "greatest access" to power.

Last week, Obama acknowledged raising at least $74 million through his team of big-time bundlers who have been showered with access, tax dollars and plum patronage positions. This elite group of Hollywood celebrities (such as open-borders actress Eva Longoria), political cronies (such as Chicago bagman Louis "The Vacuum" Susman) and politically correct businessmen (such as bankrupt Solyndra investor George Kaiser) now totals a whopping 445 gold-card members.

-- The roar of the revolving door. In his Monday announcement, Messina bragged about how the White House has enacted "sweeping" reforms to "close the revolving door between government and lobbyists." In truth, the administration has widened the carousel and removed the brakes. The Obama-cheerleading Fishwrap of Record (The New York Times) itself identified at least 15 bundlers "involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies."

.... this is a repost as I thought it should go with Amy's question...

Memphis......you're serious, aren't you. Oh brother! "it was a brazen aboutface" Get real. Perhaps it would suit your ideology, if he just left in the middle of the night. You sir, are seriously delusional. there is no way, Team Obama was ever going to give the right an inch of an advantage in this campaign. These guys are the best and will leave your candidate in the dust especially on a level playing field.

No, we will not roll over for you and others on the right.

Memphis, honestly, you provide the typical twisted logic from the right wingers. The "Gods must be crazy".

Amy, that money goes into the private sector to create jobs for advertisers, radio/TV stations, printers all sorts of people. Someone has to help write, produce, market and distribute all the ads.

If anything, the influx of money into each state for the GE campaigns should help all the local economies. Probably not a whole lot, but directionally it has to be a positive.

If billionaires and corporations weren't funding campaigns, what would they be doing with their money? Does anyone know?

___________________________________________________

Amy, you're not fooling anyone by pretending you don't already know the answer:

Sitting like kings in their counting houses, counting out their money, all the while laughing maniacally at the plight of the 99%.

Sitting like kings in their counting houses, counting out their money, all the while laughing maniacally at the plight of the 99%.

Dang Joe, I knew you would come around eventually...

"it was a brazen aboutface" Get real

GB Momma: Obama made it a principle platform issue during his 2008 campaign! "Brazen" is too soft of term in my opinion! I think his handlers are getting a little nervous!

Memphis, honestly, you provide the typical twisted logic from the right wingers. The "Gods must be crazy".

Well if you don't like Memphis logic what about Obama's logic and his own words.

UPDATE: An Obama campaign official tells Politico that Ron Klein is “no longer associated with the campaign” and never raised any money after registering as a lobbyist. The campaign does not intend to return the cash.

Former Rep. Ron Klein (D-Fla.) is an active campaign bundler for President Obama, having raised between $200,000 and $500,000, according to campaign records.

He is also a registered federal lobbyist.

The revelation poses a challenge for President Obama, who has banned registered lobbyists from personally contributing or bundling donations to his campaign. The president even touted these self-imposed restrictions in a Dec. 28, 2011, fundraising e-mail, writing: “We don’t take a dime from D.C. lobbyists or special-interest PACs—never have and never will.”

That email was sent days before Klein filed his paper work to become a “D.C. lobbyist.”

Klein, a two-term congressman, registered to become a lobbyist for Spirit Airlines, Inc., on Jan. 2, 2012, according to the Senate Office of Public Records—exactly one year after leaving office in 2011 after losing to Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) in the 2010 midterms. Federal law requires at least a one-year waiting period between leaving office and registering as a lobbyist.

When Klein joined the lobbying law firm Holland & Knight LLP as an adviser on regulatory issues, he told Politico he had not ruled out lobbying in the future. As a former corporate lawyer, he was a natural fit for the job.

The news comes on the heels of the administration’s newfound embrace of Super PACs, third-party groups capable of raising large amounts of money from wealthy corporations and individuals, but which do not have to disclose their donors. Obama had previously expressed disdain for such groups, calling them “a threat to our democracy.”

The president’s reversal on Super PACs has led some to question the president’s commitment to political reform. After all, reducing the influence of powerful special interests in Washington was a central element of Obama’s campaign platform in 2008.

“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over,” he said on Nov. 10, 2007 in Des Moines, Iowa. “They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”

Obama also promised voters “lobbyists won’t find a job in my White House,” a claim the non-partisan watchdog website Politifact.com has rated a “promise broken.”

As Politifact notes, although the president signed an executive order codifying this pledge on his first full day in office, the administration has made use of a loophole in the order that permits “waivers” for former lobbyists to serve. In some cases, the administration has hired former lobbyists without a waiver and without disclosing details to the public.

FLIPPITY FLIP FLOP FLOP FLIP

Rob, I just heard the same thing, you beat me to it, lol!..... I wonder what kind of spin the FR wacko's will put on this. gingerbread momma put it in her mouth again it seems....

Yes it is a flip flop or a change of position, nothing brazen, just smart. When you want to talk about flip flops, talk to me about Mitt Romney, now there's a fellow who is the king of them.

Glad you did that Mr. Pres.

Joe in albany, not sure amyb could draw that conclusion or believe it. Now fiesty, bev, bacjhouse and louisJ would.

Memphis kelly, why worry about it? any flip flops the left accuses the right of making nthe right can do it as well and based on the argument this flip flop by obama will be a biggy.

Good question, phine.

Would be interesting to see what FR says. My take is since their choice would be between a republican candidate who treats them as second class citizens, would round them up and ship them all somewhere else and President Obama, the answer is obvious. Those Latino Catholics would be part of the 98% of Catholics who have at some point used birth control.

jody, My latino nephew in law would beg to differ with that second class citizen remark. He might even ask you why you think he is a second class citizen. BTW - he sees thru the rhetoric of obama.

Jody,

I know plenty of Latinos, heck my daughter is half. I can tell you first hand they may be in the so called 98%, but a second class citizen, they are not.

They came here legally and spent the money, gone to the classes jumped through the hoops to become a citizen of the US. They are more conservative then you think.

Actually, carol, that's the question I'd like to see answered. They want $5k at my dentist to put plastic braces on my kid. I understand there's some technical expertise involved, but $5k?

Carol. I am in a position where I am called on to help elderly people who are in need of financial support for rent, food,medical care. But my biggest challange is dental care because of the enormous cost, the best I can do most of the time is pay for extractions.

Carol,

Good, good question!

I agrree Carol. I have to have procedure done that is going to cost me 5k out of pocket only about 950.00 is cover by my insurance. Which means that's going to have to wait until I have the cash.

Figuring this should be something for free too..............you have insurance, you have a copay, you have a copay you put a little each month to cover the visits every six months. It's not rocket science.

My question would be, how do you plan for the future when you know you're going to get old and the possibility of paying for college? Maybe put a little away here and there. It does add up, people should give it a try.

This is the problem with middle America, people live in the "now" and have credit cards they can't afford. What happened to plan for the future? yeah-yeah, there's people that needs help, but not 45% of the US population, that BS.

Patrick-SLC is a nice place, I was there last week in Sandy, very clean and friendly. It couldn't be that Morman why of living now could it?

Paul, Florida, where did anyone say they expect dental care for free? The question here is why is it so expensive and why does the insurance cover so little of the costs?

Carol

I noticed there is an eyeglass place near the mall that advertises crazy low prices for glasses. I was thinking, how can they sell prescription glasses for $60.00, when most places I've seen charge $300+? Perhaps they are doing such a volume of business they can charge lower prices.

I wonder if dental care prices are so high because there is a shortage of dentists. Lack of competition drives up prices.

The insurance companies have raised their prices before all of the Affordable Health Care law kicks in.

The Catholic Church marginalizes women everyday. The media runs scared of being perceived as bigoted in any way against anyone, so they cave to the Catholic "outrage". Lets face it being morally opposed to contraception is a difficult position to justify in the over populated, poverty stricken world we live in and yet the church clings to this because it gives them a greater control over people, which is what organized religion is all about. It has very little to do with the wisdom of Christ. It has to do with procreating the faithful. It's a numbers game. As long as catholics particularly in poor underdeveloped countries keep having lots of babies the membership in the one true faith will remain viable.

Ana - the supreme court ruling in Roe V Wade only guaranteed a woman's right to privacy. They did not give an open ticket to all choices. It is unfortunate that the subject has been completely drawn away from that ruling and women have the green light to abort a fetus.

The Catholic Church has been around a lot longer than Roe V Wade. The media knows what side their bread is buttered on... and it lies with who carrys the most weight.

Let's see, women represent 51% the population, and Catholics represent 38% - yep, that's the tail wagging the dog!

Let's tell the Muslims they have to eat pork because it's good for you. Let's tell them they can't have "call to prayer" 5 times a day because that bothers me. You think the Government will do such action? Ask Hamtramck how that's working out for them? Maybe White Collar can answer that?

Why does the media appear to respect the Muslim religion? Same thing right?

Better yet, why does the media have an opinion in the first place? Just report what's happening in the country.

Ursula-279622,

Great point. And BrianB, woman are 53% of the voters. So yes you better listen to us before listening to the Catholic church. We are a secular government by design. Leave the churches out of our public services. If they don't like our rules they can stop providing public services in this country.

Good question, Ana. I'd like to hear the media discuss this side of the question. Why should Catholic operated public institutions which have non-Catholic workers and serve non-Catholics be allowed to force their religious beliefs regarding birth control on those non-Catholic workers?

AnaBanana-1782128

Yours is a really good question. I was thinking about that yesterday. The Catholic Church has no respect for women at all. Women can't be priestess. This is just an attempt by the right wing to use one of their numerous social issues to control women's uteri, force-feed their republican ideology and political candidates affiliated with the GOP establishment down women's throat and, overturn Roe v Wade. The Church has no respect for women. A woman can't even become a bishop, cardinal, or Pope.

If the Pope can annul the serial philanderer Newt's marriage, the Pope could stop being a hypocrite and leave women's uteri alone.

The most ignored issues of the sanctimonious Catholic Church ....

a. ignores pedophiles
b. is money laundering
c. should lose its tax exempt status if their theological ideology will dictate policies

I grew up Catholic and went to Catholic school for 12 years. People don't want Neanderthals in office. It's time for the Church to come into the 21st century and leave their new found torturous, Spanish Inquisition and crusades at the door or else lose their tax exempt status.

Ana - While the women have a very slight advantage number wise over men, not all women think alike. Not every woman is for abortions... so in this topic, you'd need to tone your percentage down. Most catholics are against them.

As far as this being a religious topic in a secular government, you'd better ask your president why he involved the Catholics in the first place. He's trying to force them to comply with a secular ruling. Obama opened up a can of worms and I don't think he'll like the results.

Beverly - Was John F. Kennedy a neanderthal?

Brianb-999431

Beverly - Was John F. Kennedy a neanderthal?

Don't be ridiculous BB. A person is not an institution.

Beverly and Brianb,

JFK, Newt, Clinton and all men or women that have no control of their sexual urges are a security risk to our country.

Let's tell the Muslims they have to eat pork because it's good for you.

On the Catholic poutrage issue, no one is forcing Catholics to take birth control. Therein lies the difference with this ridiculous comparison.

...no one is forcing Catholics to take birth control.

Exactly! If you work for a Catholic Hospital or Health Care organization sorry, no bith control for you! Thanks for letting the Church control our lives.

What about free will? Their outrage is well outragous.

So we finally found out what Beverly's problem is. She was a tortured teen. See how she totally hates her Catholic education... Even though private schools have a better record of success with students than public schools, it's not infallible. We have Beverly as living proof that not 100% coming out of private schools are better off mentally.

You can't have a beer with Mitt because he's Mormon and Mormons don't drink alcoholic beverages.

I know that, you couldn't with Dubya either, Bush quit drinking long ago.

My point is that nobody WANTS to have a drink with Romney.

I wouldn't want to have a glass of wholesome white milk with Mitt Romney.

Are those dumb a$$ questions or what?

Obama Biden 2012

every body cusses the ref when the call is against thier team?... thats the only explanation,.... the right wing FOX news villifies the MSNBC cast of characters,.... the home grown right wing kool-aid party klan villifies MSNBC, CNN, and prety much any news outlet that isnt FOX,...

even when chris mathews gives obama a good verbal whoopin',.... the tea party klatch still villify chris as faking it for the show,... only to quickly yell that obamas own "cult followers" are turning on him,...

for some,.... it will be nothing more than football,.... a lot of yelling at the refs,... a lot of arm chair quarterbacking,.... and in the end,..... the owners negotiate w/ the players union,.... and all moves along.

and we still watch,... and buy t-shirts.

Great question. Hope he never considers a military action against Iran. I think General Petraus said it best. "I support Israel 100%. But not at the expense of a single American soldier's life!"

I answer that. It would mean an Obama landslide. America doesn't change horses during a crisis. One caveat: unless Republicans draft Petraus for their nominee.

...unless Republicans draft Petraus for their nominee.

That won't be happening anytime to soon. Hell the stress of his last job almost killed him.

Look for it to happen in late September.The Iranians are done. LANDSLIDE!

I've been telling you this for more than a year. No "Wag the Dog" about it.

"I support Israel 100%. But not at the expense of a single American soldier's life!"

When and where did he say that? Did he say this as a General or the Director of the CIA?

So Amy, you think if Obama knows he might lose the election he will attack Iran? If that was the case I know he would lose because the people would see right though his motives. Either way if attacked happened it should be for political gains, it should be to stop their nukes.

I tend to agree. It's not just a 'wag the dog.' There's a lot of things all pointing the same way.

Think about if Israel feels the need to go alone. Just out of political defense, the administration can't have that. I think Panetta floated a potential timeframe when he said April-June. Doesn't mean anything is decided (Iran always could say, okay, we'll give it up), but there seems to be a lot of indication of joint Israeli/U.S. messaging here.

Paul, Florida, that's not what Amy said at all. You really do twist people's comments to suit your narrative.

My answer is I don't see Israel with or without the USA's approval taking such a step. It would be a disaster for Israel and set the regional progress back. My guess is that President Obama is working with the Arab League to resolve this issue diplomatically. Iran is radical but not stupid. Israel is doing some saber rattling.

What I would like to see the media discuss more is the split in Israel on the bomb Iran question. From the bits I have heard, the idea is far less popular than many want us to believe.

Paul-977599

Look for it to happen in late September.The Iranians are done. LANDSLIDE!

I've been telling you this for more than a year. No "Wag the Dog" about it.

Sorry Paul

I don't expect an October Surprise like when Ronald Reagan paid Iran to hold the hostages till after the election. Then the St. Reagan traded arms for hostages to Israel who then shipped them to Iran and apartheid South Africa.

First of all, Israel is not gonna strike Iran. How many years have they been screaming that? Secondly, our President has intelligence enough to know Americans are war weary. It would be political suicide for him to commit more lives and money for poor little Israel. Don't forget before you call me an anti- semitic Benjamin Netanyahu is not playing with a full deck. He and the right wing Likud don't want peace. Otherwise when Abbas and Hamas chiefs offered reconciliation he would have acted on it. What did Netanyahu say??

"It is either peace with Hamas or peace with Israel. You can't have them both,".

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-02-06/israel-palestinian-rift/52986912/1

This proves to me Netanyahu is not that concerned about peace since Hamas has financial backing from Iran.

Your right-wing extremist scare tactic hypothesis is flawed.

Beverly, a little clarification please.

Are you saying you don't think Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons? More to the point, do you think the Obama Administration and Israel don't believe they are trying to build nuclear weapons?

Or is your point of doubt more along the lines that the region can be stable with a nuclear Iran?

The thing about that is both Saudi Arabia and Turkey have said they will go nuclear if Iran gets there; the Saudis saying they'll build a 1-for-1 arsenal to match Iran. That creates an arms race in what already is a pretty unstable place. Iran feels like it needs to keep up or ahead of both Turkey and Saudi Arabia, not to mention Israel, while the Saudis keep building to match Iran...

War weary, sure. But if you believe the U.S. cannot allow Iran to be a nuclear power, the reason for doing this are certainly far more compelling than they were for Iraq. And the timeline is being driven by intelligence estimates of how long it would take Iran to move the development process into hardened, underground bunkers. That's what was behind Panetta's comment that Israel may attack in April, May or June.

Inquiring minds want to know, but Romney's too busy spending his war chest on negative ads rather than educating Americans.

Dan, Romney's tax plan extends ALL the Bush tax cuts, decreases corporate taxes from 35 to 25%, eliminates the estate tax and capital gains taxes. 50% of his tax cuts goes to the millionaires, 28% to the rest of us. It adds trillions to the deficit and the debt. In other words, Romney's tax plan is Bush 43's on steroids. If Romney's tax plan were implemented, $7 trillion would have to be cut from everything else over 10 years to pay for it. His tax plan would be an economic disaster.

Well I bet I see a lot of clothes pins, on the dyed in the wool GOPers, at my polling polling place this November.

I tend to think you are correct about Jeb Bush's chances,

I think those in the Republican party who are still capable of critical thinking saw the writing on the wall & are waiting for 2016.

Would you want to hitch your horse to the crazy wagon?

Would you want to hitch your horse to the crazy wagon?

Ahhh... No. But I have been a liberal all of my life so my veiw of the GOP is a tad bit jaded. On the other hand you are absolutely right. Who in the GOP can unseat a sitting President? Certainly not the current list of candidates.

Don't worry about that, Ursula. Both sides are compiling their desktop procedures as we go. The Obama reelection team even has the old McCain negative book on Romney, from what I understand from the news.

I've suspected all along that the reelection team wants to face Romney. Maybe there's something else in that binder? Don't get me wrong - they would have loved to face a Bachmann or someone like that. But among those that had a realistic shot of the nomination, they've sure gone out of their way to treat Romney as the prospective nominee.

As a related question--we hear people talk of Santorum's lack of organization. Would an infusion of cash buy him enough organization to really challenge Romney?

Are you offering Steeler Fan?

I believe there are, anaxgnosis. I remember reading in a New Hampshire blog four years ago that they had tracked computer IDs back on several of their commenters and found they all originated from the same computer in one particular campaign office.

I seem to remember us talking about that some here on First Read four years ago.

I'd also guess the vast majority of comments are just from supporters of their respective parties/candidates. Sure, some on both sides parrot talking points. Doesn't mean they are paid to do that.

The question is, does the constant drum beat of inane comments by the same hateful and ignorant Tea Party posters make any difference at all? Who could possibly believe anything they say except people who already are reading out of the same coloring book?

However, it is fun to see them put in their place daily.