E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
In National Review, editor Rich Lowry argues that Mitt Romney should dump trying to connect with voters and simply channel his inner CEO.
If Romney is the Republican nominee, he would be wise to resist all the advice he’ll get on how to forge the kind of connection with voters that has heretofore escaped him. He should play by different rules: Don’t go out of your way to empathize. Don’t tell anyone about your passions. Don’t share endearing personal stories.
Romney needn’t dazzle with his personality or move people with his struggles. The standard he has to meet is the one Barack Obama famously established for Hillary Clinton back in their 2008 campaign — “likable enough.” People have to like Romney the way they like their accountant. They have to consider him trustworthy and capable, full stop.
Lowry continues:
Romney is a workmanlike politician. His pitch for himself should be that he’ll be an equally workmanlike president. Although it hasn’t set the GOP on fire, his truest, most natural message is that he’s a turnaround artist — the guy who can rationally evaluate a situation, come up with a plan and execute it. Romney can’t fall back simply on the dreaded Michael Dukakis buzzword of “competence.” His case has to include a vision of a better America. But his implicit slogan should be “No one ever regretted hiring Mitt Romney to do a job.”
The strength of such a pitch: It plays into Romney's wheelhouse without having to turn him into someone he isn't.
The downside: It raises the question if Americans want their president -- in this day and age -- to be more than a competent accountant or a successful business consultant. Do you want this person to be on your TV set (or video player) for the next four years? Do you want him/her to be the one to tell the country the good news as well as the bad? Do you want this person to have the judgment -- even in areas outside of his/her expertise -- to make the right calls?
As Lowry writes, Obama raised expectations among his supporters that he could never meet. And, in that respect, a President Romney would be the anti-Obama.
But is Lowry's pitch for Romney such a low bar that numerous successful Americans could clear? After all, there are lots of people out there that employers -- big ones and small ones -- haven't ever regretted hiring.
Leave a Comment:
Don't you mean a vulture capitalist CEO who according to his own words, enjoys FIRING people?
Yeah!
THAT message is sure to reasonate with Mr. John Q. Public! lol
Kiss my grits Mitt!
The strength of such a pitch: It plays into Romney's wheelhouse without having to turn him into someone he isn't.
Maybe someday soon we'll all know who he is, because at this point he seems more like a chameleon than a human. The man seems to try to transform himself with each and every day.
The CEO President aka Herbert Hoover
Don't hate on chameleons! lol
They're cute & have personalities, unlike Willard!
Uh, and, they don't have to glue their hair on every morning! ;o)
I argue that Mitt Romney should dump trying to connect with voters entirely and go back to the private sector or just become a recluse in that beach front mansion he is building in California.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
One who also likes telling whoppers. Just a couple days ago, somebody dug up the USA Today article Romney wrote in 2009 recommending that national health care should include an individual mandate similar to the one in Massachusetts after little Sir Lies-A-Lot had been denying it ever since he got into the race. The media has already forgotten about it.
Someday, we will find out that Romney is a cyborg.
Romney is not trustworthy. Not only does Romney have too much conflict of interest (e.g., Clear Channel, Wall Street, etc.), he has flip-flopped and even lied outright about positions.
Romney is limited in capability as well -- no foreign policy understanding during a time of global crisis, or leadership in standing up to Limbaugh, on down to smaller character issues of being unable to interact with the media, or accepting advice, and heck just knowing how birth control works.
Public policy (let alone foreign policy) is not the same as making for-profit business deals. In fact it is just the opposite, in which a good POTUS is able to represent the nation as a whole and think about the general good and longer-term repercussions (not a quarterly focus).
Here's an exerpt from The Missing Middle in American Politics: How Moderate Republicans Became Extinct --
Food for thought...
Hi Houston!
I saw that - I also saw old videos of Willard on MTP taking credit for the President modeling HCR after RomneyCare!
Just think how much fun THOSE will be in upcoming campaign commercials! lol
I like it! It has a nice ring to it! ;o)
The symbol of Utah and the Mormon church is a beehive. It is intended to symbolize industrialism, but really it's closer to the Borg. Stay sweet Romney (heheh), don't set your hair on fire and show leadership or conviction against the "cookie cutter" Teapublican image, just keep up the act of anger toward Iran and the president, that's a good do-bee.
Too funny! Five or six years of campaigning and this guy can't even figure out who the real Romney is anymore. He's changed his position on just about everything at least 3 or 4 times now. Perhaps he's lost without a clue where the heck he is going. Good.
I have officially decided that Mittsy is just plain stupid. How can he not figure out that, if he says something on Meet the Press, it just might be remembered by someone, somewhere...and much to his highness' surprise, it requires very minimal effort to produce a transcript....
Sadly - it is appropriate that he would be the Republican cream of the crop. Judging from the Rush-minions that post here, Republicans are completely incapable of telling the truth and can not remember a thing they said yesterday. Mittsy is simply their poster-child.
"Let Them Eat Grits!!"
This is bad advise in the Article. The key thing in winning the presidency is connecting with the people.
Feisty Red Head - much as I have issues and doubts about Mitt Romney, I really dislike the practice of taking a quote out context and useing it to make your target [or political opponent] look bad.
We all know that Romney was speaking of the need for choice in health care providers, and his desire to be able to dismiss a carrier [fire people] at will. To run around repeating that he "he likes to fire people", is something I'd expect of a Junior High School student on the playground, or of a Presidential candidate.
I'm assuming that you are neither of the above.
Am I wrong?
this article makes me think of that other candidate who ran as a businessman first, Perot. If Romney had Perot's guts and honesty he'd be everyone's favorite to win the election. Instead he's Mitt Romney, little late to try and change that isn't it
Romney's record as CEO governor of Massachusetts is pretty lousy in terms of jobs.
48 out of 50 states - only 40,000 jobs over 4 years.
Massachusetts has done better than that in the past year alone.
And of course - the US just grew another 1/4 million jobs last -month-.
Romney can't win.
He has only one real indisputable accomplishment: Individual Mandate based Health Care Reform.
But oh...that's right -> He's opposed to his own accomplishment.
I just hope nice guy Obama doesn't go too easy on Willard.
Crush him, so the Democrats can take back the house too. :)
Here here! Take back the House too!
It would be so funny to see Obama win by several points in November and say: "I've earned political capital, and I'm going to spend it."
Wouldn't that get all the righty's panties in a bunch!
Channel his inner CEO, yeah, and bring use back to the Bush age..
Cocky
Egotistical
Oaf
what CEO really stands for...
GOD HELP AMERICA!
We all saw the damage Bush did, Romney, Oh please God help US!
So, dman, you must be equally disgusted with the commercial Mittsy ran taking President Obama completely out of context. You know, the "not talking about the economy" thing - where President Obama was actually quoting McCain and Mittsy ran it in the context that President Obama was talking about himself. I agree - it is digusting.
I don't envy you, dman. It can't be easy to have integrity when you are trying to defend someone who has no integrity.
I can't think of a single thing Flipp Flopney can do to get people to accept him.
"Although it hasn’t set the GOP on fire, his truest, most natural message is that he’s a turnaround artist".......can't argue with that,seems everytime WILLard ROBME gives a message, the next day he turns that message around 180 degrees.
Shocked- [audible sigh ] Please work on your reading comprehension. I'm not defending anybody. Did I not say that I have reservations about Romney.
My point is that the type of sophmoric name-calling and intentional misprsentation of one's opponent, or, in feisty's case, of the political figure you dislike, is offensive, no matter who does it.
I voted for Obama in 2008. I may do so again in 2012, especially given the ridiculous roster of probable Republican candidates. But attacks like feisty's even when I share her apparent dislike for Romney, is both offensive and counter productive. Such remarks never convince anybody. They are just rallying cries, or something to put on a bumper sticker.
lol dont try to connect with the voters.another stellar republican plan.right up there with give the rich a tax cut theyll hire americans.or free trade....the rich wont replace their american workers with cheaper foreign labor
"Obama raised expectations...that he could never meet."
Hmmm... don't suppose that has anything to do with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) saying, the day after Obama was elected, that the #1 priority of the GOP was to make sure Obama only served 1 term, and then the GOP fell into lock-step and became the party of NO?
Hey Rich Lowry, look in the mirror.
I am sitting here reading all the comments and just thought. actually I have been wondering about what is really going on here. Is it possible the GOP really doesn't want to win in November because of the mess they created? At least created most of the mess with all the obstructing they have been doing and have no clue of how to fix it? They seem to be banking on Romney winning the nomination, keeping Santorum around to make it look like a race, marginalizing Gingrich and just throwing Paul to the curb and ignoring him? In my opinion not one can beat Obama in November. Also the fact not one of them commenting about the loud mouth Limbaugh, meaning they MUST agree with what that hate monger is really saying. Imagine someone calling the president a little boy president and calling all women who ever used contraceptives whores. How can they expect to get 51% with those ideals?
Give up trying to connect to the American people? That has got to be one of the dumbest marketing strategies around. Frankly, I don't think it's possible for him to connect...it's not who he is, but to reinforce that image is an idea only an idiot would dream up. Doesn't matter anyway...he's going to lose.
dman - thanks for the sigh. Given my challenges with reading comprehension, I will try not to take it as arrogant disdain. It appeared to me that you were criticizing Fiesty for taking Romney out of context and I found that relatively ironic given how terribly Romney has taken the President out of context.
My apologies for lumping you in with the Romney supporters.
In times of crisis, American President galvanize the American people. Having someone that doesn't connect to the people in this circumstance will backfire.
I think the premise of this article is just wrong. People (and I include myself) love President Obama. They loved Bill Clinton. They loved Ronald Reagan. There might even have been people who loved George W. Bush, but, if so, they don't appear to anymore. In all of the pro-Romney posts I have seen here, and there really aren't a lot, I don't see anyone expressing that type of feeling for him. Yes, there are people who express the opinion that he would be a good President, but, I see no passion for the man. I'm sure he will have support, and maybe a great deal of it, but, no one seems to be crazy about him or even very interested in him.
A small group of zealots love Obama. Most have figured out that he was full of it when he said he would make the waters recede.
Head Priest... Why would you say the issues were manufactured? And a landslide for Romney? I think you over estimate on the number of Obama haters. And you can't discount the poor showing of the current Republican led House. If voters are looking to dump their Republican representative, chances are they're not going to vote a Republican into the White House.
Conservatives never give up trying to spin straw into gold, do they? I realize they're used to manufacturing conventional wisdom out of a thin tissue of lies, but claiming you can turn a cold-as-stone personality into an advantage?
Head Priest, its the Republican party wanting to make Obama a one term President and a failure since the day he was sworn in that have been the most divisive force in the country. NOT Obama.
For the record, Obama has galvanized the American people on at least 2 occasions. The shooting of Gabriel Giffords and the Killing of Osama Bin Laden.
Obama the most divisive President ever? Someone must have been in a coma from 2002 through 2008 when George W. Bush took his record high approval rating of 90 on September 21, 2001 and completely tanked it down to 25 by October 3/10/31, 2008. Bush also has the record for the highest disapproval rating of 71 on October 10, 2008.
You don't go from a record high to a record low without being inept and divisive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating
Bill
Hate isn't the right word, nobody hate him, at least no more than you liberals love Bush. We don't need 4 more years of the same, 4 years more of class warfare, 4 more years dividing the country between rich and poor, black and white, Latinos and Americans. 4 yearswasn't enough to change this country to the way the extreme left want, 4 years wasn't enough to take away our right to bear arms, 4 years wasn't enough to silent the voice of the opposition, 4 years wasn't enough to end with our military power, 4 years wasn't enough to make US the largest unionizes country, 4 years wasn't enough to change our values, our pledge of allegiance who already start taking away the name of "God ".
4 years was enaugh.
Enjoys firing people that failed at their jobs, nice spin machine feisty you slut.
Shocked, there is no irony to be found here. If I were criticizing Obama for quoting Romney out of context, it would be an example of bias, not irony. My criticism of Feisty involve neither.
Romney's failings do excuse those of any other person, including Feisty. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to level at Romney. But by misrepresenting his words in this way, she actually clouds these issues, and makes him look victimized.
Anybody that is not part of the 1% are not in Romney's List of Voters....what a snob!!! No need to connect with the rest of the 99%... a very illogical point of view.
Someone, quick! Please tell Romney who he is.
That is the dumbest advice ever. Not only do people tend to vote on the issues, they also vote on who they like. An example of that is Bill Clinton - people may not have been happy with his extra-curricular activities or with some of the policy decision he made in his first term, but they liked him and connected with him. Even if you didn't agree with his politics, you wouldn't mind sitting down with him and having a beer.
Romney????? Not so much. Don't necessarily believe him on the issues and definitely wouldn't want to sit down and have a beverage with him.
I see the foul-mouthed creature from Illinois had to chime in first, as usual. Ever notice how she virtually always manages to comment first? I think she hovers over her keyboard, just waiting for an opportunity to denigrate those who she fantasizes live to oppose her. I suppose I shouldn't say oppose, though. She's not for anything that I can tell, she's only against things.
Do you think enough money could be raised to send her to a good psychiatrist to work on this fetish/obsession she has for Republicans? Or would it be just as good to take up enough of a collection to move her somewhere with no access to the internet, where she apparently lives 23.5 hours a day? Either way we might get enough peace and quiet without her infantile prattle to have an adult political discussion.
In answer to the question the article poses, no, Romney wouldn't make a good "CEO in Chief", because you can't run a government like you run a business. In business, while it is important to build allies and accept ideas from subordinates, ultimately it must be run from the top down; the leader must have a singular vision that the rank and file follow. He must be, for all intents and purposes, a dictator. A benevolent one, perhaps, but an absolute ruler nonetheless. I ask my employees all the time whether they think we should do "A" or "B", but I wouldn't put up for five minutes one of them telling me how to run the business.
On the other hand, a republic must (at least theoretically) be run from the bottom up. Leaders are supposed to weigh all the desires of their constituents, try to use good judgement, then carry out the will of the people. In fact (again, at least in theory), elected officials are the employee, and the voters the boss.
No, we don't want Mitt as a CEO, ruling with an iron fist. It just wouldn't work. Besides, I think he's overrated as a businessman anyway. All that I can tell he excels at is cruelty, and insatiable greed. And that's the cheap path to success in business.
Your unsolicited advice is duly noted...
Thanks! lol
Notice the Righties have nothing good to say about their candidate, and nothing substantive to say about how their candidate affects the race, so they attack a poster instead.
A few observations:
Those who claim Romney never said "I like firing people", wrong he said it. He did say it in the context of firing people who failed to serve him (gardeners, maids, etc.) correctly; but he did say it.
For the "4 years..." dude, each and every one of your points is in reality mirror opposite. Class warfare? Yup the Rich have been waging war on the poor and middle class for 30 years, and as Warren Buffet said, "our side's winning". Dividing hispanics, blacks, and whites is a Republican effort, as evidenced by the racist vocabulary used regarding "others", and new voter ID laws that disenfranchise millions. No effort was made to restrict guns--even after the attack on Gabby Giffords!--instead he relaxed laws regarding guns in national parks. And your comment about unions was incomprehensible on every level: India is a larger country and has unions, Union membership has been falling since Reagan and Republicans declared war on them,--all around, epic fail comment.
To those that insist that everybody but the looney left hates the President, wow. Just wow. The scale of delusion required to make a comment like that is staggering. The only way a comment like that can been made is either from purposeful deception or from only talking to Tea Party meetings and listening to Faux and hate radio.
Please, oh please, use SPELL CHECK!
Thank you for the reminder of Ross Perot. There is a similarity. The businessman who is not of this world. Let's hope folks learn from this lesson in history, and realize Romney is nuts before voting him.
Thanks for the good laugh.
You mean "Mitt,.....the POS President" don't you?
This is what the right-wing seeks, for example the "hockey mom," "Joe the Plumber" etc., though they give lip service to "exceptional-ism." The left-wing prefers someone who really is exceptional but understands the common man = President Obama with impressive life achievements, self made via the American Dream. There have been wealthy politicians who have fought for the "little people" but Romney's track record doesn't show that, at all.
Another note of interest... The Supreme Court is supposed to be a check and balance in our governmental system as the third branch of government. However, the very nature of check and balance means there must be some kind of oversight of the court as well.
A good case in point is how the Supreme Court once justified and supported slavery. So when I am asked if I support the judgment in favor of Dubya in the 2000 election, or now Citizen's United, my answer is a resounding "NO." And this extends to the current lobbyist influence on congress and the need to get money out of politics. This is the main corrupting problem the US currently faces in terms of preserving democracy.
The current GOP/TP are the worst proponents of the worst things in our society, possibly ever in our history except for slavery. The Dems are also owned by campaign donations, but if we are to have any hope of reform, they are our best bet. Aside from the need to restore the Fairness Doctrine...
For those of you with any doubt, watch Bill Moyer's segment with David Stockman on crony capitalism and other experts, and you will come away from that program with renewed conviction that we need an amendment to the constitution to override the Supreme Court in regard to Citizen's United and to restore financial regulation with a Glass-Steagall type Act.
Romney is probably more of a social moderate than he pretends at this time (i.e., pro-life , etc.), but his fiscal views are very "severely" in favor of the rich and corporations, and the Race to the Bottom that is "starve the beast" austerity (with draconian cuts in social programs in order to give more tax cuts to the rich), deregulation and retaining "too big to fail" so that the tax payers and consumers carry the risk for the plutocrats -- the investment bankers and hedge fund managers who never pay a penalty and in fact continue to enjoy business-as-usual bonuses. We need the outrage of Occupy to continue until real change is made! Romney the CEO no longer feels any allegiance to employees, but rather only to stock holders!
As President Obama said in his recent speech in Texas, the United States does best when we stand together--not every man, women, and child for him or herself. Obama/Biden - 2012!
HELL YEAH FIRE PEOPLE!
The scalpel approach to the budget is WRONG! Start with a machete then pickup the the chainsaw.
Golly, dman...you shore is smart. Here's another word for you to look up: Condescending...
Given Mittsy's past at Bain and given the current economic situation, I feel that eluding to any pleasure received in firing people is tactless at best. I agree that there are many cases in which people should be fired from a job, but it takes a "special" kind of person to actually enjoy the process. Saying the he likes being able to fire people is about the only comment he has made in his campaign that he hasn't contradicted the next day.
If you find that you are misunderstood, maybe you should take a small amount of responsibility for how you are expressing yourself. If being understood, for you, relies completely on the perception and comprehension of others, you will find yourself being very frustrated. Your self-expression is your own responsibility, dman. Being clear and concise is much easier, though I'm sure not as rewarding for you, than treating everyone like they are stupid.
I already apologised to you once. You will never find me doing it again. Grow up.
Yes, Mitt should quit trying to connect with voters. He has as much of a chance of connecting with us as do rap artists do connecting with Lawrence Welk. Connecting with his CEO side is not so effective either. His vulture capitalism side isn't so endearing either. So now the National Review feels that all he needs is to show himself capable and trustworth. Ask the people who were unlucky enough to be bought out by Bain Capital about capable and trustworthy, and ask Romney's dog if he is trustworthy or a capable pet owner.
Wayne, again with the "dog" reference. Give it a rest, you loon. Seamus had a great life...
Liberals like you are lapdogs to the Government. You want the governmemt to put you in a cage and take care of you.
Hey Bob from Vagina,
Mistress Feisty is still waiting for you little buddy!
Comma ze here!
Seamus was tortured by his owner and suffered permanent hearing loss because of that ill treatment from a cruel, unfeeling owner. If you don't believe it, have one of your idiot friends strap you to the top of a car for a 12 hour drive. Tell me how much you like it. You probably feel waterboarding wasn't torture either. Have your friends help you out there too. I hear it breaks the ice at your kind of parties. No doubt you can tape your shenanagins and make some money on your new show, "Stupid RWNJ Tricks."
Wayne's World: Moonbat Land.
You really think Romney tortured his dog? Did you know it was very common for animals to be in a carrier and put on top of vehicles? Even happens often , today? Did you know animals are put in carriers and transported by plane, as well? Is that tortuous because they may get airsick?
Why did the dog live a long and happy life, if the dog was supposedly abused?
Okay bob, you right wing nut job, now I know how to identify a moonrat republican. I'll know them by the dogs strapped to their cars' roofs, crapping on the back window. Now I won't have to look for bumper stickers to know your politics either boob. I pray you are not a dog owner. My dog rides inside!
I guess you interviewed Seamus and asked him how much he loved his abusive owner. It really does say a lot about Romney's character.
The article says: The downside: It raises the question if Americans want their president -- in this day and age -- to be more than a competent accountant or a successful business consultant. Do you want this person to be on your TV set (or video player) for the next four years? Do you want him/her to be the one to tell the country the good news as well as the bad? Do you want this person to have the judgment -- even in areas outside of his/her expertise -- to make the right calls?
Personally we could use some good accountants in Washington... instead of the lying cheating lawyers we now have. First moot argument.
We've had to look at Obama for the last 3 years... nothing is more disgusting to me so your argument is moot.
The country trusted Obama, the community organizer for 3 years to attempt to make the right calls. Again your argument is moot.
First Read, your arguments are pathetically lame. When you consider that Obama had zero experience in any sort of executive role, this country blindly chose him as the most qualified candidate. Either I'm nuts, or this country is. My last sanity examination proved I was sane.
The fact that you have regular sanity examinations reveals that there is something amiss.
These were court-ordered, I take it?
[Seamus had a great life...]
Yeah, in a crate strapped to a car doing 75 on a 5 hour trip to Canada, crapping his insides out, literally scared @!$%#less...
...a REAL GREAT life...I'm sure this is the life ALL dogs wish they had.
Mitt abused this animal, plain and simple. Willard the animal abuser.
Brian/ Instead of a sanity hearing ,you would do better going for an I.Q. test. A chief executive hires accountants. A community organizer would have come into contact with many people from all walks of life and , we hope, would have compassion for the unfortunate as well as the financier. I would hope that our population will develop into a more Christian,I mean not so much organized, but true believers in the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene Nation.
Hiya Mickey!
My mama always told me, you can learn a lot about a mans ♥ by the way he treats animals...
You are so right Feisty! My wife often tells me that she wouldn't have married me if she didn't like the way I treated her dog. The only thing that upsets her is now the dog now loves me more than her!
LOL Wayne!
I know the feeling, my former snuggle cat has taken up new 'digs' on hubby's lap! ☺
Another thing my Mama said, was pay attention to how he treats restaurant servers & his driving habits!
Mama was a wise woman - I have passed her pearls of wisdom onto my own daughter!
My parents made me who I am. All I have to do is to think back on what they taught me to make good decisions. They are helping to raise my kids without physically being there.
Isn't that the truth!
Absolutely.
Hiya Feisty!
Romney is the opposite of trustworthy. Neither conservatives nor liberals trust him because he flip-flops so often, and then lies about flip-flopping.
Hi-larious that Bob, Brianb, Kirk, etc. haven't figured out that most of us have them on ignore or scroll past their posts. They think they are having some kind of impact on the "conversation" in America. Especially when they cut and paste from some conspiracy theory source. Do they really think anyone will read that crap? Hahahaha.
Shout out to Feisty, did you see Katie Kay/BBC America do a Daily Show slap at Fox news over the solar fare panic ? That's sad when a real News program hits the wannabe Fox news with a snap.
Feisty - I read your top comment. I'm a moderate liberal, usually vote Democrat. I despise the extreme right and their hateful ways. It's unfortunate that some liberals are adopting the same playbook. I found your post insulting, both to Romney, and to liberals who recognize that conservatives are people who happen to have a different political philosophy than theirs. Sometimes I get frustrated as well, but I try to take the high road. I don't always succeed, I'll admit.
As for the article, I think that the advice is sound. I'm a Romney supporter who will be voting for President Obama. The reason is simple: Obama might lose. Romney, although a champion for big money, is a social moderate and doesn't frighten me nearly as much as the thought of Santorum turning the country into a theocracy.
My intention is not to insult you. I often get a kick out of your comments. But I don't think you gain in this kind of situation by becoming what you are criticizing, at least in terms of style.
He lies so much be believes he is telling the truth, and can't remember where his puppet masters told him to stand on the issues so he just makes it up as he goes, he can't relate to the 99% because he lives in a different world than the rest of us.
hey bob, my wife went to the gyno today and they found virginia republicans in her va gina.
Well color ME shocked - the Collapse Nazi's are out in full force! lmao!
Lot's of luck - LOSERS!
Let's see - they took me down with 46 'likes' - I'll check back in the morning and see where it leads! ;o)))
I am one of the geezer Republicans, my first votes were for Richard Nixon. However, I am an American first. And I can not stomach my party not kicking aside these extreme groups that are way to the right. And their idea of this country is nothing, absolutely nothing like the one I lived in growing up, in the army, college, and until somewhere in the 80s. This current idea "we are against the other side" at all costs in not the way democracy works. We should all work together and do what's right for people, not the rich folks. In case you haven't noticed, there is a reason the rich folks hire guards, and live behind gates.
I hung with the Republican Party until the George Bush years, that 2000 to 2008 time period. The unnecessary war, the spending binges, not paying for the wars for the first time in our history. Then all that letting Wall Street write the rules was stupid, that's what happened in the 1920s and led to the first Great Depression. More than half of my savings for my entire life's work disappeared and those people gave themselves raises and bonus money? And the current GOP wants to protect and allow them to keep my money. No more.
I've had enough. I will vote for President Obama. Never thought I vote two times in my entire life for a Democratic man or woman. But MY country is at stake, and this man seems to know how to direct the United States in the right direction. There is honest improvement on the economic front, he makes sense on foreign policy. And I am one of the working class Republicans who realize cutting more taxes on those big shots will not create jobs or help the debt.
I call on my Republican friends out there to follow my lead. We are talking about our country, not the old party we used to know.
Mitt has missed his calling in life. He'd be agreat Mormon Bishop. He should stop running for president and channel his inner self to things of the cloth.
You mean him giving a speech while wearing jeans was just a ruse??? I thought he was a regular guy. I guess I'll have to vote for Obama.
gulfportian, well said. feel the same way, although i started voting at reagan and was thare with bush. but no more, looking back, it was a mistake to have ever voted republican.
All of this talk about Newt and Paul dropping out. I think Romney should drop out for the sake of the country. No one really trust him and most can't stand him. Romney give me a break!!!!
Here's the problem with Mitt. He proposes war in Iran & Syria. He promises not to raise the debt ceiling. He promises budget cuts. He will lower taxes.
So then, how does he plan to pay for the wars or the tax cut?
With your social security, that's how. That's right, you paid into it for all those years for nothing.
Kiss your retirement goodbye under Romney - his friends on Wall Street need the money more than you!
Transporting an animal in a roof-top carrier is apparently illegal in Massachusetts.
In this interview with Chris Wallace, Romney claims he was unaware that it was illegal to transport a pet in a rooftop carrier:
http://www.petside.com/article/mitt-romney-admits-family-dog-rode-roof-his-car-12-hour-trip
MUTTS AGAINST MITT!
Bob in Virginia? In my 55 years, I have never seen a dog in any kind of dog carrier strapped to the roof of a car. The closest thing like that I ever saw was a dog in a carrier in the bed of a pick-up truck, shielded by the wind from the cab with blankets they can crawl under for more protection. If the car is traveling at 70 mph, what force is the wind on the dog? That is absolute torture. How about the bugs and anything else flying around that can blind the poor dog? Get real. You want to vote for Romney with the kind of judgement he has, go right ahead.
I don't know why people need to connect with someone to make that worthy. I had a doctor who had the worst bedside manner but really knew her stuff. Many people wouldn't see her because of her manner and they were missing out on one of the most knowledgable doctor's I've ever met.
Same thing with Romney. Do people want to be friends with him or do they want him as President? I just don't get the thought process of, this guy needs to be like me to get my vote. To tell you the truth, I want someone who can do the job and I hope they are a lot smarter than me..... I'm not pushing Romney here. I just wish people would look at what potential leaders can do for the country and not so much what they can do for me.
Typically, the higher you get in a company, the more likely you follow the creed of "the end justifies the means". Typically, the higher you go, the more cold and calculating you become... it's near impossible to avoid it. I have no idea if Romney falls into the "typical" CEO category, but I do know he will say what he needs to say to get through any situation and acts like a frickin' chameleon. He has absolutely no connection with the lower 99%, which makes him a terrible choice for president.
Romney is a robot built by Haliburton for Dick Cheney and the Koch brothers.
I'm not looking for another cool, hipster president. Where has that gotten us anyway.
Eric, sure you don't want to call him "corporationy" too? You missed that one.
Typical liberal-long on talking points, short on common sense.
I agree John-we need someone that would rather solve problems than party and whine about his predecessor. Get Obama out!!!
I'm not sure of the relevence of hip hop night, blues night, pick-up hoop games with NBA hall of famers or 100 rounds of golf. I see a guy who likes the position a lot more than the job.
Mittens is flawed, he has changed his positions far too often and flat out lied about them at times and been caught in it.
In the end though, I don't trust any republican at this point not to cave to the extremists that are stomping all over womens right. He had an opportunity to stand apart and defend women and he FAILED. The extreme over reach is disconcerting and more than one republican of late has said they will be voting for Obama.
If he can't even stand up to a shock jock who went on a 3 day rampage of brutal sexualized verbal assaults on a congressional witness, how can we expect him to stand up to other world leaders? The only one that didn't fail on that is Ron Paul and he is way too extreme.
No more Hope and Change. Ex-Wall Street and lobbyist polluting the White House.
No more transparency. "Freddy and Fannie"
No more accountability. "Fast and Furious"
Deals under the table. "Louisiana Purchase"
Crony capitalism. Solyndra
More economic dependency. " 16 trillions of dollars in debt"
He says is for the poor, but give $ 10,000 to rich people like Leonardo DiCarpio to buy electric cars from Governmemt Motors.
Obama ask for our vote to put him in the White House to solve our problems, he promise to do so and he fail. No excuses
Romney 2012
Romney can't stand up to Limbaugh...he has already failed and he hasn't even hit office. Republicans have proven what a bunch of children without any real leadership.
Obama 2012 and he will win, as the republicans continue to antagonize women, it just makes it easier for him.
When will they ask Romney the real questions?
Like:
1."Mr. Romney, explain to everybody how placing your money into shelters overseas so you can get away with paying less then 14 percent in annual taxes is helping Americans?"
2."Mr. Romney, do you send the bulk of your money overseas because you value the trade of other countries over America's, or did you send your money over there so you didn't have to pay as much in taxes as everybody else does?"
3."Mr. Romney, you like to say that you pay what you owe in taxes and not a dollar more. What if the vast majority of America thinks you should pay a lot more? Do you agree with the majority of American people and pay more taxes or tell them you don't care and don't want their votes anyways?"
4. "Mr. Romney, do you think all Americans should pay less then 14 percent of their annual incomes to taxes, like you do, even though that would plunge this great nation into third-world status almost immediately by not being able to even pay our debt?
5. "Mr. Romney only the rich could take advantage of loopholes you have used to insure you pay a smaller portion or your income to taxes then many Americans earning a great deal less then you do. Should that be how America's tax code works? Should rich people, like yourself, pay smaller percent of your income to taxes when people like our military, cops, social workers, firefighters, etc. have to pay more?
The problem is, Brent, Republicans don't really like Romney and really want another candidate.
Face it, your party is putting up a straw man against Obama.
And who says Romney will say anything to get your vote!
Well, Romney does!
Here are some Romney quotes. Remember, he says he's not a "flip-flopper".
Flip 1: "Roe v. Wade has gone too far."
Flop 1: "I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 2: "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose."
Flop 2: "I never really called myself pro-choice."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 3: "I've been a hunter pretty much all my life."
Flop 3: "Any description of me being a hunter is an overstatement of capability."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 4: "It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam."
Flop 4: "I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 5: "I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush."
Flop 5: "Ronald Reagan is... my hero."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 6: "I will work and fight for stem cell research."
Flop 6: "In the end, I became persuaded that the stem-cell debate was grounded in a false premise."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 7: "I think the minimum wage ought to keep pace with inflation."
Flop 7: "There's no question raising the minimum wage excessively causes a loss of jobs."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 8: "I like mandates. The mandates work."
Flop 8: "I think it's unconstitutional on the 10th Amendment front."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 9: "I saw my father march with Martin Luther King."
Flop 9: "I did not see it with my own eyes."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 10: "This is a completely airtight kennel mounted on the top of our car."
Flop 10: "They're not happy that my dog loves fresh air."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 11: "It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person."
Flop 11: "He's going to pay, and he will die."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 12: "Those... paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship."
Flop 12: "Amnesty only led to more people coming into the country."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 13: "I'm not in favor of privatizing Social Security or making cuts."
Flop 13: "Social Security's the easiest and that's because you can give people a personal account."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 14: "Based on the numbers of American Muslims... I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified."
Flop 14: "A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 15: "I'm a strong believer in stating your position and not wavering."
Flop 15: "I changed my position."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 16: "I would like to have campaign spending limits."
Flop 16: "The American people should be free to advocate for their candidates and their positions without burdensome limitations."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 17: "I supported the assault weapon ban."
Flop 17: "I don't support any gun control legislation."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 18: "The TARP program... was nevertheless necessary to keep banks from collapsing in a cascade of failures."
Flop 18: "When government is... bailing out banks... we have every good reason to be alarmed."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 19: "I'm going to take burdens off the back of the auto industry."
Flop 19: "Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 20: "When I first heard of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, I thought it sounded awfully silly."
Flop 20: "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell has worked well."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 21: "I believe the tax on capital gains should be zero."
Flop 21: "It's a tax cut for fat cats."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 22: "These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress."
Flop 22: "Republicans should never abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 23: "Relative to the leading candidates, some people see me as being more conservative."
Flop 23: "I'm not the most conservative candidate."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 24: "It does take a village."
Flop 24: "It takes a family."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 25: "I don't line up with the NRA."
Flop 25: "I'm a member of the [NRA]."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 26: "The all-Democrat stimulus that was passed in early 2009 will accelerate the timing of the start of the recovery..."
Flop 26: "The all-Democrat stimulus passed in early 2009 has been a failure."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 27: "...the costs of health care will be reduced."
Flop 27: "We were unable to deal with... health care costs in Massachusetts."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flip 28: "If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation."
Flop 28: "What works in one state may not be the answer for another."
Great points Jan. The party is now ruled by radicals. Neither the GOP nor our political climate can become healthy until they go down in miserable, humiliating defeat. Even as a liberal I miss the sensible, reasonable, well-grounded Republicans of the past, people like Nelson Rockefeller, Bob Ray, Gerald Ford, Dwight Eisenhower...
We're losing! AHHH!
Stop playing nice!
Let's just play dictator instead!
hahahahahaha
All I can think of when I see Mitt Romney is plastic Ken doll.
And I always hated Ken.
Asimplicity
Don't you have something more original other than cut and paste the same comment from Hufftington post ,over and over.
Sure, here you go!
I'd like to share a few excerpts from an essay written for the Daily KOS called "A Voice from the 1%"
Stop being so accusing. A lot of teenage type remarks going on here. Did anyone graduate with any type of formal education. ALL politician's "flip flop"- the new buzz expression???, over used. Sort of overdone most of us think. ANY change is a welcome one. Several years of decline, economically considered or any other way. Time for a cool change. The country is going down the tubes. Maybe you should run for prez, it might be a welcome change over what we have experienced. Don't knock select candidates, some do because they are jealous of them having been financially successful. Some one, some where will always have more than You or I, so let it go. They no doubt worked for it, just as many others have. I am retired and on a fixed income. The last few years have been dreadful. Time for a change. We do not need a leader that cares more about being on talk shows, on the cover of magazines or "Dancing with the Stars" keep at the workmanship of a leader. Let your Ego - GO, no room for that in the white house.
To ASIMPLECITY....Ditto...and more than that! My74 yr old sister is teabagger. She believes in outer space aliens, lost thousands of dollars back in Y2K planning for the end of the world, etc. She hates every race other than white, hates welfare given to the needy(she forgot how many years she was on it and the thousands of dollars dad gave her to raise two children) hates everyone who is not her brand of christian, and sends me every email that say..."God loves everyone"..........Guess who she is voting for?.....Real christians don't vote republican. There is nothing that jesus would find good about the party, other than, it's never too late to be saved. I myself do not believe in any religion...too many people have been killed because of a perceived god.
Marc2 (post 2.33) - the end justifies the means? You know this because you were the CEO of how many companies?
I did not say this but I repeat it as often as possible: " Mit Romney flip flops more than Jimmy Buffet at a Key West walkathon" So perfect...I wish I'd said that.
For the past 40 years Republicans have not connected with the people, whom they consider beneath their stature. So what's else is new? Do Republicans, or anyone else for that matter, really think they can trust Romney (a billionaire), who pays less than 14% taxes to the IRS???
I read somewhere Seamus ran away when they got to their destination. Romney said he lived the rest of his life on a farm.
Romney comes across as trying too hard; notice how he's quickly animated in his behavior when he's pressing the flesh with people around him. Combine that with his hurried tone of speaking and all smiles, it's as if he's just two steps away from sheer desperation and begging, in his desire for this uber-rich, amateur salesman, that's trying so hard to win acceptance from the working-class crowds of people he addresses, that can't quite relate to his weird statements. "I'm just like you, and my wife has two Cadillacs." Or, "I think I only have three homes."
It's interesting that a, "turn around artist," should just be himself, and we should let him give our country a good look-see. What if he decides we aren't efficient enough? Does he break us up and sell the unprofitable parts? Pretty hard to do with a whole country. Send us through a managed bankruptcy? Wouldn't that look nice on the American resume.
We need a leader, not a CEO. This is a society, not a business. Ayn Rand was a crazy person, and most of the right, including the Tea Party, have based their world view on her ravings. We would do as well to put the country on L. Ron Hubard's crazy train.
It should be obvious to anyone that has a functioning memory that goes back at least 4 years, that the deregulation model that Ayn Rand and the Right keep trying to make work is fundamentally unworkable. The, "job creators," are not virtuous by any definition of that word. Recent studies show that they are less generous, more easily corruptible, short-sighted, and not much fun to be around.
In this case, Atlas didn't Shrug, he dropped the world. Again. This will happen every time, because the entire foundation of this worldview is comically foolish.
Asimplicity1, thanks for the quote. I lived the life of the speaker. The oldest of six that had to become the man of the house at 10 years old because the true man of the house was a skirt chaser that abandoned his family.
Digging in the early morning snow, while wearing worn out sneakers, for kindling to restart a fire in an old coal stove that lost it's heat in the night because most of it's brick was missing. Heating a pot of water on that miserable beast to thaw the frozen hand pump in the back yard to draw water so we could bath to go to school. Begging from the local Mom and Pop grocer for a tab to purchase beans, potatoes, lard and flour to sustain our needy family. Paying that tab by traversing the hillsides to pick wild berries that were sold door to door. Paying that tab by seeking permission from farmers to glean corn from fields that their harvesting machines had missed.
I was gifted much more than many of my impoverished friends or cousins. I did very well in school. My graduation thrust me into a brand new world. A 17 yr. old adult that must grab the world by the azz. The 60's did not provide scholarships for higher learning to bright students. There were no student loans to my knowledge.
The Kennedy/ Johnson administration did offer a federal program to qualified students to enter trade school. I wanted electronics. Those classes were filled with a long waiting line. The next best option was appliance repair. I took that opportunity at once.
Remember that I was raised without a father. I struggled to fix a flat on a bicycle or change a spark plug in a mower. Asking me for a 1/4 socket or 7/8 wrench was Greek to me. I made it anyway.
My appliance repair business is a small, but successful family affair. It provides a comfortable living for me and my two adult sons. They seem to have grand ideas to expand the business to become wealthy men. I applaud their efforts and support them in every way. I am content with my modest means and very thankful that the American dream allowed me to spare my family from my own early years of poverty.
Mitt Romney's claim that he made it all on his own is a lie. He was given every advantage that a wealthy family can bestow on child. President Obama's rise to success proves true to me. Raised without a father figure and a mother dedicated to her own cause must have been very difficult. Dedication to the modest Grandparents that instilled his true values rings a bell with me.
A cold-hearted CEO that only looks at the bottom line is not a leader of men. The man that has struggled with adversity in his own life is the man with true vision to restore the American dream and prosperity for all.
Commonsense101:
Wow! Very well said. I read it twice :)
Very touching. That is a true story of America!
Thanks!
President Obama has finally got this country turned around and headed in the right direction. Last thing we need now is another Right wing Waco or a convicted felon to become President and undo all the good President Obama has done. Economy is finally on a upswing and the last thing we need is Mitt Romney who can't decide how he wants to portray himself to the public. If he can't even figure that out on his own, how is he going to run the country?
Executives who have worked with Romney say he is great when he is on script and things go according to plan. As governor he liked the dealing with the front room glad handing, but not the backroom working. (except for his healthcare plan he now disavows). He is a CEO who has said he likes to tell his "executives" what his strategy is and they go out and do it. Not how it's done with Congress. (of course, I'm not sure how well Obama has done at that working with Congress business)
Starsailing:
Well many republicans learned a lot during this recession. One of those being welfare isn't such a waste afterall. I think a lot of people forget that welfare saves children! Sure it's abused, but it has helped many to get back on their feet. J.K.Rowling and Whoopi Goldburg are two I can think of off the top of my head. Both are far more successful now then most republicans complaining about how we don't need it.
I have never been on welfare or used food stamps but I certainly don't look down upon those who do legitimately need them. I think it is one of the things that makes America great. It shows our society that they are part of a nation that cares for it's citizens even when they are down on their luck. They do, however, need strong punishment for those who decide to take advantage of the system. I can certainly understand that.
american-2051576
VP in a large corporation, COO in another smaller one. I actually retired to try to recover my soul and mind. I am here to tell you that unless you've lived there, you have no idea how horribly people operate at the top of the company or even at division/director levels. I have to say that not many would become a "friend of the family". You learn a whole new meaning to "watch your back". Meanness and eccentricity is the norm. Being part of and involved in money/people discussions during those times made me sick at times because, frankly, short-term profits and money ruled the day.
I'm sure there are companies out there somewhere that are different, but given that high execs show so little allegiance to any one company and move around so much, the different ones would be rare, if they exist at all. And cutting deals BETWEEN companies? Blood-fest.
I only say this because when people say they want a "CEO type", I know they know-not what they are asking for. Their imagination that supplies a cool, caring, reasonable financial wizard that saves the day is nothing but a dream. The reality is high risk-taking, knock-down drag-out conversations and transactions, absolutely NO regard for neither people or long-term consequences, and a general lack of regard for "the little people". That is the NORM... not absolute, but the usual. At least in my experience.
Cheryl, the term 'flip-flop' is Republican in origin. That accusation was used dishonestly to discredit John Kerry when he ran against The Shrub in 2004. Now the Republicans whine that it's being used againt Mitt, a flip-flopper extraordinaire! Give us a break.
"Swift boating' was also a Republican tactic.
When you fight dirty, it makes you look weak to complain about the mud that flies back in your face.
Try to picture the plastic, gaffe-aholic Romney face to face with a hard-nosed Netanyahu or other world leader. He can't even stand up to a radio talk show host.
Romney is a wimp.
Marc2, I agree with your characterization of the typical CEO.
The office of president requires someone who can negotiate and compromise with the other two branches of government. The president is not a dictator or a CEO.
Mitt for President is like Dana to NASCAR.
You know, one of my favorite Pink Floyd songs is called "Dogs"....it's a song about how cutthroat young business execs feel they need to be to succeed, and that the law of the jungle is the only law in the business world. "Eat or be eaten"....."only the strongest survive"....."survival of the fittest". These men and women who plunge themselves into this world do it for one reason and one reason only....to make themselves wealthy! Their workforce, the sole reason for their company's success, is just a resource that they can exploit at the minimum amount of cost. It's the bottom line these people are interested in, not the welfare of the company (pronounced "workforce").
How is it that Romney's handlers are now actually asking that he stop pretending that his focus be on well-paying job creation, and instead promote his "CEO" credentials, which means exactly the opposite? CEO's want the most productivity at the least amount of cost....that mentality could help with reducing our national debt, but is detrimental to job creation, which HAS to happen BEFORE we can even think about reducing our government spending spree. Any CEO will tell you that you have to have demand before jobs can be created. That was the reasoning behind the stimulus to begin with. While that was a short-term fix, real jobs that pay more than minimum wage is what is needed for long-term economic recovery. And CEO's are paid obscene salaries to do just the opposite of that.
Romney is proof of the saying --- it you try to be everything to everybody, you end up being nothing to nobody. I've never seen a more phony and insincere candidates for any office in my life. As far as a "business man" president being the solution to the economy -- in the last 85 years we've had 2 business men in the White House -- Herbert Hoover and George W. Bush. What kind of shape was the economy in when they left office???
Why not just elect a computer? They're people, too, RIght?
Marc, I've been close enough to that world to work alongside VP's who gleefully refer to themselves as "Attilla the Hun" when behind closed doors and hear a divisional President say "you're on a variable cost model, start firing people...all of them if necessary." I've watched them ignore the underlying numbers and destroy entire divisions because their intuition tells them to ignore the analysis and do exactly the wrong thing. I've seen how our current Wall Street orientation in business is entirely on improving next month's P&L, ignoring the long term entirely.
These aren't the sort of people we need running the country. In many cases these aren't the sort of people who should actually even be running businesses.
A person trying to figure out who he needs to be in order to win an election is unfit for the Presidency - such a person has ambition but lacks character, a dangerous combination. Who you want is someone who is who he is, and is only willing to become President if he can win the election while being who he is. That's character first, ambition second. We are sorely lacking in politicians with that much character.
Elections are decided by people - creatures of intellect and emotion - a combination of rational and irrational elements. That is a strength and weaknesss of the Democratic system as irrationality potentially opens some very ugly doors. Nonetheless, that's the way it is. I'm satisfied that President Obama is a man of intellect, empathy, judgement and compasssion. He has beeen decisive when necessary and has hung back when that has been prudent. I expect him to be re elected for all of the above qualities.
from Asimplicity1 And who says Romney will say anything to get your vote! Well, Romney does
Great Post --
What about this one? :
Flip - My name is Willard
Flop - My name is really Mitt
This is what the right-wing seeks, for example the "hockey mom," "Joe the Plumber" etc., though they give lip service to "exceptional-ism." The left-wing prefers someone who really is exceptional but understands the common man = President Obama with impressive life achievements, self made via the American Dream. There have been wealthy politicians who have fought for the "little people" but Romney's track record doesn't show that, at all.
Another note of interest... The Supreme Court is supposed to be a check and balance in our governmental system as the third branch of government. However, the very nature of check and balance means there must be some kind of oversight of the court as well.
A good case in point is how the Supreme Court once justified and supported slavery. So when I am asked if I support the judgment in favor of Dubya in the 2000 election, or now Citizen's United, my answer is a resounding "NO." And this extends to the current lobbyist influence on congress and the need to get money out of politics. This is the main corrupting problem the US currently faces in terms of preserving democracy.
The current GOP/TP are the worst proponents of the worst things in our society, possibly ever in our history except for slavery. The Dems are also owned by campaign donations, but if we are to have any hope of reform, they are our best bet. Aside from the need to restore the Fairness Doctrine...
For those of you with any doubt, watch Bill Moyer's segment with David Stockman on crony capitalism and other experts, and you will come away from that program with renewed conviction that we need an amendment to the constitution to override the Supreme Court in regard to Citizen's United and to restore financial regulation with a Glass-Steagall type Act.
Romney is probably more of a social moderate than he pretends at this time (i.e., pro-life , etc.), but his fiscal views are very "severely" in favor of the rich and corporations, and the Race to the Bottom that is "starve the beast" austerity (with draconian cuts in social programs in order to give more tax cuts to the rich), deregulation and retaining "too big to fail" so that the tax payers and consumers carry the risk for the plutocrats -- the investment bankers and hedge fund managers who never pay a penalty and in fact continue to enjoy business-as-usual bonuses. We need the outrage of Occupy to continue until real change is made! Romney the CEO no longer feels any allegiance to employees, but rather only to stock holders!
As President Obama said in his recent speech in Texas, the United States does best when we stand together--not every man, women, and child for him or herself. Obama/Biden - 2012!
"Romney should give Santorum an Aspirin after that 8 hour ride on top of his auto"
” People have to like Romney the way they like their accountant. They have to consider him trustworthy and capable, full stop."
Uh huh ... if my accountant flip-flopped every other day I think I might have to fire him. And I would probably like firing him.
Speaking as an accountant, I hope that my clients do like me because they know I care about them and what is important to them, I can relate to the situations they are in and I work my hardest to do what is right for them. I don't see Mitt as someone who would inspire that kind of feelings.
I like you Steeler Fan.
Wow Steeler Fan, I need your business card! I have a great car guy that I trust. I need a great accountant!
I'll have to hand you this much Tired Old Guy... Obama is steadfast in his agenda. He hasn't wavered one bit from it. He is steadily promoting the oligarchy and creating a populous dependence on the government. You gotta hand it to him... he has been able to produce exactly what he and his masters want for this country... the steady march towards socialism... ACA was his hallmark legislation to produce that in this country.
the health care legislation is socialism? because everyone has to pay for their own health care? so, people with out insurance, getting health care with out paying for it, putting the cost of that healthcare on everyone else is not socialism, but everyone having insurance is? by the way who are his masters? i thought the rightwing said it was wallstreet? so wallstreet wants socialism? i'm confused.
dzaffina, you're mistaken if you think you will find consistency in the arguments coming from the extreme right. Expediency, yes, logical consistency, no.
Yes, bringing the economy back from a recession is "socialism". Stopping two wars is "socialism". Using a mandate in health care, which was a Republican idea is "socialism"......... (rolls eyes)
Well you don't expect them to just come out and say they hate black people do you?
And good one Tiredoldguy, I would like firing him too.
Well, we know Santorum is no socialist!
He wants to do away with public education!
So many Liberals in one place, and nobody even remembered to bring the "Grape Jelly" ?
You all make me sick, just as sick as extremist Republicans make me.
The way I see things are that Republicans and Democrats take us all for granted, and their followers are like lemmings marching into the raging sea to their own doom.
Vote them all out of office on the state and local levels at least; "We the people" need to remind them who the boss is.
I will never vote for a Republican or Democrat again as long as I live. Too many lies and B.S. from both the parties and their followers.
Like Republicans start all the wars: B.S. WW I , WW II dropped the atomic bombs on civilians, Korea, Viet-Nam were all Democrats.
Or Democrats are all working class: B.S. Bill and Hillary clinton are billionaires, many movie stars are Democrats, almost all famous comedians and so on.
The sad fact is that they are both corrupt as hell, and need to be replaced.
Lets take our country back in 2012; Vote anything but Democrat or Republican.
Steeler ... this is no reflection your capabilities as I don't know you but I'd rather have an accountant who was brilliant at his job than one who was likable. Why should the president of our country be "just like us"? We don't expect our doctors to be "just like us" ... we want them to be well-trained, educated and smart. Why should the person who leads our country be any different? For the most part, our revered Founding Fathers were not like the rest of the colonists. They were wealthier, better educated and more liberal. I'll vote for competency over personality any day.
Well stated by Lowry ...The 'vision thing', as HW Bush put it.
Romney is not charismatic and doesnt inspire great passion.
But if conservatives want just a return to limited government and respect for the Constitution, we dont need an arrogant egotistical conceited overbearing slick-speaking government-worshipping Nanny Stater in the White House, like we have now.
Nobody had more trouble with the "vision thing" than George W. Bush.
When you say a "return to limited government and respect for the Constitution" I have to wonder what administration you're talking about. Can't possibly be Bush/Cheney.
"return to limited government and respect for the Constitution"
That's a mighty ironic statement from Bob from the "probe me" state.
What was the last Republican administration to have "respect for the constitution?" Bush II, no; Bush I, maybe, but he was part of Reagan, so NO; Ford, maybe, but he was part of NIXON, so NO WAY; Eisenhower. OK Eisenhower in 1960. More than 50 years ago. Craziness!
Correct! Eisenhower was the last decent Rebublican president. It is no accident that you never hear them calling themselves, "The party of Dwight D. Eisenhower!" at their conventions.
It looks like ol' Bob wants us back to the days of John Adams.
As for Seamus, I have NEVER seen anyone put a dog or any other live critter on top of a car. Our dog rides in a carrier as it is like a den for her and is safe but she rides IN the car not on top.
I like IKE and we need him again.
Ron Paul is still around, ya know?
It is obvious that the gNOp doesn't want a libertarian so I guess 76 y/o Ron Paul is out.
Ron Paul would be OK by me , except I question a few of his stances on foreign policy. That being said He is the best of what is left on the right! As far as the past- lets see Ford was ok I guess, but Nixon ? impeached and he was one of the instigators of Rat F*cking started in the late 40's- Reagan ? If he hadn't succumbed to the top 2.7% in his Pres. years - The Reagan of the late 60's would have been a GREAT president-Bush1 well he was OK but look into the history and he was REAL dirty,and Bush 2 Well That ratface Bas*ard was the WORST we have ever had, including Jimmy Carter!
BTW gulfportian I like your attitude and agree with it all except Nixon, I am an Independent and voted for Ronny in 80 but not 84 , I could see he had nothing but the top 2.7% in mind!!!
No, instead Republicans are trying to elect an out of touch money grubbing overbearing flip flopping gaffe speaking corporation worshipping middle class/poor/and elderly hater in the White House.
Bob. How much is Mitt eMoney paying you ?
I hope is more than $ 10 million. That's the amount Mitt gave Newt to stay in the race ( and block Santorum ).
Never mind!
Really Spartan??? Ron Paul is a lost cause.
My husband and I have gotten into lively debates about this.
There was a time when I liked Romney. Back when he was governor I thought he did a great job.
And then he ran for President and morphed into what he thought he had to be to win the GOP nomination -something totally the opposite. McCain did the exact same thing.
I didn't care if either of them were "stiff", what I liked was that that they both worked to solve problems and were "reasonable" men who were willing to compromise,willing to do what needed to get done,willing to go outside of ideology -like Romneycare.
I understand Romney had to move to the right to ever appeal to the conservative voter that likes Santorum and wants a guy with "fire in his belly" like Gingrich.But he does not wear either of those characteristics naturally.
He was never going to appeal to that voter anyway and he came off as fake and now he's tainted himself so that no one likes him.
It's just a damn shame the Presidential process requires this. But the difference with Romney and McCain is that McCain is and was always a man of integrity and now I don't think Romney ever was.
Ron Paul is the BEST thing going for this country. Just because some don't agree with a few policies his outlook on the most part is great. It is just what this country needs. Obama and all the other Republicans are a lost cause.
Paul 2012
Bike Boy--- you are dreaming Dude.... Ron Paul has won nothing in the primaries so far! I expect he will drop out soon enough unless he is just dumber than I thought he was. At least he is pumping some money into the economy on the campaign trail which is a good thing!
baldeagle - if our founding fathers could see us now their comments might be more in line with WTF happened?
small business owner - You may be right about eisenhowers time, and it might even stretch into kennedy's time. Definitely a different time back then. I recall all the air raid exercises, as if sitting in a hallway wiith crossed legs and bent over would protect you from a nuclear attack. To think I grew up in a prime target area. lol.
Katherine - that is the problem many politicians have. They try to be someone they aren't or try to relate to all people. Romney would have been better off coming off as a CEO willing to listen. Human nature tells us that we like it when another listens, even one from a different background. Now if romney changes it will be perceived as just another flip-flop.
Yes - American - You should have been Romney's adviser. I like the way you put it -"a CEO willing to listen" That would have been a Great campaign theme. No one cares if you are a 1%er -hell,they all are. People just want to know you care about them. But you're right -Romney can't switch now. He's caught in a no -win situation.
Who?
Oh...wait a minute. I think I remember him... the guy who lied us into a financially devastating war and trashed our economy. The guy who trampled our civil rights and only pretended to do anything to help anyone but the wealthy.
Where is he these days?
Are the Republicans still keeping him in an undisclosed location?
You can come out of the bunker now, Dubbya! The Iraq War is over!
The reason why the decency and honesty is hard to trace beyond Nixon is...Nixon! Look at all the people who learned their trade in the Nixon wh, some of whom would probably have gotten caught in the snares of Watergate if not for being pardoned by Gerald Ford, a decent man who did the wrong thing by preventing sunlight from doing its job as disinfectant.
Fast forward to the Reagan Administration. Around 140 officials indicted, but the Iran/Contra affair never was fully vetted "for the good of the country." Well it WASN'T for the good of the country. These administrations were the training ground for much of the New Right. That's where people like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld learned that honesty doesn't matter. Facts don't matter. Consistency doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is what you can sell.
John, now I disagree with you on Nixon. He was a great statesman in Congress and actually did a good job in the White House. Do you know his fellow Republicans actually did not like him in the White House because he dismantled very little of Johnson's programs? He did not have the temperment or character for the Presidency -but then LBJ did not either. Two men - great leaders in Congress. Should have stayed there.
And Ford was exactly what we needed in a President at the time. He was an excellent transition president.
I will say I did not and do not care for Rumsfeld and Cheney. When I don't care for someone -they have really stepped over the line with me.
And I really like President Obama! There!
Ah, but look at all the crooked and underhanded people who came out of that period. Not just Rumsfeld and Cheney, but Safire, Stein, and Liddy. They in turn trained people like Ailes, Abramhoff, North, Norquist...
Escaping punishment for their scandals taught them they could be without conscience and suffer no consequences. Ultimately a fundamentally corrupt Conservative Movement replaced the principled Conservatism of people like William F Buckley and Barry Goldwater...and brought us to this sorry state in our political process.
Just for the record, G Gordon Liddy served time in prison for the "escaping punishment as you put it. Perhaps you are not old enough to remember all the ins and outs of the Watergate scandal, but I believe it was the first time the media was able to create its own havoc, and it has been enjoying the power ever since. Not sure that Watergate was any different than any other candidate, party, or incumbent official has ever done, but it was the first time that somebody got caught at it and publicly held up to scrutiny....Politics, always has and always will be, a dirty game-there is so much at stake in terms of money and power that it cannot help but corrupt those who have been at it for any length of time, which is why terms limits is a superb idea.
John - that analysis I agree with wholeheartedly.
Yes, Liddy spent time in prison...which qualifies him to become a wealthy man spreading hate and lies on talk radio. That was my point.
Same is true of Ollie North, who's felony conviction endears him to Conservatives and qualifies him as a beacon of morality...and also a wealthy man.
My point was EXACTLY that this sort of behavior and the commonality of slap on the wrist or nonexistent punishment has taught the GOPTP that lying, cheating, stealing, and character assassination are the basis of political power.
So with eight months to go before the general election, Romney has to prove he is "likeable enough"?
My God, he's had eight years!!! And the majority still don't think he's likeable or trustworthy.
People growing to trust and like Romney is like tax cuts creating jobs, any minute now it will happen, just wait.
Give us a little more time or more tax cuts, it will happen soon just like we said.
For an America headed the right direction now, vote Obama/Biden 2012
that sounds a lot like trickle down reaganomics. i voted for reagan so i should be one of the first to get trickled down on. i figure after 32 years that should be any day now.
Keep on dreamin', dzaffina! That's the American delusion... er, I mean dream.
After 57 years of paying taxes for what!!! I think Ron Paul has the best idea. No government nor taxes. What a great plan.
AF - What an interesting observation...
Sounds like you think obamas desire to have payroll tax cuts and keep the bush tax cuts was a wasted effort. Right?
-----------------------
Dzaffina - You must be really thrilled with obamas trickle down economics as well. Right?
American, you are probably right about Obama. But criticizing one selection without offering a alternative is pretty vexing.
I see you've already put down Romney, so the only other viable candidate left this year is....Santorum. That guy is certifiably nuts. We don't need a christian dominionist taking away our rights and forcing his morality on us, even if he were able to get us some jobs on the side.
OK - so Mitt sells himself as a CEO, then what? Last I looked CEO's are really good at cutting and running when things get tough, but that brand of me first cowardice won't fly from the CIC. He actually has to tough things out, make tough calls, see a country through. Mitt has already proven he doesn't have what it takes to be that kind of a person. So sure - be your true self, Mitt. Just realize that neither the real you, nor the goofy, robotlike persona you keep trotting out, are good enough for us.
When Mitt took over the Salt Lake City Olympics as CEO, the first thing he did was go to the federal government for a handout.
I think when Romney showed how little morals and with his rubbery spine (must be from all that flip-flopping) that he could not even stand up to Rush.
If you don't have what it takes to stand up to Rush, how are you going to stand up to some really bad world leaders out there?
Your silence and the fact you have signed the person-hood pledge which makes women into second class citizens makes you the worst person to be president. (Along with the rest of the republican nominees who have signed the pledge, even Paul, the defender of individual liberty, apparently now for men only, thinks women should be second class citizens.)
Running a government and running a company are not the same.
WILLard ROBME is your typical republican throw federal dollars at the problem and let some one else pay for it.
Again with the expectation for logical consistency!
dzaffina - sounds like you have your personages confused. Obama is the one that wants a blank check to spend, spend, spend. Heck he ignored the advice of his own debt commision and then he latter ignored S&P downgrade warning.. It is so cool that we are now only AA+ in their eyes. Good thing the US $ is the worlds reserve currency and that people still trust our T-bills.
american - you're drawing false conclusions. Spend spend spend - what the hell does that mean anyway? His economic plans are working. Not even the GOP pundits deny that anymore. Why would we cut cut cut when that would kill the economy?
As for the debt ceiling fiasco and the subsequent downgrade is the GOP's fault. They put party over country, once more, and kept us from making the right decision.
If you are going to vote against this President, and thereby, against the economic recovery of our country, at least get the facts straight.
I read this and had a flashback to what people said about Dubya and his how his business experience would be such a great attribute, and look how that turned out. At least Dubya had a personality - a goofy one, but a personality - that people seemed to gravitate to. Romney just doesn't connect on any level.
I told everyone on here a long time ago i thought Mr Romney is an unseemly dude who just wants to be President so he and his rich friends can make as much as money for 4 years and then he'll give up being President after his money says about 5 billion dollars. That's what a CEO does make as much money for his company and then sell it to the highest bidder when he gets tired of running it. So if Mr. Romney gets to be President look for him to SELL OUT AMERICA for as much money as he can.
That is it, LoyalTexan---I've been trying to put my finger on what the photos remind me of and you are spot on.
This will be my first request at Happy Hour at the Dew Drop Inn!
Republicans look at government as if it were a wholesaler and they are the retailers. They want government to give private industry the means to make a profit off education, healthcare and even military spending. Santorum and Gingrich made millions off their government connections after they left office, and they are proud of this "accomplishment. " It isn't that they want smaller government, they want government to work for the corporations, and the wealthiest 1%.
Whether Romney is a "natural" or not is beside the point, what he wants to do is line the pockets of the "elites" while the middle class work two jobs trying to support themselves. It fits the Republican world view that working people are somehow "less than" those who earn their money through investments. I believe the Republican idea of success is when other people work for you, and you just sit back and count the cash.
Fundamental difference between CEO and POTUS is the CEO sets the agenda and issues marching orders. POTUS has the agenda handed to him/her every day from every corner of the world and is constantly building a consensuses to deal with the most pressing at any moment.
No comparison.
Loyaltexan and Amy..
Great grasp of the reality of today's issues. You two are definitely must read.
Ah, thanks, and I concur with LoyalTexan, the President of this country governs by persuasion, not fiat, and, therefore, a "likeable" President is the most effective.
And take it from someone who has lived in and travelled in multiple countries since Bush II was in office and Obama was elected... the people of other countries FINALLY have some respect for America and not the hatred we enjoyed during the Bush years. I know some of you NOT-SO-EDUCATED folks think when people like us, we are weak. But the truth is when people LIKE US, we are safer!
The only thing Mittsy can accomplish by highlighting his CEO experience is that he knows how to bankrupt companies, send American jobs overseas and profit from making the government bail out pension plans.
Funny that he doesn't like to talk about what his "economic plan" will do to the debt and defecit.
After this morning. I will always imagine Mittsy in Marie Antoinette drag...."Let them eat grits!"
Please, the Mittwit is a Yankee, he probably doesn't even know what grits are.
I think he tried grits in the South today. He liked them as much as we like him. I wonder how many times he brushed his teeth? Mitt, we don't like you either!
"Romulian Romney" does not know what he is, and everyday he looks more confused. Is he the Conservative "Speculator and Chief?" Is he the CEO Bain Capital "Speculator and Chief?" Is the "Romulian" a Liberal "Speculator and Chief?" Is the "Romulian" a Moderate Conservative "Speculator and Chief?" Is the "Romulian" a Marxist "Speculator and Chief??" Is he the Severely Conseervative "Speculator and Chief?" Is he the "Speculating Alien and Chief??" WOW! GOP/RNC are just "Crazy Conservative Clowns!"
Romney isn't anything religiously, morally, ethically, etc....He is in it for Romney and the Global Team --oligarchy. He will not stand for nor represent anyone but the super class. What I will never understand is why Americans still think of him as a Republican - blinded by the rhetoric spewing hatred and anger. If you love
Democracy, step back, and put your prejudice and fear behind you and realize that we stand to lose a lot -become an Oligarchy (ruled by the few rich) - don't fight "the People" - Help us for crips sake - You all have a
stake in what happens to ALL of us.
Thank you, Janis. As I've said on here before (several times) Romney does not want to be POTUS because he has a vision for us. He wants to be POTUS because he wants to be POTUS. Very simple.
ROTFLMAO! Why bob you just described barrack " I deserve a second term" obama. AKA "if business and the wealthy would just pay a little more or economy would be fixed...".
Huh. Wanna tell that to all of the people that lost their jobs when he was with Bain Capital?
Once again: a household budget, is not a company budget, is not a governmental budget. Just because you can understand, and run a household budget, that does not mean you can understand, and run a company's budget. Just because you can understand, and run a company's budget, that does not mean you can understand, and run a country's budget. A country is not a company is not a household. Look what happened the last time we had a CEO/MBA president.
Bet obama loses sleep over the 400 employees that were laid off when solyndra went belly up as well.
Golly matthew, you must have missed obamas speech when he referenced the governments budgetary concerns being just like that of a household.
The only difference between business, household and government budgets is in the number of options available to generate revenue or in borrowing capacity. When spending exceeds revenue there is a deficit that needs to be made up.
Yes mathew just look at how obama is mimicking him in spending. You should be afraid, very afraid.
Vote for Newt.
Lane in Lakeland, it is obvious you have not listened to those that worked with Newt in the past. They are saying that we should not vote for Newt.
This statements confirms your total ignorance when it comes to economics. You have proven it so completely, there is nothing else that can be said to prove it any further.
Well, considering that it was the Bush administration that initiated the loan process for Solyndra, you might want to check with him. Besides, there is a big difference between providing loan guarantees, and raiding a company of all of it's assets, raiding it's pension fund, dismantling the the company and deliberately firing people, just to make some money. Nice try at deflection, a$$hole, but they are not even close to the same. Solyndra, that's funny. Is that all you've got? You really are a stupid fool.
american-2051576, you never win when you try to debate me because you do not have a clue of what you are speaking of, and you lie. Give it up, fool, you only make yourself look as stupid as you are.
I think that a valid point is made here....It doesn't matter if we are talking about the nation or a household, there is only so much income, and expenses have to come from that income, or we are in a deficit situation. Now for the average household, income is really from going to work, a situation that is denied many, many American households at present. Now government has taken on the mantle that if there isn't enough money for their pet projects (and that varies with who is in office and who holds majority sway, but each has their pet projects), they can decide that they must raise taxes, or take away tax benefits.......they can do something that working Americans cannot, and that is with a pen stroke of legislation, they can increase their incomes. Don't we wish we could all sign ourselves a raise? For most American households, the vehicles of saving and investment are diminished or gone trying to stay afloat. American households are experiencing a reduction in income, stagnant wages, higher costs for absolutely everything, and this is what our present administration wants us to accept as normal? Work hard, and then harder again, for less pay, less benefits, higher taxes, and the threat of fewer services.
George W Bush called himself an "MBA President" We saw what disaster THAT was. Or does the GOP still think we have forgotten that it was THEIR party that drove us into an economic ditch.
"Or does the GOP still think we have forgotten that it was THEIR party that drove us into an economic ditch."
-What economic ditch?? You mean when the unemployment rate was 5% under Bush?? That economic ditch??
Or the financial crisis in 2008, occurring under a Democrat controlled Congress?
Typical liberals - they talk a lot but have no clue what they are blabbing about.
2009, the "official" unemployment rate in seasonally adjusted numbers
was 7.8%, with 12,049,000 people reporting
themselves as unemployed and actively
looking. 142,187,000 people were
working in January 2009.* (These numbers are
adjusted slightly since original publication as the Bureau of Labor Statistics
updates its numbers. The original January 2009 unemployment rate reported by
the BLS in February 2009 was 7.6%)
seasonal variance, the unemployment rate was 8.5% with 13,009,000 people
reporting themselves as unemployed and actively looking for work.
140,436,000 people were working in numbers not adjusted for
seasonal variance.
So where the heck are you getting 5%... obviously from another ill-informed Republican!
You are joking right? No other explantation for this comment none.
clown; pretty sure TM-J and everybody else is referring to the 5 trillion lost in residential real estate value for the average American thanks to bank and big biz friendly GOP de-regulation. Pretty sure he means that ditch.
Didn't you get the memo? Bush isn't to blame for anything. Not the two unfunded wars worth 2 trillion he didn't put on the budget (but Obama did). Not for the 1 trillion unfunded Medicare part D. Not for the 1 trillion in unfunded tax cuts he gave to the 1% in a time of war.
All that gets tacked on to Obama's numbers and you blame him instead, duh. Oh, and if you burnt your toast this morning, or your coffee was too hot - that's Obama's fault too, don't forget!
I can't wait until November and Obumma and 'miss piggy' have to become homeless! We didn't realize change meant that X p r e s i d e n t s will get Obumma Care and food stamps.
Well, Jethrooooooo Leroyyyyyyyy, how "ya'll" doin' today? Gonna git you some squirrel for dinner? Go back inside your doomsday trailer and get you a 6 pack of pabst and let the adults finish our conversation.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012 Hell, Yeah! Yee-Haw!
Well said Jethro! You hit the nail on the head.
Liberals are clowns, now I know where you get your statistics... from nut jobs like Jethrow Leeroy... go figure.
CEO - Bottom Line! What ever it takes to get to the Bottom Line! Right that's just what we need! Think of what would happen to this country if that philosophy was actually implemented! Chaos!
Ah yes, just the thing. Mitt can run as the CEO candidate. I believe there was a study that pointed out many CEO's are sociopaths. Kind of fits the ice cold Mittens.
vote for Newt!
Here's the guy who "saved the Winter Olympics in Utah", but only b/c he got a ton of bailout money from the Federal Gov't and bragged about it.
What a robot.
vote for Newt!
And who is hiring Mitt Romney to do the job of POTUS? Unfortunately, it's probably those billionaires who are funding him, and those on the far right wing of his own party. Mitt doesn't have the courage of his own convictions, as evidenced by all his flip-flops over the years. The real Mitt has concern for the bottom line - his, his supporters, etc. and God help the rest of us.
vote for Newt!
Leaders have to be charismatic. Romney doesn't have that. Neither did Bob Dole or McCain. You have to give people a reason to believe - ideas and intelligence are not enough. Romney doesn't have a vision either and it shows.
The United States doesn't want a dull CEO. We want to be inspired - it brings out the best in us. We can do great things as a nation under the right leadership. Our government and election process is broken. It (democracy) was a good experiment while it lasted. We are now owned by Super PACs and Corporations.
Like it or not, we are in for another four years with Obama. If he wasn't so far to the left, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
Agree with you except the vague "so far to the left" comment. Obama is regularly roasted by the far left for not being progressive enough on gay marriage, ending the war, closing down Gitmo, being too cozy with Israel hawks, not doing enough about voter suppression laws and laws that make collective bargaining illegal. To me he's pretty centrist, he helped restart the economy, took out Bin Laden, sent more troops to Afghanistan etc. The poor gut gets hit by the left and the right lol.
I can see your point. I just think he has spent more than I am comfortable with. I wish he was more fiscally conservative.
Agree with your Super Pac comment, But who allowed that, IT IS THE Right Wing of the Supreme court that allowed it to continue and grow!!! Until that is changed we will never have a great country again , BECAUSE THE TOP 2.7% will run it all!!! BTW there is a petition out there to get the Super Pacs banned -I have signed it on the net -FIND IT -SIGN IT !!!!!
On the mark, George B. I think that, if President Obama is reelected (as I hope he is), you will see a definite move to the left. Mind you, it won't be to the far, or even the middlin' left, but definitely more left of center than he already is. He will not have to worry about being reelected, plus, he may get a democratic House, and a larger Democratic Senate (again, I hope). This will put a stop to the shenanigans of the Republican/TP Inc. party where they vote against things they previously supported (i.e. debt commission, infrastructure spending, cap and trade, etc.).
Fire in the hole, if you think he has spent too much, take a look at this: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3036. Most economist believe that he has not spent enough, and has given too many tax breaks to the wealthy (over 1/3 of his stimulus was tax breaks, continuing the Bush tax breaks (although he had little choice on that one)). The only economists who don't think this are those who are being extremely partisan, and very disingenuous. Even Mark Zandi has conceded that there may be a need for another stimulus by the government.
The problem, as I see it, is that there are not enough revenues. Even as the population has grown, the federal budget has shrunk, as a percentage of GDP. The financial markets have grown, there are more businesses, the infrastructure is in desperate need of repair and upgrading, and basic services (such as mail delivery, policing, justice, and emergency services) needs have grown. All of these growing demands cry out for more revenue, not less. The problem is that, even as the tax base has grown, the Republican/TP Inc. party insists on cutting taxes, and mostly for the wealthy, who have benefited the most from these services. So, as the need for more revenue to just meet basic needs has been growing, revenues have been shrinking as a proportion of those needs.
Yes, let's get rid of waste, there can definitely be reforms to programs that would save money, and there are even some things that could be cut, but these should not be the only actions taken to fix our budget problems. We need to raise revenue, and not on the backs of the poor, or the middle class. The rich became rich with the help of what used to be the finest transportation system in the world, the help of government regulations that attempt to create a healthy and stable economy, with the help of a military that ensures that the world markets are accessible by keeping open important trade routes, with the help of a public school systems that ensures that there is an educated population that can work effectively, etc., etc. It would be nice if they were to pay their fair share of the taxes (there are over 1,000 multimillionaires that pay nothing in federal income taxes, so don't even mention the debunked 50% of the people don't pay taxes meme).
"We need to raise revenue, and not on the backs of the poor, or the middle class." EXACTLY RIGHT! In MI Gop governor Synder has CUT taxes for the wealthy and corporations by 1.8 BILLION and then drastically cut money for municipalities and the education budget, devastating our children's educational opportunities! Then he RAISED TAXES on the elderly, taxing their pensions, and raising taxes on the working poor! Like they can afford to pay the taxes that were cut on the rich! We are in the middle class and just did our taxes. We have a $1,000 increase from last year for state taxes and the accountant who did our taxes said it would be higher next year because gop legislature and Synder are getting rid of a tax credit we are currently getting! Anyone who thinks gop stands for lower taxes is very ignorant!
NOSHOT ROMNEY IS ALREADY DEAD the day he implemented his health-care in Mass.
Face it. if he gets the nomination.. we automatically get 4 more years of the Mr. Al Quida.
Typical GOP F---up ... AGAIN !!!!
Seriously, george-970657? "Mr. Al Quida."? How about asking Osama bin Laden about 'Mr. Al Quida'. Oh, wait a minute, you can't because 'Mr. Al Quida' ordered in the SEAL team that killed him, fool.
Educate yourself before posting, or continue to look like an uneducated, partisan hack, george-970657.
Matthew,Houston TX You don't raise taxes to fund what you need. You hire more people that can pay taxes. The more taxes paid the more revenue is made.
I recently visited Las Vegas that has extremely high tax rate. Stayed in the Lexor for 2 nights. The room was 49.00 for the 2 nights. When I checked out they included a 18.00 per night luxury tax, 12.57 for sales tax at 12% then a check out tax. They have a resturant sit-in tax. They tax everything. They also have a fee for each purchase of a debit card it is .32 cent. I bought a special gambling chip that was suppose to be 39.00. After the guy made it for me it was 39.00, special design fee in which he already had the design, sales tax, 3.00 tip. Grand total 58.00. What a rip off. Taxes are great but they can also drive away business. I will never go back.
Newt has the vision to get our country on the right track again. Super PAC's should be illegal.
I think a President's own party often does not think they do enough to dismantle the previous party's agenda. Look at Eisenhower and Nixon - their own party was furious at them for not dismantling the social programs the previous administration put in place. The Democrats were upset with Kennedy that he did not undo Eisenhower programs. Then look at Clinton -he had to fight his own party to cut programs and not spend the surplus and Democrats were upset that he went further than Papa Bush. Obama is the latest in a long line.
BikeBoy, you need to learn a bit more as to how economics works. So, who is going to do the hiring? The government needs to fund things like infrastructure projects, and research to 'kick start' the economy. This is how it has been done for hundreds of years, and how it needs to be done again.
I've been to Vegas, too, and half of the things you listed are not taxes, but rather add-ons that the hotels impose themselves. All you have to do is point them out, tell them you do not want to pay them, and 9 times out of 10, they remove them from your bill. So how is a 'design fee', a $0.32 debit card fee, or a $3.00 tip the fault of the government? And, depending on the 'special design fee, are you are suggesting that the tax on that special gambling chip was almost 40% (58 - 3 = 55, 55 - 39 = 16, 16/39 = .41)? Buddy, you have just proven that you are one of the hicks that the locals in Vegas love to see coming, so they can rip off as much money as they possibly can. I'm betting you even bought a 'system to beat the slots', right?
Obama so far to the left? Still kow- tows to big moneywhen need be. What he has going for him is that he is the onlyadult in the presidential race. All of the others are just tribalists, religious or otherwise.
Matthew, Houston, TX
Please stop referring to the woes of the Postal Service as infrastructure and something the government should be using tax money to fix....it is, and has been privately run, separate from the government for many, many years....as such, it is the responsibility of that industry to correct it's own problems, one of which is pension issues, promises made to labor, that in reality cannot be met. As for infrastructure.....it would be lovely if things really went ot infrastructure, but it doesn't seem as if they actually do. Here in Illinois, about half or our highways are tollway systems, where the little guy, the user is paying day after day to get to and from work. Those tollway systems were supposed to be temporary-way back when, after WWII, when the governments-both federal and state-promised us that if we accepted the toll notions temporarily, we would have this modern, efficient safe highway system which in turn would benefit all business. Almost 60 years later, and the tolls are still there, and constantly increasing-and I know that Ohio and Pennsylvania also have tollway systems....many of the bridges and tunnels on the East Coast are on a pay per use basis. At what point in time, do all the tax dollars being spent on infrastructure render the needs of tolls moot?
Our shortfall has to do with the number of people not working, whether that be recent or long term doesn't matter, the more people out of work, the fewer people paying taxes which in turn support the programs that have more and more people utilizing them, because they are out of work. More people collecting unemployment, more people receiving housing assistance, more people receiving medical aid, more free lunches and breakfasts at schools, more food stamps.....and all of it has to be funded out of a smaller pool of people who are working and paying the taxes because they are working...You can go one step farther and see all the vacant real estate-as much of it commercial, and retail as residential. Every single one of those vacancies represents tax bills not being paid to city and county governments, which in turn means that they look to the state and federal governments to make up the shortfalls for education, infrastructure, etc....The government agency can sieze property for taxes unpaid, but it is still a non-performing asset, because the businesses are gone and nobody is lined up to buy this property at a fair (not inflated) market price. The banks don't want the vacant properties and the municipalities don't want it....as it is a non-performing asset. Soooooo, until people are back to work, full time, at reasonable wages, and in vast numbers, so that once again, they can afford to own homes, pay taxes...the deficit is going to continue....And I am very sorry to say, that you must factor in all of those who do not pay any taxes into the system at all. I have heard many people justify it that if these people buy things then they are paying taxes, but only a fraction of the taxes being paid by other individuals....A working person can be paying income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes, and somebody considered too poor for income tax, probably does not own property either and as such is not even paying tax proportionately to the income that they have....They are not contributing to a school district or a fire protection district, or a park district, yet they utilize all the services of those entities. Once again, a deficit. We like to talk about the greed of big business in these threads, but nobody is willing to conceded that the envious green eyed monster also affects workers, and an ever increasing demand for salaries that really aren't commesurate with the work performed or the products and services produced. In many parts of the country, the guy slinging the hamburgers on the griddle at McDonald's is earning almost $10 per hour, and yet we complain if the burger costs us more than $3....who is supposed to eat the other $7 per hour????? And while it is extremely difficult for anyone to survive in our society at $10 per hour, one has to accept that with inflating salaries at entry level and low skill level jobs, it increases the cost of everything in terms of an end product. Buying power for the middle class is diminished by increased costs and those at the lower levels see the minimums moving higher and higher, but they still remain at the lowest level, because increasing the minimum salaries does not result in greater buying power in terms of groceries, utilities, daily necessities. If you are going to use the "greed" excuse, then it applies to all strata of our society.
Sue, I didn't say anything about the Post Office. But, since you brought it up, the Post Office is not a private entity, it is a self-funded government agency. Otherwise, the employees would not be civil servants, and the Post Master General would not be answerable to Congress. The problem is, Congress is taking money out of the post office revenues for other uses. The Post Office would be fine, if they were able to use all of the revenues they generate for themselves.
And since when does building or upgrading a Post Office not create jobs? Since when does buying new postal vehicles not create jobs?
As for your other rant . . . huh? Your conclusions, once I was able to identify what I thought were conclusions, did not follow your premises, which were pure fantasy, and, for the most part, Republican/TP Inc. talking points, anyway. It was really tough reading because it was so disorganized, and not really that coherent.
The "CEO president" moniker will resonate with people. Riiiiiight ... because off-shoring, plant closing CEO types like Romney are SO well respected. He had his one chance to make a call about the economy with the auto industry. His "let them eat cake" response was "let them go bankrupt". Obama took the short-term heat for the loans and look what happened, GM is now the #1 automaker again and paying back the loan, millions of jobs saved and new jobs added. It almost makes you want to laugh if it was not such a serious subject. BTW ... before you call me a socialist leftist, I have an MBA (go bucks! ... that's a double meaning lol) and make a six figure salary. I'm proud to pay my taxes and proud to vote for Obama again.
Look at FORD...they took no bailout. I'm in your 'bracket', but I don't brag about it. We need real 'change & hope'. I am supporting Newt.
Only because Ford was in worse shape earlier. They sold weak subsidiaries, fired a bunch of management, totally rethought their product development plans, and mortgaged their assets for operating capital when it was still possible to do such things.
Once the Bush Recession hit those options weren't open to GM and Chrysler.
Mitt Romney has NO CONNECTION to the American People . . . He has no idea what 'The People' face every day.
He does not represent American Citizens, but represents special interests, (The American Corporate Infrastructure).
A bad Republican choice . . .
Aww, come one, he and Ann do their own laundry don't they? I saw them......I am sure they were! I laugh everytime I see that photo of them. Ann is looking so closely as if she is trying to figure out what the buttons do! They must really think that we are stupid/gullible enough to really believe that they, worth 100's of millions of dollars, really do their own laundry, even on the campaign trail? Give me a break! They probably have no idea how much laundry soap costs let alone how much you put in the cup!
Yes, as one columnist put it: "Romney is wearing the clothes he thinks people wear when they are doing laundry." He's a totasl dork.
I love this post, Kristen. Well said.
Hey I don't do my laundry. That is what my man servant is hired for. I also have a person that picks out my clothes and picks the right colors for my tie and shirt and suit. Oh I am dreaming again!!!!!!! Dam!!!
vote for Newt!
vote for Newt!
I agree, but that is an awful lot of what drives all of the GOP - corporate interests.
Mitt & Ann - Can I ask you a question. Response: Sure go ahead. What does a gallon of milk cost?
Stupid looks on there face. I'll get back to you on that.
The rest is history