And as we speak Romneys vulture business Bain Capitol which he is still a huge shareholder is dismantling and shipping American jobs from a profitable U.S. company(Sensata) to China. Romney is the most ruthless and despicable type of business man in our country and the right wants him to be our president. I hope all you conservatives are willing to move to China if you still want your job.

On the day before an election that's supposed to hinge on jobs, taxes and the middle class, Bain Capital, the company Mitt Romney founded, will close the doors of a factory in Freeport, Illinois, and ship 170 good, high-tech jobs to China.

The employees of Sensata Technologies were forced to train their Chinese replacements, and the American flag that long flew over the factory was reportedly removed while the Chinese engineers were visiting the site. A group of workers have set up camp across from the factory -- calling it “Bainport” -- and some supporters have tried to block the trucks hauling equipment out of the plant. According to Dave Johnson, there have been several arrests.

Sensata workers have asked to meet with Mitt Romney and hoped to enlist his help keeping their jobs in the United States, but he has refused, instead remaining on the campaign trail where he speaks often about “getting tough” with China.

The most important part of the story is that Sensata Technologies is profitable operating in Illinois. Net income last year was $355 million, up 16 percent from 2010. The company reported total revenues of $1.8 billion in 2011, up almost 19 percent from the year before. According to a company financial statement, “both 2011 net revenue and adjusted net income represent record levels for the company.”

So this has nothing to do with “making hard choices” in the process of turning around a failing business, which is how the Romney campaign describes Bain's corporate raiding. Bain's partners are looking for a modest boost in profits by locating the plant closer to the booming Asian automotive market (Sensata makes high-tech automotive parts). They'll get a small tax break for relocating the plant – the one Mitt Romney insisted did not exist during the first debate – and possibly defer taxes on some of the income the company generates.

(no one sees Elvis anymore)

Oh yeah?...

http://elvisfoundalive.com/

Try to keep a straight face....

Elvis isn't dead. He just went home.

Johnny Cash and Elvis live on stage together ... the dream lives on.

Church of Elvis

http://jubal.westnet.com/hyperdiscordia/sacred_heart_elvis.html

It is Still the ECONOMY, Stupid!!! NOW we can add the murder of Americans in BENGHAZI!!!!!

--Sources on the ground in Benghazi during the attack on the US consulate tell Fox News that CIA operatives twice asked for permission to help Ambassador Chris Stevens and his staff, and twice were told to 'stand down' -- while a later request for military backup was denied.---

No wonder obama is trying to blame it on a video!! These are impeachable actions!!

border joe

Sheesh Joe, your kinda like a clock with its battery running down ... the minute hand just keeps jerking in the same spot. Lighten up or light up!

Border Joe, what the Hell does that have to do with Elvis? Please stay on topic.

No wonder obama is trying to blame it on a video!! These are impeachable actions!!

Really? What crime was committed?

Don't mind Joe, he ain't nothing but a hound dog...

What's the matter, Detroit-Storm? Did he step on your blue suede shoes?

That would be Impersinating the President hemorRoid

Da Noid - ignore Joe. He's ranting and raving about "sources on the ground" - what sources? These mental midgets on the right don't want to wait for facts - they just keep posting rumors. Facts don't suit their agenda - rumors they start do.

One line from Gen. Dempsey says it all - And let me point out, it was 9/11 everywhere in the world." There was no reason to expect more trouble in Libya than anywhere else.

Obama/Biden 2012

"Impersinating"?

Ouchie.

Hey, come on people - focus! If we can get back to the original topic here, BCWC has performed a vital service to us all by enlightening us to the one factor that ALL of the other pollsters and pundits seem to be ignoring, namely the crucial "Mercury in retrograde effect". Not to mention Denise Siegel's pointed analysis:

"It might even look like [Romney] will or could win. He may even lead in the poles. But on the day of the election Obama has enough of an astrological edge to beat out Romney," according to psychic/astrologer Denise Siegel, who says her credibility is bolstered by the fact that she predicted the 2000 election would be won by "both candidates."

Apparently, she's the only one who's figured out that it's not the POLLS that Romney is leading in, it's the POLES. That's a huge difference! But.....was Elvis Polish?

In any case, I doubt if either Nate or Rasmussen were correct in predicting that BOTH candidates would win in 2000, so from here on out, I'm going with Denise. And that Mercury retrograde effect thingie..

Da Noid - be nice - it's the best Rocco can do. His 3rd grade class hasn't gotten to the big words yet!

Obama/Biden 2012

Da Noid

Rocco needs to be returned to sender...

NOBODY-

Not only believes that Elvis is alive, but that all of the polls are 100% accurate!

Don't be cruel...

NOBODY 2012

dangerfield: gotta be careful there, I'm sure there really is a person named Nob Ody who is running for election. :)

The polls are jerking Americans around. It sells newspapers and keeps numb-skulls watching TV and listening to the radio. Up, down, sideways, the polls go... keep'em guessing while the money keeps flowing into their coffers via their advertising supporters.

Let's heed the word of a hermit who has predicted the last 3 presidents and resides in Death Valley. Hmm, that may be the next poll coming out: Harry the Hermit Predicts Next President.

The Sheepole still want BOZOhussen and his Pony& Smoke show....!!

The real question is...WHY ARE YOU SO EASILY DEFLECTED FROM THE TRUTH???!!!

Keep chugging the KOOLaid.....OHaaaBaahaaMMaaahaa!!! Salude!!!

Border gets all his info from Glen Beck infotainment radio show, doesn't check Glen 'facts', and starts to wildly demand impeachment. Do you know what qualifies as an impeachable offense?

Beck conveniently ignores statements like: The Pentagon defended its decision not to deploy forces to Benghazi, Libya, as soon as the United States mission came under attack on September 11th, saying it would have been irresponsible to put forces in harm's way without better information.

The he goes on with: Glenn then went through all the actions the Pentagon took, much of which never resulted in troops being deployed. Fox News reported that the Pentagon did relocate the following assets, but did not do more because they did not have a clear idea of what the situation was on the ground:

• Eight from Special Operations were sent from Tripoli.
• A “FAST team” (Fleet Anti-terrorism Security team) of Marines from Rota, Spain, were sent to guard the Embassy in Tripoli.
• A Special Operations force was moved from central Europe to Sigonella Air Base in southern Italy, just 480 miles from Benghazi.
• F-16s and Apache helicopters remained parked and unused at Aviano Air Base in northern Italy.
• Two Navy destroyers already in the Mediterranean Sea were moved off the coast of Libya on the day of the attack but were never used.

Me: Eight guys to repel a terrorist attack. Then we would have had 12 dead instead of 4.

FAST team to Tripoli. Don't know what's going on so protect the main embassy. Check.

Moved a team from central Europe to Italy, then another 480 miles to Benghazi. How long would that take from the time they realized Benghazi was a problem? Would they have been in time to do any good? Unknown. We'd have to ask the military guys that made the decisions. That would come under the headline of "Let's find out the facts before we jump to conclusions".

F-16s and Apache helicopters in the middle of a city. F-16s could rupture their eardrums by doing supersonic flybys, and the Apaches would be busy dodging RPG rounds.

I don't know what the destroyers were supposed to do. Shell the city?

Think about the stuff you post because Beck certainly doesn't think about what comes out of his mouth. Pure sensationalism used to drum up anti-Obama sentiment by playing fast and loose with the facts. Beck is no longer on Fox News because even they could not stomach his crap.

I am voting for Romney and Ryan because I care about the economy. Obama has had over three years to fix the economy, he has failed. Obama has also failed at foreign policy. Benghazi is a good example of his failures. It has been far more important to campaign then care about the people who lost their lives in Benghazi. To him, this is an inconvenience. We need real leadership with someone who CAN bring both parties together. Obama has proven he is not capable of doing that.

Jersey, your views are well known, don't worry gotcha covered, today early voting started in Florida, we did our duty.

Romney unfit to be President or Commander in Chief, the trust me and a republican House is going to legislate in the best interests of The People is suspect do to past performance. America is not a company my friend.

Obama 2012

Locally we have ads from the RNCC for the race for NY-20 between incumbent Chris Gibson his opponent Julian Schreibman. The ad talks about Schreibman supporting the stimulus and then falsely claims that stimulus money was used to fund Solyndra.

Pathetic.

Uh Noid, wrong again:

Solyndra’s loan guarantee came under another program created by the president’s 2009 stimulus for companies developing “commercially available technologies.”

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/10/obamas-solyndra-problem/

Do Libbies know how to Google?

WCA, the cost of Solyndra to the American tax payer was $527 million. The cost of the Iraq War to the American taxpayer was $3.2 trillion.

Now which was the bigger blunder?

of the Presidents' green energy loans, 5 companies have gone bankrupt. out of 63

that is 8% (which Fox News claims is "half")

Of the companies that Bain loaned money to 22% went bankrupt

8% vs. 22%

Guess Mittens didn't pay much attention in those fancy business classes...

business acumen? not so much...

Chucky,

What does one have to do with the other?

Totas, just providing a little perspective.

Solyndra by far, Chucky. Apples and oranges, my friend.

Money aside Oscar, how many were folks were killed by Solyndria. Why not compare the 2? A blunder is a blunder, and the costs involved are very valid to compare. Seems to me taking a chance on a green energy company makes a heckuva lot more sense than fighting a needless war.

ahhhhh, I see. You were the one that brought up money, Chucky. "$527M compared to $3.2trillon." NOW you want to change your tune. Like I said, apples to oranges, my friend.

Compare any aspect you want. No matter how you slice it, any rational person would see the Iraq War as a much bigger blunder. No doubt, there were problems with Solyndra. But I would much rather have my tax dollars going to green energy than to war. And its also safer for our younguns.

Chucky, one was a war, the other was a payoff to Solyndra for campaign contributions and to further Hussein's twisted ideology. No matter how you slice it, THERE IS NO COMPARISON. Apples and oranges. Apples and oranges, my friend.

The thing is, apples and oranges are both fruit. I like apples, but I love me some oranges. See, its quite easy to compare the 2. And its also easy to compare spending and other costs when it comes to how our tax dollars are spent. I have no problem comparing the Iraq War to Solyndra. $527 million and no deaths to $3.2 trillion and thousands of deaths, and many more injuries. Yep, the Iraq War is a much bigger blunder. My condolences if you remain unable to see that.

Well...if we are talking wars...how many soldiers have died under Obama's reign? Oh that's right...more soldiers have been killed in Afghnistan since Obama has been in office then the previous years with Bush. And need I remind you, which the left seems to forget over and over again, that Congress approved the war in Iraq, including good "ol forgetful" Biden.

the left seems to forget over and over again, that Congress approved the war in Iraq

No JK, the Left does not forget that, though it's true democrats forget it from time to time.

Wow JK - Let's do the math (3,000 killed on 9/11, 4400 killed in Iraqi(Americans), estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed+Afghanistan est. 7,000 civilians killed + 1,234 Americans) So that comes to over 115,634.

So that would a lot less that those that have been killed while Obama has been in office. Not that any loss of live should be marginalized. For being a compassionate conservative - he sure doesn't seem all the compassionate, nor does Romney/Ryan.

People Vote Obama 2012 to move forward and bring our troops home and rebuild this nation.

Neither side should forget that the war in Iraq was approved based on false information supplied to the US citizen, Congress, and the world by President Bush's adminstration.

Unlike Solyndra that went bankrupt due to lower world prices on solar cells (thanks to China directly subsidzing their industry - it's called a "loss leader strategy" in sales parlance) the funds and lives spent in Iraq were based on deliberate deception.

Matthew,

Still trying with the fake intelligence?? That intelligence was based on years of study, by independent intelligence sources. Also, try to remember that even before Bush came into office, you had a string of Democrat leaders standing up saying that Hussein had WMD's....

Self Educated,

Ok...so now you want to pin 9/11 on Bush?? How nice...how about we go further a bit in history to remember the first bombing of the World Trade center, AND let's not forget the worse bombing in America by a domestic terrorist. Just in case you forgot, that was under Clinton's watch...

I believe if we Democrats stop worrying about polls and get out the vote we will win,period. The American people should be smarter than to return to the failed Bush years.

More important than anything is the damage that a Romney Presidency would cause to us.Leaving aside even the disaster to society and economy he would bring on.There is a great danger that he would lead us back to war.

After Gen.Powell endorsed President Obama yesterday,saying he feared the neo-cons around Romney. I saw an interview with Powell's former Chief of Staff,a Republican. He said he too was voting for Obama,and for the same reason. He said that during the Bush years,he and Powell saw how a weak new President was manipulated by the neo-cons around him to convince him to go to war.And he thought they would do the same with Romney. And I for one,am going to believe men who would put country before Party,far more than the Romney supporters on and off these boards.

JK, at the time of President Clinton, there were a few WMD left in IRAQ. However at the time of President Bush, the UN inspectors were formally and publicly reporting there were none.

""There were about 700 inspections, and in no case did we find weapons of mass destruction," said Hans Blix, the Swedish diplomat called out of retirement to serve as the United Nations chief weapons inspector from 2000 to 2003; from 1981 to 1997 he headed the International Atomic Energy Agency. "We went to sites [in Iraq] given to us by intelligence, and only in three cases did we find something" - a stash of nuclear documents, some Vulcan boosters, and several empty warheads for chemical weapons. More inspections were required to determine whether these findings were the "tip of the iceberg" or simply fragments remaining from that deadly iceberg's past destruction, Blix said he told the United Nations Security Council. However, his work in Iraq was cut short when the United States and the United Kingdom took disarmament into their own hands in March of last year."

The FACTS remain historically accurate. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/index.html

President G. W. Bush's administration chose to NOT believe the UN reports: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

JK, feel free to personally hold on to the lies that the Bush administration wrote for Gen. Powell to talk about in the UN presentation ( http://americanrhetoric.com/speeches/wariniraq/colinpowellunsecuritycouncil.htm ). But you cannot re-interpret historical facts to be 180 degrees opposite of what the truth is.

Sure you can matthew romney does it every day.

Matthew,

Here are two quotes from prominent Democrats from 2002/2003. These comments were well after the search had begun for WMD... Now Senator Kerry was a member of the intelligence committee, so of all people he should have questioned if the information that was assembled was not correct...

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force– if necessary– to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA), Oct. 9, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction… So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA), Jan. 23, 2003

"On January 25, 2004, on Fox News, Chris Wallace asked Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry why he had voted against the resolution to confront Saddam Hussein after his invasion of Kuwait but voted for the resolution to invade Iraq. Kerry said in response: "We were misled; misled not only in the intelligence, but misled in the way that the president took us to war. ...I think there's been an enormous amount of exaggeration, stretching, deception."

KERRY "With respect to this time, I voted to give the authority to the president to use force under a set of promises by the president as to how he would do it: build a legitimate international coalition, exhaust the remedies of the United Nations, and go to war as a last resort. He broke every single one of those promises."

KERRY "When they talked about weapons of mass destruction that could be deployed in 45 minutes, there were none.

When they talked about aerial devices that could deliver, there were none. When they talked about the linkage to Al Qaida that they've now exaggerated, but they themselves said then there was no smoking
gun. They said it. Now they say there was a linkage.

I think there's been an enormous amount of exaggeration, stretching, deception."

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mostert/040208

JoAnne---makes sense to me. I remained a registered Republican for many years after I stopped voting for them in national elections because in my community the primary races for local government were fought among Republicans. That has changed over the years but even if it hadn't, the GOP war on women made me realize that I couldn't remain part of a party that wouldn't treat me with respect and wouldn't tolerate dissent.

I wonder how it is that Colin Powell stays a Republican.

Steeler -

I suspect that Colin Powell - like the few remaining moderate Republicans out there - is still clinging to the belief that his party will one day wake up and realize that they're losing the overall war by focusing so much on the social issue skirmishes - as well as by willfully ignoring the rapidly shifting demographics in so many parts of the country - including my little old (and it's literally both) suburban county.

Hey, this might also interest you - remember how our Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi was so out in front on the whole Voter ID law that dominated politics here this summer and early fall? Well, his state senate district includes the borough where I work, and on the way home last night I heard a campaign ad for him on the radio. It touted the usual vague "accomplishments" about creating jobs and cleaning up Harrisburg, etc., etc - but strangely enough, there was not ONE WORD about him leading the fight for that Voter ID law, which I'd have thought was by far his shining moment. The crowning achievement of a long career.

Weird, huh? You'd almost think he wasn't proud of it. And we know THAT can't be the case......

Famously and traditionally Republican cities in Orange County California, Irvine and Anaheim, now report more Democrats than Republicans in their population. I have to say that I was very happy that my state didn't vote for a teabagger governor two years ago.

JoAnne---hope he is defeated; the Pa legislature is an embarrassment. Here a Senator from a safe district is running ads about voter ID rather than re-election ads. The first group urged people to get proper ID; the more recent ads stress that no photo id is required and what to do if challenged. How sad that this is necessary. And of course we don't have early voting.

Ricardo,

That shift is due entirely to the demographic change occurring in Orange county. Latino voters have increased in Orange county...

No...we didn't vote for a teabagger, instead we voted for a moron or a stooge of the unions. Please explain why both both of California's House of Reprsentatives and Senate have been dominated by Democrats and we lead the nation in highest sales tax, lowest in funding for education, but yet have the wealthiest public unions in the nation? Explain why Brown is going yet again after our pocketbooks? Prop. 30 is advertised as a tax to help schools, but the fine print says that the money can be earmarked for anything (i.e., funding the union pensions). So yes, while we might not have elected a Tea Party candidate we ended with someone far far worse....

Like you?

Own my business but like to drop in throughout the day if I can

Bend over...... and get over yourself

My mother is 4 months shy of her 100th birthday. She has been a life long REPUB. but voted in 2008 and now in 2012 for President Obama. She sees that the direction the GOP is going is not the right path. She's seen a LOT in her lifetime and is no dummy!

Wm

"go along, to get along."

sadly that is exactly how we deal with out of control and out of touch government. They shovel it out and we eat it and if we complain no one hears us. It's a sad time and I hate knowing that the younger generations will grow up learning to "go along, to get along" as the correct way of life.

I have seen the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Rights, and the Vietnam War Protest. The younger generation has seen Occupy Wall Street which the government squashed and made almost illegal to protest as we have a right to assemble and protest. They barely teach History anymore to make them understand the struggle our founders went through and what they left for us. Sad

Suzq- What a wonderful example your Mother is for you and your family. Enjoy her as long as you can. I lost my Mother at 96 and a great Aunt at 111! Imagine all they've seen change over the years!

Obama/Biden 2012

Robert -

They also rarely teach the hard lessons learned by the Great Depression - unregulated financial industries, wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, and massive wage disparity lead to financial ruin.

"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it...." There are certainly some eerie parallels between the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

TNSEVOL

true, and not to start any partisan stuff with anybody but the feeling I am getting down the back of my neck is that the new trend is to try and push women back into the Kitchen. Get them back in the Kitchen, barefoot and pregnant and eventually there will be plentiful jobs for men that need a job. June Cleaver is the picture I am getting. Strange but if that is the long term plan we will likely eventually accept and conform to the new order of things. It's like a weird reality show, politicians that want the ability to make us all believe and worship how they do and to accept the high class low class with no middle. There are strange parallels to old European beliefs and then the 50's way of life.

I am a registered Democrat but usually vote for best candidate not party last time I voted for MaCain but after the republicans action and statements the last four years for the first time in my life I will vote straight democratic ticket this year. Obama has done a great job with the obstacles he has faced and yes I am better off now that I was four years ago.

Exactly, Rachelle. The difference between a "Romney bankruptcy" and a "Hussein bankruptcy" was that Hussein chose the illegal path. He screwed over the legal bondholders and illegally gave ownership to the unions.

Of course Romney's way would have stripped retirees of pension benefits and broken up the union but that's OK to you people. Assuming that anyone would lend money even with a guarantee, which in the worst of the crisis wouldn't happen.

Rachelle

In campaign fairness Romney did make a Television quote "Let Detroit go Bankrupt" and in his mind I would imagine he believed everyone knew about his 2008 opinion letter spelling out his idea of them going bankrupt. After he said that on TV he came back and tried to explain it but it was brushed off as damage control.

Most never heard of this letter or article that published it in the I believe the NYT but a lot of people saw him on TV just say those 4 words that are being held against him. Not a new campaign maneuver, it is the most common finger pointing thing they ALL do.

In all fairness I had to say this, that said I am an Independent voter and for the record I would not trust Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan with anymore control of anything than they have right now. Neither of the candidates have shown an actual plan for the next four years but I can't vote for the party that wants me to worship as they do, wants to mandate women's health and choice, I do not want my future Medicare and Social Security to be touched by them (not without a reimbursement check for the last 42 years), and I certainly do not agree with his plan to reduce taxes on everybody. Cutting Capital Gains Tax and cutting individuals market investment profit tax helps no one making less than $500,000.00 per year, it certainly will not help the average family of 4 making almost $50K per year. Next, why the hell do we want to spend more on the military, it is a huge reason our debt is so bad now. Joint Chiefs said they do not want more, more ships more tanks, nothing (hence the Horses and Bayonet Jab), they want better technology.

Steeler Fan is right, Romney's plan was to fire management, reduce labor and labor cost and their pensions. It was in the opinion letter that he wrote.

*shrugs*

The Federal Government backing post-bankruptcy financing assumes that there would have been private capital available in the market in 2009 for their to be loans for the government to back. Consumer protections do not equal financing for operations. There was no capital available in 2009. The industries would have been liquidated.

Your money in the bank is 'guaranteed' too. But the government doesn't actually spend any money for that unless there is a run on the banks or an institution goes belly up. Mitt Romney was not in favor of proactively saving the industry. He made an assumption that the liquidation would not happen - an assumption that in retrospect was probably wrong. That would have ended up costing the the midwest hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of jobs if he'd been president.

In conclusion, the fact checkers are checking his op ed piece to see whether he did mention any government involvement in the 'managed bankruptcy' and he did slip that in there. But him using that to indicate he would have been in favor of the government actually doing anything active to save the auto industry is just as disingenous as the president claiming him saying that 'no act of terror' line of September 12 meant that he was actively labeling Benghazi as a terrorist attack.

If there are political consequences for either to face, then both should face them. But don't be deceived by Romney's reinterpretation of his op-ed now. He had no intention of any government involvement in what was going to happen to GM, Ford and Chrysler.

I know, Steeler. Instead, Hussein's way stripped LEGAL BONDHOLDERS of their pension benefits. Some of these LEGAL BONDHOLDERS were teachers and firefighters unions. So Hussein sided with UAW unions, and SCREWED TEACHERS/FIREFIGHTERS unions. Picking winners and losers, that's the Hussein way. Whether it's legal or not. He "won."

Rachelle -

Most fact checkers did not say Romney's statement was accurate.

"I know he keeps saying, 'You want to take Detroit bankrupt.' Well, the president took Detroit bankrupt. You took General Motors bankrupt. You took Chrysler bankrupt. So when you say that I wanted to take the auto industry bankrupt, you actually did. And I think it's important to know that that was a process that was necessary to get those companies back on their feet, so they could start hiring more people. That was precisely what I recommended and ultimately what happened." - Romney at debate

That is patently untrue. If you read the text of Romney's Op-Ed, he three times denounced a Government bailout, saying it would destroy the auto industry.

Excerpts from Romney's NY Times Op-Ed on the bailout:

If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.....

Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check....

new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. ....retiree benefits must be reduced......

...the federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk....

In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.

In short, Romney OPPOSED a federally-funded bailout and wanted a privately-managed bankruptcy that would have significantly lowered wages and benefits for the auto workers in favor of the investors.

A privately-funded option was floated to several banks and private equity firms, but in the midst of the financial crisis NO private company could or would finance the bankruptcy. In fact, even Romney's former firm Bain Capital declined!

For Romney to say a government bailout was "precisely" what he proposed is a flat-out unmitigated LIE, and that he now supports it is yet another complete reversal of position.

Oscar - there was nothing illegal about it. GM and Chrysler submitted bankruptcy plans financed by the government that were legally approved.

The only difference is normally the workers get screwed and lose their pensions, this time they got to keep them. This HAD to happen in order to ensure the integrity of a supply chain that was covered under the same pension agreements via GM spin-offs (Delphi).

Do some research, check your facts, you are WAY off base.

Robert, I hope you realize that the "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" was a HEADLINE THAT THE NYT CAME UP WITH. Those words did not come out of Romney's mouth. IT WAS SOMETHING THE NYT SAID.

Mitt Romney wanted go guarantee loans that no bank would give. Maybe he wanted BAIN to buy out GM, but couldn't get anyone to go with him on the deal and now is pissed because the US Taxpayers have made money on the deal.

The reality is, Mitt Romney's op ed piece was titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." Romney could have changed the headline, but he didn't. Just like his party is all in favor of rape, so it is also in favor of destroying America. THAT is what selling your soul to Grover Norquist, the Tea Party and corporate interests does.

Robert, I hope you realize that the "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" was a HEADLINE THAT THE NYT CAME UP WITH. Those words did not come out of Romney's mouth. IT WAS SOMETHING THE NYT SAID

Romney repeated those words, though, even putting them into his own campaign ad (before he reversed his position). His Op-Ed advocated a privately-managed bankruptcy that would have fundamentally changed the US auto industry and decimated the wages and benefits of American workers.

Again, check your facts and get a clue.

Apparently you haven't listened to what even lifelong Republicans are saying. These words came from people who worked with Governor Romney and supported him in 2008.

"There was NO private money being invested in ANYTHING at the time."

The Detroit newspaper endorses Romney!!!

OMG===ObamaMustGoOoo!!!!

Oscar: Democrats don't call women stupid. We call how Republicons view and treat women as stupid.

Do you understand the difference: Democrats respect women and know they can make their own decisions. Republicons do not respect women and think they (mostly men) have to make decisions for women.

Now this is respect we can all believe in. LMAO @dirp

How can you not view this as an assault on the legal right of a woman to choose what to do with her body? If you were truly a "Concern Citizen" ('ad' you say you are) you would not vote for Romney/Ryan.

She has no intelligence and just spews whatever the right wing media she's listened to that day says. Most of us have gotten past even reading her drivel. It will give you headaches - but sometimes it is good for a very sad laugh!

The fact that you claim to be an Independent; Self-respecting Hard-working Woman is sad. You missed the main ingredient - Intelligent, and clearly you aren't!

Ttth, there are significant differences between treating an entire group of people (women) as being incapable of making their own personal medical decisions and calling out a single person for parroting media pundits. For you to select a single outlier situation to look at does NOT disprove dirp's statement.

Oscar, the Republican platform plank to get rid of ALL abortion rights, plus the restrictions currently being placed on clinics, and the stated objective of Gov. Romeny to defund Planned Parenthood are clearly FACTS that can be used to show the overall attitude of the Republican Party and their efforts to retrict the individual personal right to privacy and current access to health care that women have. Whereas, all you've expressed is an unsupported and false opinion.

Women are women. These two that the three comments were directed at are both Romney supporters. Dems think that anyone who isn't for Obama is "voting against their own interest" and that is the only position that they will support. They are NOT allowing for the free thinking and ability to make their own decisions that the dems advocate. If you don't agree with them, you are stupid and incapable of making those choices. That is not respect by any means. GET IT?

TTTH-Women are women. These two that the three comments were directed at are both Romney supporters. Dems think that anyone who isn't for Obama is "voting against their own interest"

That is totally accurate. Women that do vote for Romney are voting against women's interest. That's also true of people outside of the 1%,people of color,and other groups that the Republicans care nothing for. Maybe it is "disrespectful" to tell the truth.But its no less the truth. For those people to vote for Romney,is like the chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.

TttH, you are looking for an excuse to accuse others of the blatent disrespect for GROUPS of people that is completely advocated for by the current Republican candidates and Party.

Specifics: 47%, 30%, "right to life" amendments, abortion plank, etc.

Your position is seriously flawed, sir.

Suzq- well said and so true.

Obama/Biden 2012

To the Rethuglicans women are just objects not real people. They want to shrink government so small it would fit in a womans vagina.

Woman: Pay attention to the shiny object over here, don't worry about Social Security, Medicaid, Debt, Unemployment, Jobs.

Suzyq: Vote like the lives of the women and female children who come behind you depend on it.

It is also a vote for the good of all, even the people who are to stupid to see it.

4 more 4 44 4 all! ☺

Suzq, what a joke! "reproductive rights?" Are you kidding me? By "reproductive rights," do you mean the right to murder your unborn child just because you accidentally got pregnant and don't really feel like having it?

Romney has clearly stated that he beleives abortion should be allowed in instances of rape, incenst, and health of the mother. In what other instance to you believe you have the right to kill your baby? Because you made a bad decision and don't want to deal with it?

To all those women out there gullible enough to fall for Obama's whole platform of "women's rights," What "women's rights" has Obama given you during his four years in office that you didn't already have?

Do you really think he's going to be able to wave a magic wand and change people's opinions about rape? Or magically force employers to pay you equal wages? Discrimination based on gender is already illegal! If you feel you'er being treated unfairly, talk to your boss about it or get a different job if you feel you're really so deserving of more money.

And pay for your own healthcare. Buy your own birth control. If you're such an independent woman, stop depending on men like Obama to hand you things on a silver platter. Romney, as president, would move women forward--not backward--by removing government dependency. Obama tries to make it sound like he cares about women's rights so much, but he's just trying to get your vote!

Move forward by taking responsibility for your own life and advancing democracy and freedom--not more government dependency and rhetoric. Think before you just believe in empty phrases like "Forward!" and "Grow the economy from the middle class out," and "women's rights," because they are meaningless. But he knows people like you will be swayed easily by your irrational emotions.

From,

An Independent, Self-respecting, Hard-working Woman

Votefordemocracy - No we don't believe President Obama is going to be able to change ignorant people's opinions about rape. However, we don't intend to make a person President who supports someone who believes that a woman who gets pregnant due to rape is carrying a child that is God's will. We won't put a President into office who believes women are 2nd class citizens because he is going to try to pass laws to make us 2nd class citizens and take away our rights - as well as those of gays; anyone who isn't white and stupid.

The fact that you claim to be an Independent; Self-respecting Hard-working Woman is sad. You missed the main ingredient - Intelligent, and clearly you aren't!

Obama/Biden 2012

Romney has the National stage

Waiting for him to say

"Rape is evil and a sin."

They say he shares my Christian principles.

Votefordemocracy-

There are several inaccurcies in your post.

Romney has clearly stated that he beleives abortion should be allowed in instances of rape, incenst, and health of the mother.

Romney said in the Republican primaries he would "gladly" sign a bill outlawing ALL abortions. His running mate Paul Ryan, most of the Republican Senate candidates, and the Republican Party platform all advocate outlawing ALL abortions, no exceptions. Do you trust Romney to hold his (latest) position against his own party?

Do you really think he's going to be able to wave a magic wand and change people's opinions about rape? Or magically force employers to pay you equal wages? Discrimination based on gender is already illegal!

The law previously had a statute of limitations on filing a alwsuit, so a woman had no real recourse if she found out she was being paid less for years. Romney failed to endorse the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

If you feel you'er being treated unfairly, talk to your boss about it or get a different job if you feel you're really so deserving of more money.

Seriously? That's your answer?

And pay for your own healthcare. Buy your own birth control. If you're such an independent woman, stop depending on men like Obama to hand you things on a silver platter. Romney, as president, would move women forward--not backward--by removing government dependency.

Most women DO pay for their own healthcare, they just want contraception coverage to be part of WHAT THEY PAID FOR! Women are paying for their own birth control via the insurance they PAID FOR!

Think before you just believe in empty phrases like "Forward!" and "Grow the economy from the middle class out," and "women's rights," because they are meaningless. But he knows people like you will be swayed easily by your irrational emotions.

Wow - women who support Pres. Obama are "irrational" and "emotional"? That is not something I would ever say, I disagree 100% with that characterization.

"Women's rights" is an empty, meaningless phrase? another 'WOW'.

An Independent, Self-respecting, Hard-working Woman

You sure don't seem to have much respect for other women who work just as hard, are just as independent, and believe THEY should be making decisions about their bodies instead of politicians.

Those are the kind of women I respect and admire.

Oh man, if I held every stupid democratic opinion I've ever heard against president Obama, he would sound pretty terrible too. Christian ideology supports the believe that God is in control of everything and has a higher purpose for even the worst moments of our lives. A baby could be a blessing. Try to see something from another point of view for a change rather than just assuming the worst. You know that man did not mean to say the woman deserved to get raped in any way. And I'm not making a personal argument against abortion here--that's not my point (though I do oppose it in my personal life.) My point is that Romeny is in favor of abortion in the case of rape, so your point is...pointless.

Romeny would not make women 2nd class citizens. You're spouting off democrat speaking points that don't even make sense. In what way would that happen? He wouldn't take away any right but the right to abort your child just because "oops" I didn't mean to get pregnant. He's in favor of abortion in the cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother. Once again, I ask, in what other instance do you think it should be okay?

And as for intellegence? I'm not the one whoe thinks I'm GAINING freedom and rights by having my independence TAKEN AWAY from me. I can provide for my own family and take responsibilty for my own actions without making the rest of the country pay for my mistakes with their increasing taxes.

You're being sweet-talked into voting for a man who couldn't care less about what rights you actually have. Take control of your own life and don't depend on Obama to take care of you.

@vote for democracy

Strange all those who post their thoughts on abortion.

Never come out and openly condemn rape.

I am Pro-Life

I care about the life of the victim.

Votefordemocracy -

I beg to differ with about Romoney! Romoney will take what rights we have AWAY! If he wins HE WILL try to end Planned Parenthood which is responsible for birth control for many women - young and older! Very little of their work revolves around abortion. He will over turn Roe v Wade by his appointments to the SCOTUS. Think about someone other than yourself! Walk a mile in someone elses shoes.

There are many younger, unprepared women who are under-educated, emotionally not ready to become mothers. Maybe they've been rape victims, maybe victims of their own poor conditions, maybe drug or alcohol users and become pregnant. Who would adopt those babies? Not YOU I'm sure. Americans want perfect babies! So these young women' best option MAY BE an abortion. IF they choose one, that's their business and they will answer to their God. It's not your business NOR any old white male in Washington DC.

I am an Independent and this with my brain not with the REPUB. talking points.

Votefordemocracy (but not really) I'm not being sweet-talked into anything. That's your moronic stance. See - I actually do my research and know what I'm talking about instead of raptly listening to the ever changing stance of Romney who was against abortion; now he's for it; then who knows. He has said in the past he would be against abortions in all cases - just changed his stance for this run for President. See - I actually pay attention.

I take contol of and responsibility for my own life. I don't EXPECT President Obama to take care of me - I do that quite well thank you. But you are a liar. President Obama, who has two daughters, truly cares about people - especially women - unlike Romney who cares for no one but himself!

Don't you EVER talk down to me. You're the one who isn't paying attention but is buying every lie spoonfed to you by those who know you're too ignorant to understand what they plan.

Obama/Biden 2012

Vote for Democracy:

Just a couple of things. Do you think if President Romney was in the White House, he would have vetoed any of the 30 bills that passed the House since 2010 if there wasn't a Democratic majority in the Senate to block them?

And assuming you go for the obvious answer of 'no,' then do you suppose any Supreme Court nominee that a theoretical President Romney would nominate would be inclined to uphold said law once it reached the Supreme Court?

This is not an illusion. This is what these people have actively tried to do ever since they reached majority status in the House.

And if you somehow answered 'yes' to the first question, what exactly is it about Mitt Romney has you convinced that he would buck his party on this issue?

Seeking & Michael -

Very thoughful, intelligent posts.

Too bad some people will believe Romoney won't change, when ALL he's done is change.

Romoney doesn't say what he believes nor believes in what he says - he's scary!

"He's in favor of abortion in the cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother. Once again, I ask, in what other instance do you think it should be okay?"

Couple of other things that have been rolling around in my head ever since the 'rape exception' argument bubbled up again. Here are a couple of facts about rape prosecution. Only 5 out of every 46 rape reports to the police result in a conviction. The actual trial does not last that long, but if a defendant pleads not guilty, then the proceedings leading up to the trial average between six months to a year.

So here's the issue. At what point, knowing that rape is a crime that is actually very rarely successfully prosecuted, do you allow the woman who has been raped to have the abortion?

After a conviction? So at that point, you would be mandating third trimester abortions?

After the accusation? So what happens if later on the defendant is convicted? Do you then charge the woman with having an illegal abortion? That would probably result in a lot fewer rapes being reported if there's a possibility that if you report it, YOU might end up in prison rather than your rapist, don't you think?

After the grad jury votes that there's enough evidence to go to trial? That's probably a little more feasible, but the question of what happens if you allow the abortion, but then the defendant is acquitted remains?

Who makes the decision? The trial judge? The doctor who performs the rape screen? The police?

Having a rape exception for something that is otherwise a criminal offense creates a massive array of issues, some of which might even work the other way. Suppose the conservatives are very liberal in the way they apply the rape exception. Suppose that all the woman has to do to get an abortion is to accuse the man and a doctor finds the accusation plausible. Do you suppose that unscrupulous women might actually use a rape accusation to get an abortion and then drop the charges afterward?

In practical terms, a 'rape exception' is almost impossible to practically implement. So in short order, you would be stuck again with whether or not it's appropriate in this nation to legislate one group's religious views over another group. Claiming a 'rape exception' is a smoke screen, because every Republican legislator who claims to have one knows exactly what I am saying right now. In reality, if abortion is banned, there will be no rape exception because having a 'rape exception' to the abortion law would basically be the same as having an 'it was an emergency exception' to the speeding laws.

I guess Michael isn't going to condemn rape.

Just like the rest of the GOP.

I'm a member of the GOP now?

"So in short order, you would be stuck again with whether or not it's appropriate in this nation to legislate one group's religious views over another group."

Was it this line that gave me away?

I am wondering how many women who are going to vote for Romney/Ryan use birth control. The CDC gives the statistic that 99% of women who ever has sex have used some form of birth control. There are only a few forms of birth control that do not use interrupting the implanting of a fertilized ovum as the basis of their effectiveness: abstinence, rhythm method, condoms, diaphragms, and barrier types like foam or gel. The types of birth control used by most women are the ones most efficient in preventing pregnancy, (save abstinence which of course would be 100% effective), these are the pill, the patch, and iuds. These all work to make the uterus an inhospitable place for the implantation of the products of conception. So, I assume all these women voting for Romney/Ryan must use some form of birth control that actually prevents fertilization, that none of them are on the pill, or have an iud, or use the patch. If this isn't the case, if the Ryan/Aiken "personhood" amendment is passed, I maintain they, along with the rest of us, will have to have to choose another form of birth control. Perhaps they will choose . . . abstinence; it's 100% effective, but if they chose rhythm, or condom, or one of the others, their chance at unintended pregnancy increases.

Now, if they are wealthy or even comfortable, perhaps that will be no problem for them. But if you are a mother with two kids living below the poverty line, whose husband has perhaps a minimum wage job and she might have a part time low wage job, or perhaps the father in these hard times skipped out and she is left alone, another child will be a catastrophe for her and her family; another child might cause desperate problems in finding enough money for food, diapers, just routine care. So when people say that the Republican party is not in a war against women, I would refer them to this situation. You want people to have babies regardless of whether they can care for them or not. You want women to endure the after effects of devastating acts of violence against them. Men cannot get pregnant, so women are left to deal with the results of sex, which it seems to me takes both sexes, whether is consensual or not. In the case of rape, the man doing the violence does not have to deal with the physical and psychological consequences of that violence, it's the woman who is the victim, a living, breathing, suffering person. You may believe that life starts at conception, but not everyone does. And even at that there is something to be said about self-defense, about the defense of the self that was violated and abused not having to endure more violation and more responsibility for something she did not chose, something that was forced, in the truest sense of the word, on her.

All the women who vote for Romney/Ryan ticket and take the pill, have an iud, use the patch, are voting for that party to have the ultimate say in your family planning, to possibly take away your choices and leave you using methods that are less effictive and more likely to fail. Are you ready to have children at the government's whim? Are you ready to force mothers already in economic peril to have more children? Are you ready to force your daughters or your sisters or your mother to carry to term the child of a rapist, or the result of incest? Are you ready to lose your daughters, sisters, mothers, to a pregnancy that might kill her or drive her over the edge of sanity? If you answer these questions yes, then you would have to live in that would of your creation. But don't be surprised if the rest of us do everything we can to avoid living in that world.

Don't worry, the Right will be here soon enough. FOX's 24-7 coverage of Benghazi does have commercial breaks.

... says the guy who is posting on the same message board at the exact same time as the people he's ridiculing.

You realize you look like kind of a tool now, right?

blackcatwhitecat - clearly Billy Colorado hasn't learned how to multi-task. Actually he probably hasn't learned much since he's flinging the same old Republican stupidity!

Obama/Biden 2012

I'm actually at work, dink!

Billy Colorado - I believe YOU'RE the dink since you accused the rest of us (some who ARE at work) of being on welfare! DINK!!!!

Obama/Biden 2012

Okay.

Now connect the dots.

It's not hard.

Here, I'll give you a minute or two...

Here, connect these dots!

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

Uh huh.

So do you suppose that if Romney manages to get himself elected, you'll get whiplash from having to reverse your heartfelt opinions about the deficit that fast?

Billy Colorado - we do deserve better so we are voting out as many of the Republican obstructionists as possible in November. That way, we can get things moving forward faster - for the good of the country!

Obama/Biden 2012

Typical response - you completely ignore that facts and deny the truth. Obama is nothing but lip service and has not lived up to anything that he said he would do for this country. Yet, let's give him four more years to do nothing. What do you think maybe this time he will actually rebuild the roads and bridges that he said he would do back in 2008?

Patriotism means to stand up for the country. It does not mean stand up for the president. - Theodore Roosevelt

And I'm retired - worked since I was 15 yrs old. Paid my way the whole time and now am hanging on to my social security with a DEATH grip.

The only reason you bringing up RCP because it makes romney number look closer to Obama. But go ahead and let RCP make your day. Obama only 2 or 3 states and its OVER. How many does Romney? Don't worry I'll wait.

The bottom line is all the President needs to do is get out the vote and we win. So everyone be sure to vote. If the traditional Blue sates go Democratic,and Oh,Wi,Ia,battleground states go for the President we win. NH,Nev,Co,Va,Fl,would be nice to have but the road to victory could be traveled without them. I'm not worried,if we all vote,we win.

Why do you think Romney will improve on that? He hasn't promised a "balanced budget" until the end of two terms or after he leaves office. And, in the meantime, he says he won't INCREASE the deficit, not eliminate it. That puts both Parties at roughly $24 trillion in debt, by 2022.

Don't worry...$50,000 isn't what it used to be. The size of the debt isn't important, it's the ratio of cumulative debt to annual GDP, the latter of which is the key factor to the economy.

John-4274116

Cute number ... I would like to see it staggered as to income/wealth.

john: Romney won't reduce the debt, his budget will increase it per the CBO. And Romney's policies will put more of a burden on the middle-class.

Remember: Romney/Ryan said they won't tell us what they will do because then we won't vote for them....is that really the type of leadership you want?

Billy Colorado...cheating on your boss? With the crisp Colorado air today, how can your brain be so fuzzy about the rights of women? The rights to our bodies equal economy.

I don't believe that Roe vs. Wade will be reversed, I don't believe that my tax dollars should pay for abortions, I don't believe that Planned Parenthood should receive $500m in support from the Gov't. I do believe that things happen, but hopefully women are smart enough to consider safe sex as well as men, so they don't have to make a choice. And I seriously do not believe that abortions for rape, incest, etc. will be outlawed.

And you would love to have my job!

BC-I don't believe that Roe vs. Wade will be reversed, I don't believe that my tax dollars should pay for abortions, I don't believe that Planned Parenthood should receive $500m in support from the Gov't. I do believe that things happen, but hopefully women are smart enough to consider safe sex as well as men, so they don't have to make a choice. And I seriously do not believe that abortions for rape, incest, etc. will be outlawed.

So what to you base those beliefs on. The Republican Party leadership WANTS to overturn Roe vs. Wade.And if Romney can stack the Supreme Court with more right-wing judges,its a done deal. His Republican VP,and the Teaparty candidates have stated on TV that they want to outlaw abortions for rape and incest. Do you not believe what they're saying,and that they are lying. Be honest with yourself and us. Either you really just don't care,or your making a tragic mistake in not listening to their own words.

Good post. Get Real.

What I cannot understand is if the Bible is the guideline to the way one lives their life, and we should use Gods words as that guideline, how come the Republicans never use the the words that God spoke.

Such as Genesis 2-7. This one should be the most important one for them.

Now wait a minute. So now you're saying that Obama and the democrats use the words that God intended, but Romney and the Republicans don't?

So I guess it was ok for Obama's preacher whom married Barrack and Michelle, they both went to his church for 20 years, being a man of God would say - Quote " It is not God bless America, it is God damn America"

I just don't think that Romneys preacher ever said that.

Excellent post, Billy!

Ramblings from the left continue I see.

GM filed bankruptcy. Chrysler filed bankruptcy. The city of Detroit is bankrupt. Hoffa is a crook, just like his dead daddy. Fools.

Women don't get mammograms at PP, but they do get exams and referrals. Planned Parenthood is the only health care many women get. And Bishop Romney wants to defund it.

Amy -

You are so right!

And this is not the Democrat Party that you knew, it is not even close to what the party was when Clinton was president. This is something different and I know that we will never agree, because you think Romney is bad for the country and I believe Obama is bad for the country. I don't listen to what Obama says, he says just what he thinks everybody wants to hear, I watch what he does and another four years of him and I fear we will lose this country!

And if Romney doesn't get in and Obama is re-elected then I guess the far left democrats will then choose 2-3 supreme court justices. What a treat that will be, as clearly we will lose many of the freedoms granted under the constitution. You don't think about that do you, well I do, because if that happens, I believe that it is quite plausible that this country could erupt into a civil war. If they would have had the internet back in 1862 the civil war would have started much faster and I fear this country is headed for violence.

BC-You don't think about that do you, well I do, because if that happens, I believe that it is quite plausible that this country could erupt into a civil war. If they would have had the internet back in 1862 the civil war would have started much faster and I fear this country is headed for violence.

Do you seriously think that people today will except the destruction of our rights that the Romney/Ryan plans envision. I read over the Romney plan for his Presidency yesterday.And even though it is very short on details,the titles of each section speak of curtailing peoples rights and expanding power for the 1%. That is a sure recipe for violence. The America today is not the America of the 1950's. People today will not calmly accept going backwards into the old social structure of master and servant. The right-wing needs to wake-up before its too late. And they bring on what they most fear.

Donna those c.e.o.'s will never take care of the workers that helped make their company,or business because they simply do not care it is a all for me and nothing for you society.

Well said Donna...most people who will be voting for Romney will be doing so for either of the 4 reasons noted; (1) their blind loyalty to party; (2) too bias to even know it (3) they are completely ignorant of the facts and (4) all of the above. This country has amnesia when it comes to the Republican primaries (even though we watched it for nearly two years)...New Gingrich said it best about Mitt Romney. He called Romney and liar and then said, "If they will lie to you to be President, then they will lie to you as President". Now when questioned further by Bob Schieffer, Gingrich said he would support Romney even knowing that he is a liar and the reporters simply laughed in disbelief..this is where we are today...which is a sad commentary. Now it wasnt just Gingrich, this was a consistent theme from Santorum, Trump, Huckabee, McCain and Perry...this speaks volume. But what's more troubling is his overly zealous personality we saw in the first two debates..this centers on his inability to listen to others when major decisions need to be make...the over zealous personality combined with the lack of integrity points me to one other President....Richard Nixon....And have we truly learned from our history??? I think not...

You are a lunatic...and totally ignorant of the facts...this government is no more bigger than it was under George Bush..how so? By investing in financial institutions and GM to prevent a run-on of business failures and stabilizing the country caused by the Bush tax cuts that nearly sank this country??? By investing more in education, so that our children can thrive educationally so that we can remain competitive in the world and not outsource the jobs elsewhere for others to perform them?...By investing in new technologies so that we can stay ahead of the world? By investing in our military so that we can bring our soldiers home so that we can start saving money? Come with facts, not fear mongering..and God will Bless America if we do the right thing...