Romney failed veterans
Yes, I’m blaming Romney for failing veterans. He ran a piss-poor campaign to attract veterans. It’s been eating away at me that half of veterans in Virginia voted for Obama, if Fox News is to be believed. Of course, veterans in Virginia are going to be the hardest hit when sequestration takes hold because of the large presence of defense contractors there and the fact that many veterans are on their payroll there. But, back to the campaign. To their credit, the Romney campaign asked for help from milblogs early on, well, they reached out to Blackfive who reached out to the rest of us. I pledged that I would comment on the campaign in regards to politics related to veterans. But, you know what? That was the last we heard from them. Maybe others heard about it, but TAH didn’t.
You might remember that I wrote a piece last month about the Romney campaign and veterans. That was because I had to pester John Noonan, the Romney campaign’s defense policy adviser, because he happened to be one of my Facebook friends. Yes, I had to get answers on Romney’s veteran policy on Facebook.
Most of the issues I asked Noonan about, I also had to provide links to news stories because he didn’t know what I was talking about. Most of the news stories links were already on TAH. For example, when I asked Noonan about the Obama Administration shutting down Tricare Prime, he admitted in the email that I published as a post that he didn’t know anything about it because the Obama campaign hadn’t said anything about it. Why would they admit that they were screwing veterans in their campaign? It was Romney’s job to point it out, but he didn’t.
Just like in the debate, when Romney brought up sequestration, Obama’s answer was that sequestration isn’t going to happen. That short answer to a complicated question. Apparently, defense contractors think it’s going to happen, they’re already laying off people in prepartion of it. But Romney let Obama get away with his lie that the law wasn’t going into effect instead of pressing the issue.
The weekend of Hurricane Sandy, I wrote to Noonan again on Facebook and told him that I knew the campaign was going to cease out of respect for the tragedy and that they should mount an offensive on the blogs and let us carry Romney’s water for him during the campaign blackout. I didn’t hear anything back from him, not a word. Well, except the one video he sent everyone about Bill Clinton, which I dutifully posted.
Now, I’m not so conceited that I think I can influence entire elections with my little corner of the internet, but, if political campaigns can’t take advantage of the reach some of us have, they really don’t want to win. Do you honestly think that Obama would have got half of the veteran vote in Virginia if they had heard that Tricare Prime was being shut down in five western states in April? Everyone on this blog knows it, why didn’t the Romney campaign know it, and once they were told about it, why didn’t they hit Obama with it?
Yeah, Romney failed veterans by taking our votes for granted and it may have cost him the election.
November 8th, 2012 at 10:34 am
John, Romney ran a decent, pandering-free campaign.
One can fault him for using that model because he didn’t win. But if pandering to every damn splinter group is necessary to win elections, then we have a much, much bigger problem in America, one that will lead to our collapse in the none-too-distant future.
So I’m not particularly impressed with this post. It’s another highway sign with an arrow pointing to “PERDITION.”
November 8th, 2012 at 10:45 am
Truthfully, it is not the candidate as much as it is our citizens. Look beyond the Presidential campaign, so many corrupt people either kept their positions or were elected in spite of their history. Jesse Jackson Jr. won and he’s been in a mental hospital since May and is under investigation for corruption! Elizabeth Warren, fake Indian and she practiced law without a license. Claire McCaskill, doesn’t pay taxes and her husband took stimulus money and worst of all Alan Grayson is back!!! For the life of me, I can’t wrap my head around WTF people are thinking! The soul of our country is rotting and it shows in who we elect to represent us!
November 8th, 2012 at 10:48 am
I don’t know why any of you guys serve (or served), but I’m not in this for the college money and ugly military women. I want the greatest and strongest country in the world to also be and stay the richest, and if that means we have to cut defense spending and stop throwing pallets of money at contractors so we don’t spend ourselves into debtor’s prison, then that’s what we need to do.
This makes a hell of a lot more sense than killing Big Bird and having him for Thanksgiving dinner. If you’re cutting weight and your diet consists primarily of grilled chicken and ice cream, guess which one you’re better off eating less of?
We are the ice cream, gentlemen, and we must be prepared to deal with this fact. The blind allegiance of servicemembers and veterans to conservatives and the military-industrial complex must end if we are to survive and prosper as a country.
November 8th, 2012 at 10:51 am
Folks here in Fairfax have little idea as to what they just voted for…
November 8th, 2012 at 11:11 am
Passing on help from the milblog community is a failure of imagination. And probably a failure of senior campaign advisers of knowing what a milblog is.
November 8th, 2012 at 11:14 am
@3 So what you are saying is that defense spending,as mandated in the constitution must be cut, but the non-sustainable entitlement and ‘green energy’ programs can stay fat and happy? And on top of that, we are going to be adding to our government spending once Obamacare kicks in next year.
I understand that cuts will need to be made all around in order to balance the budget, but show me what else is being cut. It looks like the only thing being cut IS defense, how is that going to balance the budget if other programs spending is not equally curbed.
What has happened is that those on the dole have discovered that they can vote for ‘bread and circuses’ on the taxpayer’s dime. It was the downfall of Rome, it WILL be the downfall of us, if we are not careful.
November 8th, 2012 at 11:16 am
There IS no budget. Has not been one since 2009.
November 8th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Beat me to it, Ex. Now, @#3, how about we stop throwing pallets of money into the real entitlements, like never-ending unemployment comp, SSI for the folks who’d rather file for some BS disability than work?
Gotta agree with RayRay, we have entered the era of Bread and Circuses.
November 8th, 2012 at 11:48 am
I agree with you Poohbah.
In particular note the strong Latino voter support for obama.
I’m sure this happened because Romney would not compromise his views on illegal immigration. Romney held steadfast to his principles on a live national debate.
Not to mention that it is hard for republicans in general to avoid being labeled racist.
With the changing demographics of America, it is a sad thought to think that republicans will have to sell themselves out and pander to every single race in order to get elected.
No wonder the thought that our country is further going to be balkanized present in many people.
November 8th, 2012 at 12:06 pm
I admire the heck out of you guys for your service, but, respectfully, Romney didn’t lose because he took veterans for granted. Did that contribute? Possibly. Obama won this campaign (yes, there’s a difference between saying he won vs. Romney lost) because his campaign did a better job turning out their core voters. They did a good job at creating divisions with Hispanic, young, women and African American voters. Incumbent presidents have a distinct advantage, and Obama used his well. Halting deportations for young illegal immigrants. Eliminating work requirements for welfare recipients. Employer paid-for birth control. Plus, they were smarter on turn out. For Pete’s sake, they had a “barber shop and beauty salon” turn out program for AA voters. That’s really f’ing smart. I spent 7 years working on some of the top and toughest federal campaigns in the country. The Obama campaign capitalized on Romeny’s weaknesses (real or perceived) and made fewer mistakes.
November 8th, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Tman – and just wait until Obama introduces comprehensive immigration reform…the leaderless Republicans will trip over each other trying to be the loudest, harshest anti-immigration voice, and the media will trumpet the worst of it, and Obama will be certain to include enough poison pills to prevent even pro-immigration voices on our side from going along.
The Hispanic vote – the inexorably growing Hispanic vote – is lost, and gonna get MORE lost…
November 8th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
@6: “how is that going to balance the budget if other programs spending is not equally curbed.”
One ounce of garden variety soft-serve ice cream has just over 60 calories in it. The same amount of grilled chicken? Less than half that number. I consider the point made.
Profligate spending did not begin with the Obama administration. What you people call “entitlement programs” are an investment in the human capital of our nation necessary to ensure our future prosperity. They are also a fulfillment of our human obligations that come with living in cities and states as opposed to treetops and caves – we would not choose to keep in our company, for example, someone who ignores a baby teetering at the edge of a well or a gunshot victim bleeding out at their feet.
Our disagreement comes from what we think people are entitled to, and what percentage of the beneficiaries of our humanity we are willing to risk abusing our trust. I feel that one able bodied welfare cheat does not represent good cause for stopping benefits to five decent citizens who have fallen on hard times and need help keeping their families fed.
I agree wholeheartedly that we should encourage people to be able to stand on their own, but this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be there for them when they can’t. If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.
November 8th, 2012 at 12:24 pm
All of the exit polls said there were more Republicans in the lead. Now, we find out that more Dems won by landslide. Now, I’m not trying to say that there was any voting fraud, but… well, I only wish we had an independent investigation firm that could look into it besides Obama’s gestapo… I mean the Justice Department.
November 8th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
In fairness to Romney, in terms of EV count he did better than vets George Bush 41 in 1992, Bob Dole in 1996, John McCain in 2008…Romney’s problems were on a much greater scale: he got 61% of the white vote (though fewer Republicans voted than in 2008), but lost 93% of black vote, 71% of the hispanic vote, 65 % of single women, 60% of under 30 voters. White voters are GOP’s strongest base, but have shrunk from 87% in 1992 to 72% in 2012 as percentage of the voting block.
Based on 1992 models, Romney’s 61% of the white votes would have routed Obama in a landslide. If the majority of the people want big gov’t ( most blacks, latinos, and single women) than the GOP platform can’t survive on a national election basis. We could be looking at a United States of California…where its all Democrats all the time and Republicans are just token opposition. Not too much longer before Texas and Arizona – GOP strongholds, are purple or bluish states than its game over.
November 8th, 2012 at 12:51 pm
Yes, I suppose Romney’s campaign was pretty pandering-free, except for the amazing amount of time all of the GOP spent kissing Israel’s butt. Too bad Israelis don’t have a vote in our elections, but they do put more than their share into PAC’s. I wonder if Karl Rove has had to go to ground, lest the Mossad come looking for him, because all their money was pissed down a well.
If you look at Obama voter demographics, it’s clear that his campaign did a better job of motivating women, young people, and people of color. A lot of these people were probably a little bent at being dismissed as “the 47%” by Romney.
And there’s the crux of it. Romney preaching endlessly to his already-converted base, ignoring the people he needed to get elected. In other words, attacking the enemy where he ain’t.
November 8th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
IMO it was the fact that Romney was a pretty terrible candidate, just based on his resume. A liberal governor of the most liberal state in the country is supposed to be our next Reagan? I don’t see it. And a pampered billionaire to boot. The amazing thing isn’t that he lost, it’s that he didn’t lose worse than he did.
Seriously, Republicans need to at least give their core voters a reason to get out of bed. Nominate someone with a liberal history and a magical ‘road to damascus’ conversion doesn’t automatcally transform him into Ronald Reagan.
The other factor is that conservatives have been on the losing side of the cultural wars for a long time and that will only get worse as long as the pro-lifers hang like an albatross around their necks.
November 8th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
The GOP’s base is big business. When big business sent the jobs overseas, the GOP lost their base because their base got put out of work. Until that gets rectified, the GOP will continue to lose voters. The one vital component to the conservative platform is gone — to China. It needs to come back to America.
I’ll get down off my soapbox now, before I fall off and hurt myself.
November 8th, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Not really disagreeing with your overall sentiments here, Jonn, but I would phrase it differently. Romney really didn’t fail veterans because he, by definition, has not had an opportunity to either serve or fail veterans. He did not pander to vets, and we kinda missed that because we, too, have gotten used to being pandered to.
No, it is Obama who has failed veterans. He has also lied to and about veterans. Entirely too many US citizens chose to believe the lies instead of taking the time to discover that he really did lie about a multitude of things.
On the other hand, there are many more things about which he has been entirely honest. Scary things. And folks have chosen to either embrace those scary things or ignore the obvious.
November 8th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
” What you people call “entitlement programs” are an investment in the human capital…”
Right.
So, from your last paragraph, you consider yourself a Christian? Pleases allow me to point out a couple of things.
#1 Free stuff, what ever shape or form:
“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we might not be a burden to any of you; 9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, that you might follow our example. 10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone will not work, neither let him eat. 11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread. 13 But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good. 14 And if anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that man and do not associate with him, so that he may be put to shame. 15 And yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (2Th 3:6 NAS)”
Years ago, I spent a significant amount of time in my church body’s Food Pantry, and occasionally now, as the Spirit leads. To sum up that experience, coupled with my observations during the last six decades, free money, in what ever form, is the MOST ADDICTING SUBSTANCE IN HUMAN EXISTENCE. It didn’t even work at the very beginning of the Church! Remember Ananias and his wife Sapphira (ACTS 5)? Do you think they were the only ones? Though they are the only ones mentioned, I suspect that they were just the first to try to cheat. The Plebes of Rome, Ancient Greece, the Soviet Union, the early colonists here, history ABOUNDS with examples the this failed idea. It completely destroys the drive to work for a better life for yourself and your family. Think I’m blowing smoke? Find someone born and raised somewhere behind the Iron Curtain and talk to them. I’ve talked, and listened to, to several. The most current is a guy at another Airborne site that I hang out at. He wore the blue beret (Airborne Forces) in the Red Army, born and raised in Soviet Union. He sees this past four years, and the election that just happened, as utter folly. If you are interested, perhaps I can get him to come here and leave some life experience for you to examine?
November 8th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
That was addressed to #12 Harrison btw … can’t submit posts that are too long.
November 8th, 2012 at 1:53 pm
No doubt SGT E.
I see yet another article today on Yahoo about the second guessing of what went wrong with Romney’s campaign, and one of the mentions was, you guessed it, Romney’s stance on illegal immigration.
When I watched that town hall meeting, when that hispanic lady asked Romney about immigration, I knew it was a ‘set-up’ to make Romney look bad for latinos.
Yet Romney did not pander or sell out, similar to his stance on abortion.
So now republicans are supposed to sell out and suck up to every single racial/ethnic/sexual group out there in order to get elected?
Sadly it looks like a lose lose situation to me in the near future and long term.
November 8th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Harrison – Not sure where you are aligned (right, left or middle of the road) but, I really do not believe we want to completely do away with social entitlements. What I personally would like to see is that any one living here, categorized with “Illegal” in front of their status, be treated as just that, ILLEGAL.
NPR recieves enormous pledges from other areas, therefore, they are a profit generating organization and should not get the huge amount of taxpayer money they do receive.
No one wants to see anyone starve or go without in this country, however, if that individual starving has not tried to fend for themselves, so be it.
Welfare to single parents could be drastically reduced just by allowing the benefit to last one month past the first day of employment, freeing the individuals stress level of how they would survive until their first paycheck came in. Also by limiting the length of time allowed to stay on the benefit. I.E. find a job or we will find one for you until you do.
As for the military and defense of this country and the Constitution, we are not the “Ice Cream”, more like the mortar that holds the dairy barn together so all of those stinking cows can run around crapping on themselves and moo about every little thing they don’t like.
You say that 1 in 5 individuals smell up the benefits system, in my experience its more like 1 in 3. These people do not want to work, regardless of what they say to the outsider. When given the chance, they turn tail and walk away, yet they are the first to complain and the first to be in the hand out line.
Again, I am not sure where you come from, but, I live in a pretty impoverished part of the nation and we believe in taking care of the young, old and those that cannot do for themselves, not the able bodied, lazy entitlement driven individuals that suck the life out of our country and community.
November 8th, 2012 at 2:39 pm
GOP platform is about low taxes, small gov’t, entrepreneurship, rugged individualism, low to moderate welfare safety net. Yep, your party is in real trouble if more than half the people want big gov’t…as Bill O’Reilly said “The people want stuff — they like politicians to tell them they can have stuff.”
November 8th, 2012 at 2:49 pm
Romney’s campaign failed him in a number of ways. I can’t say with any degree of certainty whether it was up to his advisers or Romney himself.
1. He brought a smile to a gunfight. When the opening shots from Obama’s people were outright lies, misrepresentations and slander, he should have taken Officer Jim Malone’s advice from the movie the untouchables and hit back hard. Expose the lies for what they are. Don’t let him dodge you in a debate. Don’t let up on him in areas where he’s soft (like Benghazi). He should have thrown Obama’s lies right back in his face. Each debate should have spawned some demolishing TV ads. When Obama said Romney wanted to abandon the Auto industry, ads should have run with Obama’s quote and then showing the actual text where he said the auto’s should have had a structured, protected bankruptcy.
2. He let the media scare him off Sandy. While Obama was out there with his WH jacket on and looking presidential, Romney tried to help. Some say he did it in a poor way, but he tried and the MSM crucified him for it. Didn’t hear much about ole Mitt trying to help out after that. I think the MSM scared him off. And he lost time while Obama gained photo ops.
3. I like Ryan. I really do. I think he’s a damn decent guy. I think he’s one of the few people that have had the guts to put out a plan and get it passed (in the House anyway) for dealing with our impending national financial disaster. I like Ryan. I also absolutely think he was the wrong guy for the Veep slot this go around. Obvious choice? Rubio. There’s a good chunk of the Hispanic vote. Rubio shows that the RNC doesn’t hate brown people, no matter what they’re told. He would have shown people “hey, it’s ok to be Hispanic and be Conservative…Hispanics and Conservatives have a lot in common.” Another good choice? Christie. He’s a straight talker that does it in a way people LIKE. Likeability was a huge factor in this race. Early on, people saw Romney as a robot. Christie could have challenged that notion by calling people on their shit in a way people would respect, or even like. Another choice? West. He doesn’t have the curmudgeonly appeal of Christie, but he’s got bearing. He’s black. He’s damn smart. He’s not afraid to speak the truth. And he would have been the only one in the race with ANY military experience. He showed he cares about his people, to the point of risking his own career and future.
I know there’s other reasons out there. I know for certain some won’t agree with me. This is just how I see it.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
This is another viewpoint on why Romney lost. It’s very long, so instead of taking up space, I’m including the link.
http://news.newsmax.com/?K6Ov.toFBlJCLOZS2dE8Y57n63sfNLvAK&http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/why-romney-lost-obama/2012/11/07/id/463241?s=al&promo_code=109FA-1
I think one of the biggest mistakes was in not buying ads sooner, at a lower price. My TV didn’t quit on me until Oct.1 and I saw NO ads for Romney on TV before then.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Republicans have been branded “the Old White Men party.” That needs to change, and it will change when we come up with a viable solution to the illegal immigration problem; when the men in the party stop treating the women in the party as ornaments; and when we can pry the religious fundamentalists off our necks (someone already made that point, with which I agree.) And that’s just part of the domestic side of the house.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:38 pm
@26
I heard it suggested from one of the talking head pundits that the ’12 ticket was probably the last all-white ticket we’ll see from the Pubs for a while. I suspect that’s true. There is a lot of damage done to the party’s image over race.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
@27 Agreed. And not just race, either. Until we crush the “legitimate rape” and “binders full of women” mentality, we’re last week’s fish-wrap as a party. Those two comments alone, rang so loudly with so many women that they heard nothing else. They not only have to stop making brain-dead comments like that, they have to stop THINKING them.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:52 pm
One thing’s for certain. The RNC needs to figure it out. The MSM is not on their side. Ever. Everything they do and say is going to be over-parsed well beyond any limit of what a normal person would consider reasonable.
That said, I was glad to see the two idiots running for the Senate losing their positions. Akin and Mourdock deserved their losses. However, I have a hard time putting “binders full of women” anywhere near that same category. Taken in context of the statement it was fine. But the lesson that should have been learned is the over-parsement that was sure to go on. Yes, it would have been better said as “binders full of women’s resumes”.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:58 pm
It is sad when Republicans have to not only contend with their opponent, but the media as well.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:58 pm
As a veteran myself (and father of a 3-tour infantryman), I was somewhat put off when Romney’s wife went so far as to try to compare Mormon missions to military service. But then again, running out of Grey Poupon probably counts as a hardship for her.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/18/ann-romney-mormon-missions-and-u-s-military-are-different-ways-of-serving/
November 8th, 2012 at 4:00 pm
>>>>If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.
I am going to rely on Caesar to take care of my people said Christ -NEVER
November 8th, 2012 at 4:07 pm
“If you don’t feel this same obligation to be essentially Christ-like, then I don’t think there’s much I can say to change your position on the matter.”
“we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat” 2 Thessalonians 3:10
November 8th, 2012 at 4:18 pm
@12
#2 To Whom does this duty belong?
To stand aside and watch a fellow citizen suffer want, while it is in your hand to help? That is certainly not Christ-like.
From the U.S. Constitution:
Article I -The Legislative Powers
Section 8
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”
IMO, this contains the much abused “general Welfare” clause that has been used to justify all kinds of, and what simply boils down to, vote buying. If you go to this link, please scroll down to Art. I, Sec. 8 and examine the examples delineated therein. In every case, the issue addressed is for “the general Welfare.” This is NOT the case wrt issues like Social Security, Welfare (no matter the disingenuous title it has, or whether it is for individuals, corporations, farms,), etc. These all favor, at the taxpayer expense, individuals or groups of individuals, not the entire population of the country, as all of the others do.
So, to address the original question, to whom does this duty belong (and I DO see it as a duty)?
The Church. Why?
1. The multitude of admonitions and instructions in the Scriptures say so. Or, where does it say, “Go therefore unto Caesar for Thy daily bread and drink?” No, but it says to ask of Him, and He will provide – nearly always, this happens through His people. And that is because, over time, so long as we forget what lies behind and pursue the upward calling of Christ, we become more and more like Him. And it simply is His nature to Love. To care for the poor, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, shelter the homeless, etc, all of this flows forth from His Love, which we have, and by His grace, continues to grow and increase in us.
2. Government sponsored welfare, with all it’s bureaucracy, completely removes Love, and that is the heart of the unwisdom of it, IMO. At the local church level, it becomes very quickly apparent who has suffered a sorrow versus who is looking for a free ride, because there is ACCOUNTABILITY, both to the giver, and to the receiver. That is necessary for the sifting out of the deceivers, and that is for the good of their own souls. For the Brethren in need, when that need is satisfied, their Love and Faith in Christ increases and for the Giver, even more so. If you doubt that, go serve in a local church sponsored soup kitchen for a while, or go on a short term mission trip to somewhere like Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, India, Pakistan, Mexico, anywhere in Central or South America, and you will see that the Giver ALWAYS receives much more than the gift in return. That’s just how He rolls.
Therefore, in every case where the local church is involved, we are protected from the wolves, the souls of His sheep profit, and Christ is magnified.
This is why bureaucracies always grow, they must always be sifting for fraud, because accountability is difficult to accomplish in these circumstances.
The only time Caesar does this is when our Military is used, as a direct representative of the American People, in Humanitarian efforts after the disasters common to our times. Interestingly, the Land and Sea Military are some of the explicitly written areas of the Authority and Duty of Congress expressed in Section 8 …
I hope this helps.
November 8th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
@24 Nik
Concur on Rubio VP pick.
November 8th, 2012 at 4:31 pm
We as a people failed, and now we have a proven failure enjoying a second term in office to push his social agenda and piss poor foreign policy that our enemies laugh at down our throats.
Romney and his campaign made some major mistakes, but “We the People” no longer exist. It is everyone putting their hand out, to include Veterans. Oh those evil republicans did not vote on a Jobs Plan… that was utter Bull Shit, but we got all pissed off when it did not come to a vote nonetheless, because it was “for us”.. needed or not. How easily bought and paid for.
November 8th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
#15 – seriously? I suggest you start reading something cogent and stop getting your post election analysis from Stormfront.org. There was no Israeli butt kissing…it was hardly necessary. This administration and the Likud/NRP/Shas ascendancy in Israel couldn’t be further apart ideologically. Israelis polled supported Romney overwhelmingly without said “butt kissing.”
Is Bob Walsh Gordon Duff in disguise? Sounds like it to me.
69% percent of the Jewish vote went to Obama. That’s down from 78% last election. It’s a trifle when it’s only 1% of the population, but I think you can find a hint in that very slight drift to Republicans. It takes quite a bit to make any demographic shift, but Jews, particularly in the northeast and Florida, will elect Arlen Specter, we’ll elect Guiliani, we’ll elect Jeb Bush.
I think if the GOP could stop being so overtly hostile to the RINOs, things could look better. The “Midwestern Firewall” would still break Republican, because what, they’re going to vote for Democrats for the first time ever? And you stand a better chance in the Northeast, then, too. Pennsylvania once went Reagan, and our demographics have not changed *that* much.
November 8th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
I disagree with this post’s main point. People are supposed to vote for how the candidate will run the country. Will he run it better or worse, with a better or worse direction? In this case, the best case for voting, and voting against Obama, was the 4 years of Obama that we have just been subjected to. It is an invalid argument that the better candidate did not offer you stuff, or stroke your ego, even if you deserved it. We are talking about direction of the country here, not the limited and narrow interests of specific groups.
November 8th, 2012 at 5:07 pm
Well said SteveC!
Like #13 said, I also tend to believe that the election was stolen because I refuse to believe that a majority of Americans enjoyed the last 4 years and want more. If Romney lost because of free phones, America is in the toilet.
November 8th, 2012 at 5:08 pm
I can understand why there was some particular bitterness exhibited by some of my friends over this election, and several of them are not white.
We have seemingly entered a point of no return, a balkanized America where it is no longer about what one can do for their country, but what the country can do for you.
Social programs, handouts, rewarding the breaking of laws, pandering to a multitude of racial/ethnic/gender/sexual groups, the list is endless.
You don’t have to be white to see this, and unfortunately as always republicans get the short end of the stick. Look at how republicans/conservatives of color are mercilessly crucified over their political beliefs, in the most cruel and mean spirited ways. Wasn’t the celebrity Stacy Dash getting death threats over her support for Romney? Yet Beyonce can write open letters gushing and brown nosing obama and get praised for it.
Our country just seems lost because of all these divisions and lack of unity.
November 8th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
I find the idea of selling out interesting. No one should abandon their principles to run for office. I think the republicans as a party need to discuss what are they as a party. Are they a party holding to the principle that there can be no compromise on abortion or immigration? If so that’s great, stick with it and have at it.
But understand that the content of the pond you have been fishing at has changed whether you like it or not. You can choose to keep fishing with the same bait and catching less fish every visit, or you can choose to examine what matters more. Abortion or a balanced budget? Immigration or a reasonable tax policy? You might not be able to get all 4 of those to go your way, so what are you willing to discuss as compromise positions? If you can’t compromise on any of those positions why should the democrats compromise any of theirs when it’s clear they already have the numbers? A war of attrition can’t be won by the side with less numbers. As republicans we can choose to dig in our heels and p1ss and moan that the whole world is wrong and we are right until we are so irrelevant to current discussions that we join the green party in vote counts.
Or we could approach immigration with some of our younger hispanic members and discuss the ideas they might have to solve a very large problem. We might even ask a few of the moderate women members what is a reasonable compromise on abortion. Then you might have the changing nature of the electorate view the party as an evolving entity, one that understands the nation changes as the times change.
Or not, p1ssing and moaning seems to work well for members from both sides of the aisle so we could just keep trying that.
November 8th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
You’re a fool Lilyea, why would Romney campaign ask for help from you? Anyone who reads your extermist blog is already voting for Romney anyway..
November 8th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
We welcome your stupidity and blatant ignorance, OG. It’s amusing. Extermist blog? Not sure if anyone here is in the bug killing business.
November 8th, 2012 at 6:04 pm
I’m sure that we’ll be “treated” to OG’s ignorance sometime in mid January, too. Can’t hardly wait.
November 8th, 2012 at 6:14 pm
It’s telling how she only came back here when her savior got re-elected. That’s a pretty chickenshit move, IMO.
November 8th, 2012 at 6:25 pm
She could do us all a favor and just stay away. She is what she is, and I agree with your characterization.
November 8th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Yeah, speaking January, there is not much time left on the Congressional schedule for that sequestration issue:
Senate Recess – August 6th – December 31st
Target Senate Adjourn Date December 31st
October 6 – November 12 House Recess
November 17 – 26 House Recess
December 8 Hanukkah begins at sundown
December 7-10 House Recess
December 14 Target House Adjournment
December 25 – Christmas Day
If the Senate does not act, the sequester will take effect in: 054 DAYS 05HRS 33MIN from today at 4:27PM CST.
Not too much time left to work on that thing, eh? No, especially with nobody in the office at all.
November 8th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Here’s part of an article about the impact of the sequestration effect, by Anita Campbell in “Small Business Trends”:
What is sequester?
Sequester refers to mandatory government spending cuts that are looming. On January 1, 2013, $109 billion in spending cuts will automatically kick in across the board, according to the Christian Science Monitor. But that’s just the first step.
Over time $600 billion in cuts are required in defense programs, and another $600 billion in domestic programs.
What is the fiscal cliff?
The term “fiscal cliff” is a shorthand term for the impact of those cuts. A big deadline is looming on January 1, 2013 when the cuts start going into effect.
In addition, certain tax increases will also go into effect.
The resulting impact is so dramatic that it could throw the country back into a recession. In other words, we’re headed toward a financial precipice.
What will be the impact?
The proposed changes are so sudden and deep that the Congressional Budget Office estimates they would shave gross domestic product (GDP) by 4% in 2013, triggering another recession (i.e., negative growth). That could lead to higher unemployment, with a loss of 2 million jobs.
Even if you believe that government spending should be cut, as I do, the problem is that mandated cuts will be made across the board. They may not be the right cuts.
The analogy I use is that one day in your business you decide to finally address your red ink. You decide you need to cut expenses. But you do it by laying off your best sales people and not paying your insurance premiums. Then the sales orders slow to a trickle. Then you have a fire and lose all your inventory and equipment, with no insurance to replace it. Hmmm, maybe you should have found have other expenses to cut.
How does sequester and the fiscal cliff affect small businesses?
Sooner or later with high spending, there has to be a reckoning.
However, when you cut spending across the board, you can cut the legs out from important programs that should not be cut. Defense cuts, for example, could hamper the ability of our country to defend itself and stay as secure as Americans expect.
And when you raise taxes, are you raising the right taxes? Or do the higher taxes strangle growth among the very groups you expect to create economic growth, such as jobs?
For small businesses specifically, the tax increases would impact those who make over $250,000 a year. As Professor Scott Shane points out, with help from George Haynes of Montana State University, raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 would affect the business owners that employ a whopping 93 percent of employees in small businesses. And since many business owners sacrifice for years to reinvest in the business — in anticipation of it paying off later on —the taxes will hit them just as those years of sacrifice start to pay off in higher earnings for the business owner.
The entire article is at this link:
http://smallbiztrends.com/2012/10/sequester-fiscal-cliff-impact-small-business.html
The impact of a 4% drop in gross domestic product is high. It is not just the loss of the final product to consumers, it also includes the loss of parts produced for and purchased by all manufacturers, especially those who employ only a few people, less than 100. Employers are already cancelling health insurance for their employees. It’s cheaper to pay the tax imposed by Obamacare.
I have a friend in Taipei, Taiwan, who tells me this, from his e-mail this morning: “I see that most officer workers in Taiwan are bullied everyday, yelled at, belittled by upper management. People here work very long hours so that people in the US have it easy. This shift is changing, that is for sure, longer hours now in the US and shorter hours now in Asia, it is happening.”
November 8th, 2012 at 6:47 pm
>You’re a fool Lilyea, why would Romney campaign ask for help from you? Anyone who reads your extermist blog is already voting for Romney anyway..
I know you feel all tingly because your tampons/government paid for birth control is safe, but know one cares what you have to say..
November 8th, 2012 at 7:12 pm
It’s not Mitt, it’s you. You have not had a Presidential candidate break 300 electoral votes in 20 years. You have had in that time three big elections- all midterms. 1994, 2002 and 2010. Most of your “big” victories come from the fact that Democrats just don’t vote in midterms.
In 2000 the GOP “won” the electoral vote 271 to 266 (Gore had a faithless elector) with a 5 EV advantage. In 2004 Bush won 286-251 (Kerry had a dumb-ass elector who voted for Edwards for VP and Potus) for an advantage of 35 EVs.
Contrast this with the crushing electoral defeats you’ve experienced: 1992 Bill Clinton defeats George Bush Sr. 370- 168 a 202 EV victory. Four years later Clinton beat Dole 379-159 a 220 EV victory. In 2008 President Obama beat John McCain 365 to 173 for a 192 EV advantage. In 2012 he beat Mitt Romney 332 to 206 for an advantage of 126 EVs.
So if you average out our 4 wins over the past 20 years Democrats have an average margin of victory of a little over 18o EVs and Republican’s have an average of 20 EV’s margin of victory. Much of this is due to the “genius” Karl Rove’s strategy of getting 50% plus 1. It’s a strategy built on the knife edge, and the GOP is now getting cut with it.
November 8th, 2012 at 7:14 pm
That and the fact that now we’ve won 4 times in the past 20 years and you’ve won twice.
November 8th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
Did OG just tell us that he/she/it voted for Romney?
In #42 above it said, “Anyone who reads your extermist blog is already voting for Romney anyway.” To respond to something someone (anyone) has written here, one needs to have read at least part of it. Therefore, as one who “reads your extremist blog,” OG would be someone who voted for Romney.
Either that is a lie or previous statements of supporting others is a lie. Please note that in case anyone needs absolute proof that OG is a lying sack of it. Stupidity has been proved on many occasions, so that one need not be documented.
November 8th, 2012 at 7:40 pm
@52 – OWB, I like your logic.
November 8th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
I’ll say something (when do I not?) that I’ve said since 2002:
Why does the GOP consistently walk away from candidates who are combat veterans? Unless that vet is self-financing and won’t upset the apple cart, you won’t find the RNC, NRCC and NRSC recruiting and growing candidates.
Starting in 2002 up through the present, the DNC actively courts veterans. Tammy Duckworth was lousy! Excuse, Representative-elect The Honorable Mrs Tammy Duckworth. Suck on that title for a while.
But anyway. Can’t fault Romney for not being more vet-minded when he is a creature of the Establishmentarian GOP, a party that only likes veterans when they’re at the buffet line at the country club, as waiters. Ask Allen West, who got gerrymandered out of a win by the Florida GOP.
Vets need to turn to a third party and cut out pandering to the GOP, who will never care about former, current, and future servicemembers.
November 8th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
@42, I was on the fence on who I was going to vote for. I go to multiple sources for information not just this blog. I come here to hear veteran issues to be voiced. I make my own decisions and I decided to vote for Romney.
I think that the extremist one here is OG.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Tuesday I was working as an election observer for OFA. Ironically the one vote that I know I saved was a Romney vote. The guy was feeding his ballot into the machine for him and his wife saying “Romney” each time. After loading the last ballot they left and I noticed the machine beeping and that it spit out the paper. I called for him to come back and it turned out his wife had double voted for President. It didn’t occur to me till after they left that I was working for the other side.
Needless to say, if President Obama lost Ohio by one vote you’d never have to worry about me posting again as I’d toss myself off a bridge.
As it is, I’m proud of myself for putting democracy over my “team”.
So in that spirit, I shall now give to thee unasked for, and sure to be unheeded advice on how you can turn this whole thing around:
1. Win by convincing people to vote for you, not by stopping people from voting against you. Whether the GOP was or was not trying to suppress minority votes, that’s how the policies implemented by the Governor of Florida and the Secretary of State of Ohio was taken. As I was canvasing for President Obama I can’t tell you how many times I heard a variation of the phrase “I wasn’t all that into voting until I saw how much they don’t want me to vote!” Plus the whole optics of people standing in line for 8 hours in swing states is not a good reflection on GOP governors or GOP secretaries of State.
Imagine if Florida Governor Rick Scott or Ohio Secretary of State John Husted reacted in the following ways: “you want a month of early voting? I’ll give you TWO months! And I’ll extend the hours! “ Instead Husted gave MORE hours to Republican areas and less hours to Democratic areas (finally he relented and made it all the same- but the optics are AWFUL) and Rick Scott looked at the 8 hour lines and proclaimed that there’s no problem here that needs a remedy.
There’s no better way of convincing someone to do something then to tell them they can’t.
Resign yourself to a strategy of winning the minority vote and poor vote, not preventing it.
2. Speaking of winning the minority and poor vote- a good way to do that is to stop insulting people. Minorities and the working poor work just as hard as white people and even rich people do. Everyone wants high-paying jobs. If you say “It is better to have a good paycheck then a food stamp” you’ll have most minorities and poor people agreeing with you. If you say “You voted for President Obama because you love all the giveaways” or as Rush Limbaugh said “Voting for Santa Clause” you’re just insulting them. I won’t even get into the whole blaming the gays every time there’s a natural disaster.
3. Speaking of seeing reality- see the world as it is, not as Rush and others propagandize it. No one who sees President Obama believes he’s angry or vindictive or evil. He does not laugh fiendishly and order people to “stand down” he does not smuggle guns into Mexico for a back-door way of implementing gun control.
No one sensible believes you. President Obama comes across as a pretty good guy. When you invent conspiracies like this you cease to be taken seriously. Democrats had a similar problem with Ronald Reagan. He too came across as a likeable guy, not a war-monger or a man too incompetent to tie his shoes. If what people see does not coincide with what you’re telling them, the solution is to start telling them something different, not to scream louder.
4. Speaking of Ronald Reagan, remember that he worked with Democrats. And he won in a landslide- and so did Democrats. President Obama, despite your rhetoric, is no socialist. Had Mitt Romney somehow got elected in 2008 the health care plan we call “Obamacare” now would be called “Romneycare”. This was a Republican plan, originated by the Heritage foundation based on the Republican principle of accepting personal responsibility. Stimulus packages during recessions have passed under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. There was no reason whatsoever that you had to make these bills into a death match. Imagine how much easier it would have been for Mitt to argue “I can run that plan better- I invented it!” then arguing that the same plan is GREAT for Massachusetts but AWFUL for the nation. Imagine if Ryan weren’t embarrassed by requests for stimulus funds during the debate?
5. Decide what you want to be and be it. Obama was consistent during his first campaign with hope and change and he was consistent during his second with “forward”. No need to pivot. Mitt’s strategy was to be severely conservative during the primaries and then moderate Mitt starting at the debates. Yes, it got him closer, but then what? You can’t get EVERYONE to forget what was said during the primaries, nor is your opponent likely to allow you to get away with it twice. Plus you lose almost an entire year because you have to craft two messages. Bush, when he won, campaigned as a “compassionate conservative” the entire campaign. There was no need to pivot. During his second winning campaign he was the guy who will keep us safe. Romney seemed to rely on either people not minding his change of position or everyone getting amnesia.
Anyway, there’s my unasked for and soon to be unheeded advice.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:03 pm
4 times in the past 20 years …hmmm….sounnds like a good explanation why this country has gone to shit.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
Well.. He just got elected to the 4th term. He won’t be done serving till 2016. The entire amount of actual time serving was 12 years Dem, and 8 years Republican. During the times that Democrats were in charge the economy did MUCH better. The coutry went “to shit” while the Republicans were in charge and it happened because of Republican policies.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:23 pm
Now that just sounds like a bunch of shitty excuses to me. I’m farily certain it’s the 12 “Dem” years that got us to this point. Most of the 8 Republican years were spent cleaning up the mess the “Dems” left behind. I’m hoping whomever is elected in 2016 is up to the task, it’s gonna be quite a mess by then.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
*If we’re still even a country by then, that is.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
What “mess” are you talking about? We had a good economy in 2000, we were at peace, we had a plan for going after Al Queda and we were running a surplus? You don’t get your own right-wing reality.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
I’m making another prediction. So far i was right that Obama would get over 300 and that health care reform would survive the SC. In 2016 the economy will be doing great and we’ll have added far more than the 12 million new jobs Romney promised.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:38 pm
Sippy … you sound angry!
November 8th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Yup. This is certainly an atmosphere where both sides can come together and work together.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
IMHO People are really overthinking the whole thing. The Democrats simply had a better ground game, that’s it. I saw Demo head hunters decked out in glow-belts descending upon my neighborhood throughout the day. At the polls, the Democrat observers were looking at the poll books and texting that information to the street posse, who in turn found their targets and bugged the hell out of them to vote. I saw numerous Democrats showing up at the polling station literally not knowing wtf they were doing there, and many of them weren’t even in the correct location where they were registered to vote. I guarantee you if the GOP had worked their game like this, and if many of the young, passionate Libertarians that I know had also gone out and pushed for a mutual conservative candidate, then it would’ve been a sizeable upset for the incumbent. “Changing Demographics” have very little to do with this race, it was all turnout, as usual. Additionally, look at the differences from 2008 vs. 2012, the pendulum is swinging back. Party domination/branch balances all happen(s) in cycles, and 2014/2016 will be the real litmus test of this holding true.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:51 pm
When Obomber said “we have more work to do” I believe he mis spoke. Saying there’s more work to do would imply that work was done in the past.
November 8th, 2012 at 10:25 pm
>>>What “mess” are you talking about? We had a good economy in 2000, we were at peace, we had a plan for going after Al Queda and we were running a surplus? You don’t get your own right-wing reality.
I guess you never heard about the dotcom bust or several terrorist attacks that warned frickin Americans that 9/11 were coming.
November 8th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
Shhh!!! Melle don’t interrupt sippy’s unicorn ride down to the chocolate river. Unlike the rest of us who live in the here and now, sippy thinks he’s entitled to his own leftarded reality.
November 8th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
@68 — Yeah, Redacted, we have other things to deal with now, like a bad winter and price hikes on everything from gasoline to a loaf of bread, as well as 30% tax hikes in January.
A 30% tax hike means back to an 18% or more chunk out of your paycheck just for federal income tax. That depends on how much you actually make, and I didn’t include social security or Medicare hikes in that. Or state income tax hikes, which may just start popping up everwhere. Not to mention federal tax increases on everything from gasoline to airplane tickets. Ouch!
Do you think Shortnspiteful took any of that into consideration while s/he was gloating?
November 8th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
@8 — UPnorth, remember the history of Rome? When Nero wanted to do a little construction, he threw a party at the Coliseum (bread and circuses) and then burned the slums.
Jane Byrne tried the bread and circuses approach when she was Chicago’s mayor, but it didn’t get her re-elected. Now that has become just bread. The circus is Lollapalooza, and they had to pay for making a mess out of Grant Park.
November 9th, 2012 at 12:30 am
An item that may be of interest to some:
http://now.msn.com/las-vegas-business-owner-fires-employees-after-obama-re-election?gt1=50501
November 9th, 2012 at 12:49 am
I remember the not-lamented Jane Byrne, ex. And, I remember the bread and circuses, well, not personally, but I’ve read about them. The Obamaphone is a manifestation of the bread and circuses, as is Come on in and sign up for SSI, we’ll figure out what your disability is later.
Sippy, you might have made a valid point or two, but you fell into the trap you always do, TLDR, and throw in a little ad hominem to top it off. And, can anyone explain why it takes a “progressive” 60 or 70 lines of text to say what could have been said in 6 or 7?
Just a minor nit to pick, but your administration DID smuggle guns to Meh-hee-co, and what was the purpose of said smuggling? It certainly wasn’t to “track the guns”, so what was the purpose? And, like I said in another thread, HST said of the presidency, “The buck stops here”, so, yeah Obama does own F & F, among a lot of other things, like Benghazi.
November 9th, 2012 at 1:00 am
@UpNorth, the only difference between Rome and now is that the citizens of Rome didn’t have to pay for their bread and circuses.
We may see that again, although I’m not sure that getting free cheese does much for your diet. I view the Obamaphones as a ’1984 – Big Brother is watching you’ approach to keeping track of the lower end of the population spectrum. How long do you think it will be before that phone bill starts showing up? My friend in Taipei says he estimates the deficit to reach as high as $30 trillion in another four years, and I would not be surprised.
Taste of Chicago is an expensive deal to attend, and it’s been shortened again, to five days this year. Lollapalooza is likewise expensive to attend, never mind the cleanup afterwards.
It’s going to be a very interesting time.
November 9th, 2012 at 3:08 am
How long? I pay for their frigging phones now, it’s already shown up.
As for the deficit, if he doesn’t even try, the AA president can double it in 4 years. I can see $34 Trillion, without Barry breaking a sweat.
November 9th, 2012 at 6:34 am
Like him or hate him, I believe O’Reilly had it right. People want stuff. They voted for it. Remember “I don’t have to pay my mortgage anymore” lady? This is our Nation. I also agree on sequestration. It will happen, but just like everything else, the government may choose to ignore it. Anyone seen a budget get passed? Me neither, but there has been no collapse. Whether the laws exist or not, we have selective enforcement of them. No one is deporting illegals, and we are still functioning. I don’t think sequestration will have much of an impact unless the government wants it to.
November 9th, 2012 at 7:54 am
Harrison, #3; I’ve got your fucking ice cream, asshole.
November 9th, 2012 at 11:59 am
@76- Anyone who writes a column comparing President Obama to OJ Simpson has no business calling anyone else an asshole. And if you want to know why Romney didn’t direct anyone to your site, it’s probably because you wrote a column comparing President Obama to OJ Simpson.
November 9th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
That was quick:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/sean-hannity-john-boehner-gop-tackle-immigration-reform-142212570–election.html
Sacrifice principles for the sake of the vote.
November 9th, 2012 at 12:37 pm
I hope you gentlemen will forgive me if I reject the Fox News version of Jesus in favor of the picture distilled by Jefferson of an unconditionally compassionate teacher. Also, #76, don’t you know that your tears of impotent rage only entertain and energize me?
November 9th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
100 million on food stamps by the end of Obummer’s second term? I’m sure the left would consider that progress…
November 9th, 2012 at 1:00 pm
@78
Charles Krauthammer has been espousing the same…see handwriting on wall ?
November 9th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
One thing I noticed when thinking about post WWII elections is that with two exceptions – 1956 and 2000 – the only time a Republican has ever been elected president is when the country is either at war, or menaced by a foreign adversary.
1952: Korean War was raging, Ike promised to bring the war to a conclusion. You also had the Cold War heating up in areas besides Korea.
1968: Duh, Vietnam
1972: Again, Nixon promises “Peace with honor” to end the war
1980: Reagan wins, a resurgent USSR has just invaded Afghanistan and US personnel are being held hostage in Iran.
1984: Again, the “Evil empire” is still a menace (remember “there’s a bear in the woods?”)
1988: Still the Soviet menace. It wasn’t apparent to most that the USSR was in its death throes until mid 1989 (hell, it wasn’t apparent to me and I was an intel analyst stationed in Germany.)
2004: The first post 9/11 presidential election, and the war in Iraq was raging.
Of course, we were at peace in 1956 but we were also prosperous and safe, which means the incumbent rides the wave to reelection. And 2000 is the exception that proves the rule: But for Clinton’s hard-on for gun control and some poorly marked ballots in FL, Gore would certainly have won that election.
My point with all this is that it seems people flock to the “daddy” party when there’s a scary man with a gun outside the door, but if not, we have no interest in him.
It’s funny that after the quick ‘victory’ (not really) in the 1991 Gulf War, Bush I looked unbeatable, but by November of 92 that was old news and the American people couldn’t elect Bubba fast enough.
Based on this it really looks like when it comes to presidential politics (as opposed to general party politics), National Security is the only trump card the Republicans have, and if they can’t play it, they lose.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:06 pm
@79 Harrison
Really!?? The Fox News version!!??
Oh well, I tried Adonai, but you can only lead a horse to water …
November 9th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
I wonder how many people that voted for omumbles received, or will soon receive, a pink slip as a direct result of his failed policies. I believe the phrase “shot yourself in the foot” is relevant here.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Hy, guys, the One is on TV right now making a speech about “solving our fiscal challenges”.
He said he worked with both parties before the election to solve this.
“Right now, if Congress fails to come to an agreement by an overall deficit reduction by the end of the year, everybody’s taxes will go up as of January 1st.” (quote as spoken — yes, I can type quickly.)
I posted the recess and adjournment schedules elsewhere. Is he aware that Congress goes into recess at the end of the year?
Hey, is Harry Short&spiteful’s clone?
November 9th, 2012 at 2:18 pm
Oh I see him, can’t hear a word he’s saying though. Every time his head takes up my screen my speakers stop working, Sony must have developed an instant bullshit filter and never told anyone about it. I see they populated the room with dumbasses that would give him a standng ovation just for farting.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
@82
Yep,
If its true that “only the dead have seen the end of war” than GOP might not face extinction…Though more people identify as conservatives than liberals, evidence seems to indicate Democratic message has greater appeal – even among many whites…Republicans in last 6 presidential elections won 2 squeakers and 4 landslide losses – lost popular vote in one of the wins. Doesn’t help that since Ronald Reagan, there hasn’t been a compelling and charismatic GOP candidate.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
This is a classic article from CBS Chicago: Yeah, gimme gimme gimme…
Some In Line For City Job Fair Upset There’s No Hiring On The Spot
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/11/09/city-to-hold-job-fair-today-at-kennedy-king-college/
November 9th, 2012 at 2:53 pm
@88
Wait…what? There’s no instant gratification? They are daring to say they actually want to think about it…consider all the applicants, not just the ones who arrived early?
‘Course if they DID offer jobs on the spot, then the people who arrived later in the day, after the jobs are all or mostly gone would be mad. They wouldn’t think it’s fair that people who got there early are the only ones who got jobs (or the “good” jobs). “OMG…they should consider all the applicants after the job fair, not just handing them out to people who could stand in line at 3AM. I’m a ________ I’ve got things I have to do in the morning”, is what I suspect we would have heard.
And one gem from that article:
‘Rodney Booker said, “I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.”’
I’ll just leave Mr Booker’s quote there without comment.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
>hope you gentlemen will forgive me if I reject the Fox News version of Jesus
@ Harrison You still haven’t explained to me where the msn version of Jesus ever said that Caesar should take care of his people.
@ Martin the reason they want GOP during war is because that is when the nation is really at stake and people’s lives are on the line.. and that is the time they actually want a grown up running the country.
November 9th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
@82
Sheepdog vs Lapdog.
November 9th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
@90 — Melle, I’d like to know, too, because Jesus said “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. Render unto God what is God’s.”
This is from that story when one of his Hebrew neighbors complained about paying taxes to Caesar’s tax collectors.
Didn’ say nothin’ about Caesar taking care of anyone at all. Besides, the Hebrews weren’t Caesar’s people. That label applied ONLY to Roman citizens. You could, however, buy your way into Roman citizenship, as historian Flavius Josephus did. He was a Romanized Jew.
November 9th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
@90: The unfortunate side effect of that is that if there isn’t a bonafide boogeyman like the USSR or Al Quaeda, republican candidates have to try to manufacture one, and trying to turn laughable and incompetent adversaries like North Korea or Iran into a Soviet-style existential threat just makes republicans look like fools.
November 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
@ 93 and Dems are naive at how much of a powder keg the world actually is but Meh live in your bubble. My husband retires in January and our home is well armed…
November 9th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
And speaking of vets:
“CIA Director David Petraeus is quitting, citing personal reasons, a government source says.”–CNN
Email alert I got says he’s admitting to an extramarital affair.
I have to wonder at the timing, given that today is the day lawmakers are allowed to look at the State Dept’s info on Benghazi.
November 9th, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Petraeus is resigning over gettin some strange, he shouldn’t be the only one stepping down when the actions (or inaction) in DC have cost people their lives.
November 9th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Well the official story is he’s stepping down because he was stepping out.
That doesn’t preclude other motivations.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
Here’s the way the conversation went in my imagination:
O: Hey, Dave, get on over here to the WH. We need to talk.
P: Okie dokie. (And he paddles on over to the WH.)
O: Here’s the way it’s gonna be, Dave. You are gonna fall on your sword for the good of the country. You will accept full responsibility for all this mess in Benghazi.
P: Not gonna happen, sir. (Reaches into his pocket and extracts a letter which he hands to O.) I’m outa here.
And now, as a civilian, Dave is free to tell anyone and everyone the unvarnished truth about Benghazi. Among other things.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
I find it extremely hard to believe that man had an affair.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Can’t say I do, PintoNag. Kissinger called power the “ultimate aphrodisiac” for a very good reason. There are a lot of very attractive women within the DC metro area who are indeed attracted to power. And virtually anyone can succumb to enough temptation.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Oh, PN, I’m thinking that if he said he did, he did. Figure that he and his wife decided that public acknowledgement of it would be less painful than trying to live with the dishonor of taking responsibility for things others were due especially since doing so would serve no useful purpose.
Whatever else happened, I still think the General did and will continue to do the honorable thing.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:30 pm
@100: I’m with you. Rich and powerful men often have “zipper malfunctions.” Hell, it was an old story in the time of Jezebel, Cleopatra and Bathsheba.
It’s also true that 2-term administrations often see an exodus before the 2nd term starts. And why not? I’m 50 years old and every 2nd term presidential administration I’ve seen (Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and Bush II) was plagued by scandal, hearings, finger-pointing and forced resignations. Petraeus is smart enough to get out of dodge before the inevitable.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
Yeah, the second term curse even afflicted Reagan…guess after so many years the pile of horse hockey gets way to high to keep out of sight. BO seems immune so far to scandal, he’s got a extra thick coating of teflon and the compliance of the media…we’ll see, about the 6 year mark wheels seem to fall off most 2 term administrations – public grows tired of you as well.
November 9th, 2012 at 6:01 pm
@103: That’s why the Presidential “hat trick” (3 successive presidential administrations under the same party) has only been pulled off successfully 1 time since the 22nd amendment was ratified (Bush I succeeding Reagan in 88.)
November 9th, 2012 at 6:21 pm
Holder is talking about leaving, also.
See here: http://www.gsnmagazine.com/article/27791/holder_hints_he_may_leave_could_kick_changes_dhs
Hand up, anyone who thinks maybe they’re just getting out of the line of the sh and it rolling downhill?
November 9th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
@105: Another way to look at it is to say they’ve punched their ticket and there’s no reason for them to stick around any longer. Their CV will never be any brighter, this is the perfect time to jump ship and find that nice consulting gig, professorship, or TV commentator job.
November 9th, 2012 at 6:30 pm
@ 3 Harrisuck.
You my friend and your opinion can kiss my Royal Irish Ass.
Have a nice day!
November 9th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
2nd term? Let’s see, Jawn F’ing Kerry for SoS, Van Jones for Secretary of Business, or Business Czar, Janet the Nappy for AG, Chris Matthews for White House house keeper(he can get under the desk a lot that way). How about Representative Hank Johnson for SecDef, he’s totally qualified, he knows how many Marines it’ll take to capsize Guam.
November 9th, 2012 at 6:39 pm
@ 12 Harrison … you should have taken up a career in the food service industry. You seem to know more about the ice cream and chicken than you do political science.