Good post. I've attached a blog I read earlier and thought you might find it interesting. While I didn't really like the movie, (my husband said I didn't get it because I'm a girl) D.L. Hugley's take on it's relevance to the campaign I find amusing.
SgtFriday2: If you were in the military, thank you for your service. I say this in the most respectful way......It's truth, not rhetoric, whether you like Obama or not. I watched the interview and he was remarkably orange-ish/brown. Coincidence? I think not. Nobody tans that perfectly in a couple of days. I'm telling you there was a sprayer in his vicinity before that interview.
It has become ever more noticeable of late that the left has pretty much run out of anything positive to say about its leader or his “accomplishments”.
It sees, therefore, (witness this blog) no alternative but to ape its leader by “manufacturing facts” for use in lowbrow attacks upon his more able and honest competition.
I really don't care what color any candidate is. I can think of very few less relevant factors in selecting a leader.
What bothers me more is 'pandering' to this group or that group. You make not like Romney's 47% comment, but at least he stood behind it. The rest of the time, both candidates seem to be competing to see who can kiss the most butt in order to secure votes.
I would GLADLY elect a Purple candidate if he/she would just make decisions based on the best interest of the country and freakin' stand by them!!
fly--i would love to see some hope and change
sebh--drugstores are chock full of items to maintain your youthful appearance.heck,ive even used just for men dye myself.lol
Passingthru, All of this came from newspapers.Who needs to make anything up? Republicans are jumping ship as fast as they can.
Charlie, I will respectfully disagree. The fact that Romney did not apologize for a remark that cannot be explained away does not demonstrate leadership.We all need to admit our mistakes and move on. Romney doesn't seem to be able to do that --- a serious flaw in politics or in business.
Kinda like Obama himself 'fessed up when he (mistakenly) said that the 'Fast and Furious' program started under GWB.
Spare me, fly, and re-read my opinions on pandering. At least Romney will admit he said it, unlike BO who sends his 'campaign' or 'the white house' out for the mea culpa.
sarah palin reminds me of the girl in school that would tell you how cute someting would look on you and laugh behind your back when your rear end looked like a buick-- if bo and mittens are my only choices i guess i am not voting for either
SgtFriday2: Washing the grey out to look and feel younger is one thing. A politician showing up to (like Charlie said) pander to Hispanics in brown-face is another.
dirtroadlady: There are other choices. Gary Johnson and Ron Paul are also running, even though media outlets (all of them) refuse to talk about anyone except Romney and Obama.
Hmmmm - I can't seem to think of anything positive to say about my party's platform or performance, so I'll talk about all the negative things of my opponent.
Democrat Playbook - Page 2. This post reminds me of Charlotte.
Obama saved us from a rerun of the Great Depression and improved the image of America and Americans around the world. That should be enough.
Yes,the Democratic Convention in Charlotte could never hope to surpass the glories of the empty chair.
Any by the way, just what is so captivating about the Republican Party circa 2012? Feel free to expound.
The rerun of the Great Depression is a "maybe" at best. It can't be quantified. I can't prove it would not have happened, and you can't prove it would have. You can ask 10 different economists and get 10 different answers of what would have / could have happened and if the actions taken helped or not. However, I applaud you for taking that stance. It's smart as it can't be successfully argued.
The republian party's ideas simply make more since. Smaller government, lower taxes, less programs. I bought into Obama the first time around. I really thought he was a breath of fresh air and bought the whole "change" approach. He failed. Miserably. He has been unaffective as a president in initiating change for the positive (please don't tell me Obamacare is good for our Nation. If you honestly believe that, take an hour and call random small business owners and ask them what's going to happen to their business when this is launched in it's full force).
On that note - enough with the "Republican's wouldn't let me" lines as well. That's part of being President - figure it out. It's your JOB to be bi-partisian and do what's best for the nation. If you can't get the other people to play along, you are not the right guy for the position.
Sorry for the long answer. I ranted a bit. The best answer I can give you is that I feel the repulican's ideas are more financially realistic for our nation. I think the ideas of more programs, help, assistance, etc just continues to drive our debt out of control.
And before you peg me as a "die hard republican who hates democrats and sees no wrong in his party" - you couldn't be more off base. I would still be willing to support Obama (possibly...), if he would simply give us some sort of idea of what he's going to do differently over the next four years to be more successful than the last. However, he won't (or can't), so he, as well as the rest of his party, resort to Page 2 of the plan (see above).
You sound like a thoughtful person. The country is filled with thoughtful people even if members of that troublesome 47%. If elected, and this is a very big if, Obama, as a second term president, will feel no need to play patticake with Republicans ,so I'm hopeful there will be fewer concessions made to get the job done.
Other benefits accrue. If Romney loses, the Republican Party will be chastened and will be forced to examine some of the policies it has held so dear.It can be argued that a defeat in November would be just what the Republican party needs to avoid the fate of the Whigs in the nineteenth century.
The two party system has served us well. We need robust alternatives and carefully limned political ideologies--- and frankly the Republican Party as presently constituted has lost its way.I am hopeful that the upcoming election will be instructive to both parties.
Fly I think you way off base with your Mitt Romney augment – where is the kind, caring Mitt? The Mitt Romney that personally donated 7000 pints of milk a week for two years to a Boston VA hospital because while touring there when running for Governor he found out they did not have enough money in the budget for milk. Or the Mitt that spent hours setting with the 14 year old son of a family friend who was dying even helping him write his will and make his funeral arrangements?
Maybe you should speak of the Mitt Romney that upon learning of the disappearance of one of his close business partner’s daughters shut down all operations of a multi-million dollar company (Bain Capital) and personally flew all of Bain’s employees to New York to join the search for the 14 year old girl. He even went as far as hiring private investigators and personally directing the search which got the needed media attention that eventfully lead to the girls rescue. Or how about talking about how as a young man Mitt volunteered 10 to 20 hours a week with his church providing the needy rides to the doctor, food, housing and even raking leaves for the elderly.
How about we talk about how then Governor Mitt Romney when on vacation in New Hampshire saw a family of boaters in distress and immediately jumped on a Jet Ski; and with the help of two of his own sons and other bystanders saved a family whose boat was sinking 300 yards from shore. Maybe we you should share the story of how the Nixon family came to know Mitt Romney. The Nixon’s sons Reed and Rob where injured in a car accident and both were let quadriplegics. Though the Nixon’s knew Mitt through church they were not close friends. Upon hearing of the tragic news Mitt and his family wanted to help and had learned of the financial hardships caused by the medical bills from the accident. The boys left rehab close to Christmas and when they returned home Mitt and his family had purchased the entire Nixon family Christmas gifts. But Mitt’s help did not end there he has spent hours volunteering in fundraisers for the boys and even paid for their college education out of his own pocket.
So fly knowing what I know about Mitt Romney I just can’t see him as the heartless two-faced corporate raider your blog makes him out to bee. Sorry!
watchpig, there are big differences between one's personal caring and one's political caring. Romney's various statements, whether about the 47% or the very poor, indicate his political caring is either nonexistent or he is unable to verbalize it in a meaningful form.
I’ll take this one watchpig
Ok Bryant lets talk political by examining his record:
While he served as Governor of Massachusetts he closed dozens of tax loopholes which over his full term resulted in $300 million in new revenues for the state. He also was able to balance the budget and cut spending by $1.6 billion and by the end of his term as Governor he helped move Massachusetts from a deficit to a $2.2 billion surplus. During this time he unsuccessfully lobbied the state to reduce income tax so I suppose if they had done what he asked the surplus would not have been so large.
While he served as Governor his state saw a Job growth of 1.5% which was below the national average however the overall unemployment rate improved from 5.6% when he took office to 4.6% when he left which I think we can all agree is a fantastic number.
Did he care about people? Well he pushed through a first of its kind in the nation Health Care Reform Law that provided nearly universal health coverage for his state. Romneycare as Dems like to call it also was fully funded and did not create new deficit spending unlike Obamacare. Romney has consistently stated it was the correct thing to do for his state but plans like this should be handled at the state level and not pushed down from the Federal Government.
On the education front Romney instituted full-day kindergarten in schools and a merit pay system for teachers. He pushed through a bill which awarded 25% of all high school students a tuition-free scholarship to the state’s public colleges and a bonus program to attract the nation’s top teachers to Massachusetts and he consistently lobbied the state legislature to fund his efforts to help minority students succeed and called the gap between urban and suburban schools the “civil rights issue of our time.” In spite of his efforts to fund these programs the actual money approved by the legislature actually fell during his time in office.
While Romney does not support Gay Marriage he has consistently supported both Civil Unions and is on record as supporting equal rights for all citizens with the exception of marriage.
Also when he took office Massachusetts had some of the most lenient drunk driving laws in the nation. Romney pushed hard for reform and a new law “Melanie’s Bill” was signed that increase the penalties for repeat offenders. Since the law was passed the number of repeat drunk driving offenders in Massachusetts has been cut in half.
On a woman’s right to choose abortion Romney as Governor stated that he personally disagreed with abortion except in certain circumstances like rape or medical necessity but he would protect the right to choose which was already in place. During his time a Governor he kept this promise vetoing any changes of any kind to the states abortion laws.
Finally he pushed through a 72 point plan that greatly reduced harmful emissions in Massachusetts and improved energy-efficiency at state owned properties.
And I could go on and on but frankly I am tired of typing.
Sources: Wikipedia, the Boston Globe, Mitt Romney on the Issues, Fox News, CNN, the LA Times.
Bryant I disagree, a persons actions speak much louder than their words. Mitt Romney has proven himself a admirable person and a respectable leader. He does not deserve to be labeled the uncaring tyrant that fly and others has portrayed him to be.
Wow flowmaster it seems you have just described Mitt Romney as a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Who would have thunk it?
Hunter, But what exactly does Romney believe now?
Paul Ryan spends most of his days lambasting Romney/Obamacare, and Romney's recent comments don't seem to be those of a social moderate.Romney has jumped on the Tea Party bandwagon ,and now he cannot get off. This is the stuff of Greek tragedy: Romney's hubris has done him in.
watchpig: Romney donated that milk because when the director told him they couldn't afford the milk, Mitt said, "Well, Ken, maybe you should teach them how to milk cows." He was at a homeless shelter for veterans. And he only covered HALF the cost, dairy farms pitched in as well.
And on a more personal note: I was raised in the Mormon church and service to others is part of your beliefs. I also cut grass, ran errands, picked grapes and cleaned houses for those in need. Another family paid for my braces. Whether you know someone personally or whether they're a Nixon is irrelevant. And as a boater, YES, when you see someone on the water in need, you help them.
flowmaster: Yes, he eliminated some corporate loopholes, but the revenue was only $150 million. Another $400 million (in the first year) came from him doubling court filing fees like marriage licenses, firearm licenses and professional registrations. This figure includes the quintupled per gallon delivery fee for gasoline. Another $230 million came from him cutting funding to local municipalities. This forced them to cut services and raise their fees.
Job growth? That's disputable. Over and over many experts have pointed out that the entire U.S. economy, local factors, market woes, predecessor policies, and other factors effect job growth and unemployment numbers. Even when the numbers were down in Massachusetts, experts said it wasn't Mitt's fault because of all the other factors in play.
Health care? A fund of over $1 billion in 2004-2005, known as the "free care pool", was used to partially reimburse hospitals and health centers for un/under insured expenses. In 2006, an MIT economics professor, Jonathan Gruber, predicted that the money in the "free care pool" would be sufficient without requiring additional funding or taxes. In April 2012, the Blue Cross Foundation of Mass. funded and released research that showed the law had cost approximately $2 billion in fiscal year 2011 versus approximately $1 billion in fiscal year 2006. Some of this doubling in cost was funded by temporary grants and waivers from the federal government. It may have been funded then, but not anymore.
sox: Since 2006 in Massachusetts, businesses with 10 or more employees are required to either provide coverage or pay a fine. I haven't heard that all small businesses in Mass. have shut down, have you?
Everybody just needs to calm down. Why does it always have to be "us against them." In the words of George Washington, "I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discrimination's. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.
sebhsparent you need to look before you leap in to this debate. Spreading false information about Mitt's charity will get you no points with me. According to the Boston Globe when running for Governor Mitt toured this VA facility and asked them what they needed. They responded they did not have enough money in the budget for milk. Mitt then did then jokingly say "Well I guess we better get some cows in here then." Of course the liberal press ran with headlines saying "Mitt Romney wants veterans to milk cows." But you know when Friday rolled around the milk truck showed up with 7000 pints of donated milk. Who paid for the milk? Mitt Romney and he kept paying for it for two years; you know another thing he did not even admit to donating it during that whole time because he is just that humble.
watchpig: So will spreading true information about Mitt's charity score points? Because I did look. Directly from the Boston Globe Archive:
Romney comment leads to milk run
Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext) - Boston, Mass.
Author: Michael Kenney, Globe Staff
Date: Nov 27, 1994
Section: CITY WEEKLY
Text Word Count: 615
Abstract (Document Summary)
"From all accounts, Mitt [Romney]'s visit to that veterans shelter just behind Boston's City Hall Plaza was not one of the brighter moments of his campaign for US senator. When director Ken Smith told him that one of the things the shelter needed was fresh milk, Romney replied jokingly that maybe the veterans should be taught how to milk cows."
He wasn't running for Governor, but U.S. Senate as this happened in 1994. I never said it wasn't anonymous, and I never said it wasn't a good deed. But he only did it to make up for what he said.
As I said "jokingly" but you make it sound abhorrent in the 23:15 post. Context matters and pushing this kind hearted event as some sort of penitence for a malevolent comment is just wrong. If you want to degrade anyone who has done something good just to make you candidate seem better you not doing him any justice. Perhaps you should speak of the great deeds your candidate has done and not belittle the charity of others.
BTW: I am sorry for mixing up the Senate and Governors races. My bad!
See, this is exactly what I meant when I said, "Us against them." Show me where I said, or even alluded to, who "my candidate" is. I'm not 'degrading' all of Mitt's actions, I'm simply pointing out that he is not the 'saint' you made him out to be. And yes, In MY opinion, telling the director of a homeless shelter for veterans that if they want milk they should learn how to milk cows is abhorrent, whether the speaker thinks it's a joke or not.
Well I think I have said this before, Am I better off today than four years ago? For me the answer is no. Do I believe that Mitt Romney will help me be better off four years from now? For me the answer is yes so all of this back and forth BS is worthless to me.
Nothing is that easy. Our democratic system is based on back and forth BS on the hope that voters will be able to shift through the BS,find a glimmer of truth or reason here and there, and chose the candidate who they deem the best. Good luck and give it your best shot.
Fly you say "Mitt is a true chameleon" Its very hard to disprove and or validate someones opinion. For example one might assume, if a man changes his name, from Barry to Barack Hussein...
Not us against them sebhsparent? Is it not easy to see you are "against" Mitt Romney by your words and actions?
Or one could assume that Buffet is a true patriot for saying in all wonder how he pays less in tax than his secretary that its true...
Or one could assume that Buffet is a fox and is playing Barry and the media like a fiddle. With the pipe line veto one might assume Buffets trains can transport the crude..."We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." —Cincinnati, OH, Sept. 22, 2011 Barry
I guess you could assume that Buffets corporations didnt pay 50+% corporate tax before paying Buffet devadends of wich he payed 15% tax... Is he hideing behind a corporation?
Lets assume that Of the top 20 richest people in america, 17 are liberal democrats
I could assume that when someone says "What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your Christian faith," which Obama quickly clarified ...that Sigmund Froyd never sliped
SEBH - I don't know any business owners in MA, and doing a quick Google search I could not find any data one way or the other.
However, I do know several business owners in Statesboro, myself being one of them. I am in the Food & Beverage industry. If Obamacare is fully implemented as outlined now - this is what you can expect.
1. Approximately 40% of my staff will be fired. I currently employ around 62 ppl.
2. I will reduce my open hours of operation to set days (Most Likely Wed - Sat or Thurs - Sat). The remainder of my staff will be reduced to all part time positions.
3. Because of this, the tax revenue generated by my business will also be reduced - both payroll and sales tax. The city and state will make less money from me.
4. I will have to renegotiate rent with my landlord. He will also make less money, pay less taxes, etc.
Without getting too specific, I make around 8% profit margin if everything goes well with my business. If I were just to keep operating as normal, but add medical insurance cost for all my employees, I would immediately go negative.
So, the end result is I have to manage my business to profitability. Obamacare will dictate how I do this.
So, no, I have not heard about all the businesses in MA closing. However, perhaps you should worry about local businesses. Maybe you should talk to a few? Maybe you would like to come help me inform those who will no longer have a job, and can now go back on government assistance? Then YOU can help pay for them as well.
So this means you do not currently provide health insurance to your full-time staff, right?
Talk about the law of unintended consequences. The whole notion of employers providing health insurance to their employees, which has always seemed a bit illogical to me, was the result of employers looking for a way around wage restrictions imposed by the government during WWII. Those restrictions were only briefly applied, and never have been imposed since, but the tradition of fringe benefits remains, and I'll bet the net headaches it has given most employers ever since has far, far outweighed the net benefits of those employers during WWII!
That is correct - I do not provide health insurance for full time employees. It's just a simple matter of math. If I were to add that cost, and operate as I do currently, I would go broke.
I did not know that about the WWII wage restrictions. What was the thought behind restricting wages?
Sox, I've not found an entirely convincing answer to that. PRICE controls have been put in place during war time, including WWII, to protect against runaway inflation and war profiteering. So one explanation of WAGE controls was to protect businesses from being caught in the middle (that is, having to pay increasing wages while not being able to raise prices). A related explanation was that the shortage of labor in the business sector (as a large portion of the labor force was redirected to the war effort) could drastically drive up wages through basic supply-and-demand, leading to serious inflation.
A very different explanation revolved around a fairness issue: if soldiers risking life and limb were being paid a pittance, it was unfair that those who were back home should be allowed to earn as much as possible.
The anti-inflation explanations seem more reasonable than the fairness one, but I haven't seen the writings of the people who actually enacted the wage controls, only those of historians interpreting the past.
Interesting - I was not aware of that. What are your feelings toward the implementation of Obamacare?
On the one hand, I think people have forgotten how bad things were getting re: health insurance in this country, and there were no intelligent options being placed on the table. I rate Obama's plan an improvement over nothing being done. On the other hand, I think its implementation has been clumsy. I wish they would have implemented more of it up front, or at least more quickly, so that people would see its effects, both intended and otherwise, for themselves, instead of listening for years to hyper-partisan claims of doom. I wish the nature of discourse in our country wasn't in fact so hyper-partisan, because it's almost impossible to imagine either side watching the inevitable downsides come into play and saying, "Okay, that's not what we want to see, how can we fix that?" Finally, my most far-fetched wish is that they would have at least tried to disentangle health insurance coverage from employment.
That Romney has no trouble in shedding in beliefs or positions that prove inconvenient is well documented. It is not a matter of opinion but of fact.Talk radio blowhards make much of the the fact that the President has an exotic name ,but anyone with the slightest acquaintance with informal logic should be able to smell a red herring.
It is an exotic name I agree.
"anyone with the slightest acquaintance with informal logic" your logic fly?
your "red herring" fly?
"Informal Logic" is just an attempt.
Islamic law tells us that Barack Hussein Obama jr is muslim.
This is in no way a statment derived from logic, however informal it may be this statemant "Islamic law tells us that Barack Hussein Obama jr is muslim" is FACT.
22, I get the feeling that you're immune to argument ,so take comfort in conspiracy theories if it helps.
There is no conspiracy theory to the fact that Barry changed his name. His mother did not give him that name, his father did not give him that name, Barry picked that name out all by himself. This is a fact not theory, fly. Not my opinion nor "informal logic" can change fact!