Monday, November 5, 2012

Ohio Romney supporters in their own words - YIKES

Like I said before, perhaps the best "tactic" of the Left is simply to give committed right-wingers a microphone and enough rope to hang themselves with.

Wait till you get to the part on when the correspondent asks what is Romney's plan?

And finally, we have an answer to the question that inquiring minds want to know: is Obama a communist, an atheist, or a Muslim?  "He's all three."

Even worse, we can't even go outside with somebody watching us.

Meanwhile, those damn Buddhists are taking away our freedom of religion.

Watch the whole thing, seriously.  Then ask yourself, if you're a Romney supporter: Can you do any better than these morons in explaining yourself?


By NewLeftMedia
November 1, 2012 | YouTube

Bennett: Why vote for Romney - WHY NOT!

I'll repeat myself a little here but it seems warranted, because Romney's main backer, Bill "The Gambler" Bennett, makes the case for Romney trotting out qual's that are actually disqualifications.

First, he holds up Romney's experience at Bain Capital as the primary reason that Romney could turn around the ailing U.S. economy (that has posted 25 straight months of job growth and 13 straight quarters of GDP growth, incidentally, after losing jobs for 25 straight months from February 2008.)  In October, Ronald Reagan's budget director, a private equity guy himself, destroyed Romney's Bain qual's better than anybody.  As he described in meticulous detail, deal by deal, Romney's experience at Bain of buying ailing companies, loading them up with debt, laying off workers and/or exporting jobs overseas, and making questionable mergers to achieve questionable "synergies" that never panned out but temporarily pumped up stock prices, all the while collecting huge fees for himself and his buddies before this businesses went bust, is the exact opposite of what America's economy needs right now.  

Here's how David Stockman summed up his analysis:

The Bain Capital investments here reviewed accounted for $1.4 billion or 60 percent of the fund’s profits over 15 years, by my calculations. Four of them ended in bankruptcy; one was an inside job and fast flip; one was essentially a massive M&A brokerage fee; and the seventh and largest gain—the Italian Job—amounted to a veritable freak of financial nature.

Only trouble is, there is nobody to whom Romney can pawn off this hot potato we call America in 4 years.  We can't take a 57 percent chance that America won't be a going concern post-Romney.  

Next, Bill Bennett cites Romney's experience turning around the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics.  OK, sure, he deserves some credit for that.  But so does Big Government, which bailed out Salt Lake City at Romney's request:  

"The $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars that Congress is pouring into Utah is 1.5 times the amount spent by lawmakers to support all seven Olympic Games held in the U.S. since 1904 —combined," Donald Barlett and James Steele reported for Sports Illustrated in 2001.

But let's give Romney credit -- back then -- for giving Big Government credit where credit was due:

In his own 2004 book, Turnaround, Romney acknowledged the central role of the federal government in making the Olympics possible. "No matter how well we did cutting costs and raising revenue, we couldn't have Games without the support of the federal government."

Next, Bennett cites Romney's success as governor of Massachusetts.  Yet he curiously leaves out Romney's signature accomplishment: Romneycare.  That he alternately praises and disowns.  A health care plan based on plans by the Heritage Foundation and endorsed by Newt Gingrinch no less -- twice.  Can you say, "Media bias?"  

Next, Bennett cites Romney's moral character.  I don't need to dispute whether Romney cares about his friends and family, or humanity in the abstract.  He's not a monster.  But then again, neither is Obama, who is by all indications an extremely nice person with a lovely family, a guy who -- to his own detriment -- refuses to say bad things about his political opponents.  

Finally, Bennett cites Romney's "plans" if he is elected.  This gets back to the moral character issue.  How can we trust anything Romney says if he has flip-flopped so many times, from his $5 trillion tax cut plan (that he publicly disowned in the first 15 minutes of the first presidential debate when Obama challenged him on it) to Obama's saving the U.S. auto industry?  The guy simply cannot be honest about his own record.  "Etch A Sketch" will forever be etched into our political discourse thanks to Romney.  Some moral character!

So this is the best Romney's most eloquent spokesman could come up with.  Too bad.

In conclusion, I leave you with some of my favorite lines from Kingsley Amis's Lucky Jim, something I remember when I'm hiring somebody: 

However. I think you'll do the job all right, Dixon. It's not that you've got the qualifications, for this or any other work, but there are plenty who have. You haven't got the disqualifications, though, and that's much rarer. 

You may find that truth insufficiently inspiring.  I don't.  Any number of Democrats would make a better POTUS than Obama.  But those guys didn't make it this far.  Romney and Obama did.  Obama ain't perfect, not by a long shot. He's not nearly liberal enough; or, at least, he doesn't have the courage of his liberal convictions. But his lack of disqualifications makes him the clear choice.

(I suppose this quote could be turned on Obama if you think caring about the general welfare and believing "we're all in this together" is a disqualification. Vote your conscience.)


By William J. Bennett
November 5, 2012 | CNN

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Sandy sent by God to elect Obama?



If I were the type of guy to attend a church with a Jumbotron and a mall in it, I might believe that Hurricane Sandy had been sent by God to remind us what a real President looks like, and believes in: we're all in this together, and we help each other.

We must not even consider privatizing/disbanding FEMA and other parts of the government that keep our fellow Americans alive.


By Paul Krugman
November 4, 2012 | New York Times

Romney's hopes rest in 'contempt for the electorate'

Romney really has been hoping that nobody would care to dig into any of his statements or arguments, like his plan to cut taxes by $5 trillion and increase military spending by $2 trillion and yet (somehow) cut the deficit:

The important thing to remember here is that the GOP argument for a Romney victory rests explicitly on the hope that those who turned out to vote for Obama last time won’t be quite as engaged this time around. Republicans are hoping the electorate is not as diverse as it was in 2008, and they are arguing that the GOP base’s enthusiasm is much higher than that of core Dem constituencies. The Romney camp seems to think it will help whip GOP base voters into a frenzy — and perhaps boost turnout — if Romney casts the way Obama is urging Democratic base voters to get more involved in the process as something sinister and threatening. This is beyond idiotic; it is insulting to people’s intelligence.

The Post editorial board, in a widely cited piece, has claimed that the one constant about the Romney campaign has been that it is driven by “contempt for the electorate.” To make this case, the editorial cites Romney’s nonstop flip flops, his evasions about his own proposals, his refusal to share basic information about his finances and bundlers, and his monumental Jeep falsehood and all his other big lies. It’s fitting that Romney’s closing argument rests heavily on one last sustained expression of that contempt for the electorate — one focused squarely on a call for more engagement in the political process, i.e., on something that is fundamental to democracy itself.

Call me a conspiracy nut, but I think many smart Republicans realize Romney's plans are pie-in-the-sky.  It's just that they hate Obama so deeply, so viscerally, that they will vote for anyone running against him.  And those Republicans are mostly white people, mostly white men, mostly white older men.  It's really as simple as that.  This isn't a campaign about ideas for them.


By Greg Sargent
November 4, 2012 | Washington Post

America: Still crazy after all these years

Having several paranoid family members and friends, I can vouch that the "Paranoid Style in American Politics" is very much alive and mentally unwell.


By Todd Leopold
November 4, 2012 | CNN