Game Off
Rick Santorum is done. Gingrich has admitted defeat but still remains. Mitt Romney will be the 2012 Republican nominee. Any hopes for a crazy convention should be lost now. Time for Romney to shake his etch-a-sketch.
Romney has a mansion full of political baggage though. Obama continues to go grow stronger while Romney has been a gaffe machine that puts Vice President Biden to shame somehow. Romney is still trying to figure out how to deal with the ar right wing nut jobs that are running his party now and ruining his advantages. This is clear in the polling.
The most fantastic thing I've seen so far from polls is the Romney gender gap problem. Who'd have though the actions of the GOP against women would strengthen for Democrats what has always been a core of the Democratic Party?
Romney will have a good 6 months now to try and rebuild his image with women, to try and take over the lead in independent voters, and to make the average American stop thinking Mitt is an out of touch super wealthy weathervane who uses an elevator for his car. It's going to get ugly fast over these things.
Santorum may be trying to drop out gracefully in order to try and be Vice President. I wouldn't count on it though. Romney is much more likely to grab a Southern Governor. He may even go crazy and pick a woman again to try and close that gap but I think that's a long shot. The VP buzz has been on for weeks but now it will really ramp up.
Keep the popcorn close.
Posted by Adam Ducker at April 10, 2012 2:20 PMWe often forget the human element of being in the public eye. A politician is not merely an image- that person is a human being. In Santorum’s case, I would take his word about leaving to attend family matters. His threee-tyear ikd daughter suffers a genome defect. It’s bad. But in addition to the human side of this sudden departure, Santorum is not blind to the polls. Romney began hitting Santorum hard with negative advertising in PA, the first poll showed Santorum losing, and that, for all practical purposes, would have spelled an end to the campaign anyway. By dropping out, Santorum preserves viabiity for the 2016 campaign. In addition, he surely received enormous pressure from the GOP establishment, especially in regard to the widely perceived War on Women. Santorum bears the chief responsbility for this, and Romney showed his typical lack of political courage by moving to the right, coming out in favor of personhood amendments, wanting to kill Planned Parenthood, and so on. Santorum and Romney can read the polls as well as anyone. The Republican War on Women is a catastrophe, and a sure way to achieve a landslide loss in November.
So, my predictions for the GOP race proved absolutely accurate. Youd did well too, Adam.
I don’t think the general election will be close. Romney relied heavily on his ability to spend huge amounts of money on negative advertising, and even then, he was barely able to KO weak opponents who never did raise the funds, or adequately organize.
The SuperPAC’s are Romneys only asset, albeit a very big one. His negatives are sky high. Although the right will unite behind him, not all of them will do so.
Rachel Maddow ran an interesting segment last night on the state of some Republican state organizations. The state GOP in MN is broke. Many others, in states such as NV, IA, NH, CA, and NY, are extremely weak. This inability to organize is a huge vulnerability. It’s nearly impossible to win an election solely by saturation bombing the airwaves with negative ads. Romney not only has a serious problem, so do all the down ticket races.
The War on Women might prove to be a fatal mistake in and of itself, truly a gift for the Obama campaign. Throw in a lot of money, good organization, and the bully pulpit of the office of the president, and Obama will clobber Romney.
Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2012 3:51 PMThis morning on “Morning Joe” Axlerod started the Romney attack in full and again brought up the tax rate issue. Funny I had just finished my taxes and I was astounded to find, ding, ding, ding, my Fed income rate was better than Mitt’s 15%.
We are an empty nest, middle class couple with our primary house and charitable deductions as our remaining deductions (those kids were a net loss anyway!) and yet we still paid less than 15% Fed on our gross. And I did my daughter’s taxes, her first year in the job market and only the standard deduction, and she came in around 11%. Funny, you always hear that people making less than $50k don’t pay fed income taxes, but she paid about $5k to live in this great country.
So it got me wondering, who does pay more than 15% of their gross?
Posted by: George at April 10, 2012 5:25 PMAdam Ducker, sorry but I have no confidence in your Washington Post/ABC poll. I do not belive any of the numbers, and I certainly don’t believe Romney is in trouble with women.
Obama’s problem is that he is trying to run on the ticket of a Washington outsider. He’s not running as an incumbent. He’s not running on any of his record; his running exactly as he ran in 2008. The problem is, the American people know what he is, a socalist trying to destroy America.
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 10, 2012 5:27 PMGeorge,
I pay more than 15%. A lot more. It’s called the Alternative Minimum Tax, AMT. In my case it’s not on gross income, but on a transaction. Taking possession of stock options and converting them to stock required payment of the taxable amount in full, up front, even though no sale of the actual stock took place. The conversion qualified as a taxable event. Worse yet, the following year the feds kept that taxable amount as a credit against eventual future sale of the stock.
There’s been talk about reforming AMT rules, but for the really rich guys like Romney, they still somehow manage a tax rate in the teens, rather than the 30’s.
Billinflorida,
Why would you not believe Romney is in trouble with women? His stands on the issues are toxic among women, especially women under the age of 50. Even as GOP spokesman denied there was a War on Women, Gov Walker from WI was quietly signing four bills harmful to the interests of women, including one that did away with a WI law giving women the right to sue over equal pay.
Republicans desperately want to avoid the subject. The problem is that the Republican War on Women is already baked into the cake. Large numbers of bills have made their way through political processes of various states, and now they’re coming to votes. These bills include definitions of personhood at conception, forcing women to undergo unnecessary ultrasounds if considering abortion for any reason, restricting access to birth control, doing away with Planned Parenthood, and so on.
The good news for the GOP is that Santorum has dropped out. My sense is that Romney never really cared about social issues in the first place, especially not women’s issues. He will say whatever he feels he has to say on any given day, depending on the crowd, but it’s just going through the motions.
I know poliicians lie. Part of that comes from the need to negotiate and compromise. But I’ve never seen anyone lie as much as Romney. Even for a politician, he’s remarkable.
Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2012 6:00 PMRomney can shake that etch a sketch all he wants, but the fact is, as a result of the campaign Santorum ran he isn’t just left with the enormous problem of appealing to the vast majority of American women — he also faces a very serious problem of not appealing at all to the social conservatives and far right evangelicals. In other words a very large percentage of the GOP base still doesn’t like Mitt, and they consider the Mormon religion a crazy cult (which if you ever look at exactly what they believe, it pretty much is).
Btw, why is this website having so much trouble with the posting of comments? I’m starting to think I’ll have to take holiday from this site if it isn’t fixed soon…
Posted by: Adrienne at April 10, 2012 6:13 PMI find the wild-eyed unrealistic predictions of the obama liberals above fascinating. Choosing one or two issues they predict an obama landslide. The real issues, on which the election will hinge, jobs, federal debt, wild administration spending, poor management of foreign affairs, and ignoring our constitution, among others, will not favor obama or the liberals.
If the liberals on WB care to lull themselves into some kind of magical thinking about obama being reelected that’s just fine with me.
Posted by: Royal Flush at April 10, 2012 6:18 PMAdrienne writes about the Mormon religion being a “crazy cult”. I wonder if she has heard the recent sermons by Rev. Wright, obama pastor for 20 odd years. I’ll take the Mormon’s any day over that hate filled devil.
Posted by: Royal Flush at April 10, 2012 6:22 PMphx8, so what is Obama’s plan? Is he going to run on his accomplishments or is he going to run on smearing the opponent?
Adrienne, as a “far right evangelical” and a “conservative”, I will have no problem supporting Romney. His religious beliefs mean nothing to me. I might also add, I have many friends who belive the same as I, and feel the same about Romney. This falsehood, you are speaking of, is nothing more than a liberal pipedream.
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 10, 2012 6:26 PMRoyal, AD has based his whole post on the poll of the left leaning Washington Post and ABC. The events taking place in DC (if polls are to be used) must be based on all the polls taken by all organizations. The overall polls show Americans are not happy with Obama. Example, if 70% of Americans want to see obamacare repealed, how can the left predict an Obama victory? It also answers the question why Obama is not running on passing obamacare.
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 10, 2012 6:33 PMAdrienne,
I keep having comments stopped by a ‘too many submissions’ error msg, even though I am positive that’s not the case. Very frustrating…
You righties can say whatever you want now, but it’s obvious Mitt didn’t and still doesn’t appeal to the evangelicals and social conservatives. Otherwise Santorum wouldn’t have stayed in the primary race nearly as long as he has. Mitt has an enthusiasm problem with the base of the GOP and will naturally now go out of his way trying to appeal to them. However, this means he will not be able to run toward the center to try to win over the moderate voters and women he needs in order to win the general election.
McCain had this exact same weakness as Romney — and that’s why he picked Palin. I expect to see Romney doing the same by picking a far right evangelical running mate.
And no, once more I don’t think this will work for the national election.
The Supreme Court will throw out all the gazillion pages of obamacare. obama will then run on a platform urging voters to vote more dems and libs into congress to pass an even worse version.
Romney need ask the simple question…Are you better off now, under four years with obama, or are you ready for a president who wears long pants?
He can use obama quotes against him very effectively, there are many. He can ask why obama’s latest budget proposal crashed in defeat with not even dems supporting it. He can ask where all the money went that obama promised would create jobs and restore public confidence. He can ask where all that promised “hope and change” has gone and prove how riddled his administration is with incompetent people, and in many cases, down right dishonest criminal behavior by his hired thugs.
Posted by: Royal Flush at April 10, 2012 7:42 PMBillinFlorida: “I do not belive any of the numbers, and I certainly don’t believe Romney is in trouble with women.”
What about a Fox poll? Would you believe that? This recent Fox Poll asks “19. If the presidential election were held today how would you vote …”
Just 49% said Obama, but 37% said Romney. A 12 point gap like that will doom Romney. The gender gap is real no matter how many polls you ignore.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 10, 2012 8:23 PMRoyal Flush: “Are you better off now, under four years with obama…”
Romney will ask that believing the base will not check the facts and will simply suggest the answer is no. This is like when Romney trashes Harvard grad Obama because he believes the base won’t notice Romney graduated from the same school. Romney needs your help with that level of deceit and I guess he can count you in.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 10, 2012 8:27 PMAdrienne said:
“You righties can say whatever you want now, but it’s obvious Mitt didn’t and still doesn’t appeal to the evangelicals and social conservatives. Otherwise Santorum wouldn’t have stayed in the primary race nearly as long as he has.”
Adrienne, I believe you are incapable of comprehending any facts. You claim that Mitt Romney did not appeal to a certain group of Republicans simply because Santorum has stayed in the race until today, April 10, 2012. And you base it on what; the fact that Romney is a Mormon or moderate? Let me show you how ignorant that statement is:
Hillary Clinton was in the 2008 primary, running against Obama, until June 3, 2008. That is 2 months longer than Santorum. There was division in the Democratic Party and if we use your logic, half of the Democratic Party was for Hillary and against Obama, simply because Obama was black. But even though half of the Democratic Party did not want to vote for Obama because he was black; they were still able to come together and vote for him in November.
Before you get your panties in a wad over Obama being black; it makes as much sense as your claims that Romney will not be able to galvanize the Republican vote.
“BillinFlorida: “I do not belive any of the numbers, and I certainly don’t believe Romney is in trouble with women.”
What about a Fox poll? Would you believe that? This recent Fox Poll asks “19. If the presidential election were held today how would you vote …”
Just 49% said Obama, but 37% said Romney. A 12 point gap like that will doom Romney. The gender gap is real no matter how many polls you ignore.”
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 10, 2012 8:23 PM
Adam Ducker, I’m sorry, but I will have to put your intelligence on the same level as Adrienne.
Your polls mean nothing. Not even the Fox polls:
First, liberals never quote polls unless they are in favor of Obama. Any polls that are against Obama are incorrect and should be ignored.
Secondly, if you’re going to go by the polls, then you have to go by all the polls. A single poll means nothing. Re/Obama polls, if you look at the polls as a whole, you will see a distrust of Obama and the Democrats. I gave the example of 70% of voters who want obamacare repealed. In order for 70% to want it repealed, it means 70% of the voters know about it, who passed it, and they don’t want it.
Thirdly, except for a few left leaning polls which show Obama at around 50-51%; Obama is hovering around the 40-45% approval and reelect ability numbers. It takes more than 50% to win. You claim Romney’s numbers are at 37%; but that is misleading because Romney is not the only Republican running. Now that he looks to be the candidate, why don’t we wait and see what the numbers are when it’s just Romney and the socialist Obama.
BillinFlorida,
This is supposed to be a political debating website, and it’s become really obvious that you simply don’t know how to debate because all you ever do is fling insults and try to insult people. I’m here to debate issues, not feed trolls.
Posted by: Adrienne at April 10, 2012 9:44 PMGovernor Romney would beat Obama easily. Governor Romney has a record to run on including fixing Massachusetts’ budget woes as well as those of the Salt Lake City Olympics. Romney also passed a phenomenally successful law that reformed health insurance for the better. If Romney ran on his record as governor he would surely win.
Unfortunately for the GOP, the man they are about to nominate is not Governor Romney, but Candidate Romney. Candidate Romney has eschewed his successes as governor in order to adopt flawed conservative positions, which will cost him. By eschewing his successes as governor, Romney will not be able to run on his own record; his only choice will be to negatively attack Obama. Meanwhile, Obama will be able to run on a successful four years. An economy in the gutter has been transformed into a steady recovery. Although the individual mandate is unpopular, the rest of the PPACA is quite popular; repealing the PPACA will mean a return to the regime where people are tied to their employer for insurance and people are denied coverage because of “preexisting conditions”. If the rest of the law goes into effect in 2014, it will become a lot more popular.
RF,
I wonder if she has heard the recent sermons by Rev. Wright, obama pastor for 20 odd years. I’ll take the Mormon’s any day over that hate filled devil.
Have you ever listened to any of Wright’s sermon’s in context? Or are you assuming that 30 seconds from 3 sermons is enough to judge a man with a 20 year track record?
Adrienne & Phx8,
I keep having comments stopped by a ‘too many submissions’ error msg, even though I am positive that’s not the case. Very frustrating…
I sidestep this problem by switching browsers or by clearing my computer of temporary files (cookies, history, cache, etc).
Billinflorida
Secondly, if you’re going to go by the polls, then you have to go by all the polls. A single poll means nothing.
I agree.
Obama is hovering around the 40-45% approval
When I at recent polls, I only see one poll in the past month that shows Obama with an approval rating below 45% (the most recent Gallup tracking poll puts him at 44%). There are 4 other polls that put him above 45%, including two that put him at 50% or above. Those 50+% polls were conducted by ORC & Abt-SRBI on behalf of CNN & ABC/WaPo. I would not characterize ORC or Abt-SRBI as left leaning.
Nevertheless, quoting polls this far out is a pretty useless exercise this far out before the election. Personally, I’d wait until the summer begins. Things will definitely change in June when the SCOTUS releases their decision regarding the PPACA. Also, the economy is likely to improve over the next 6 months and voters will credit Obama for it.
Posted by: Warped Reality at April 10, 2012 10:25 PMI’m better off thanks to the Obama administration. Much, much better. No question.
Repeal Obamacare? I’d be fine with that as long as the alternative is universal health care, Medicare for all. A lot of people feel the same. That doesn’t mean people like myself distrust Obama. It all depends on how the question is posed. Ask people if they oppose government interference in Medicare, and they’ll say ‘yes.’ Ask those same people if everyone should be eligible for insurance despite pre-existing conditions…
Romney faces huge problems with various constituencies. Among latinos, Bush garnered 44% in 2004, McCain in the mid-thirties in 2008, and right now according to a Fox News latino poll, Romney would take only 14% of the latino vote in a head-to-head match with Obama.
It’s virtually impossible for Romney to win with those kinds of numbers. And those polls reflect what most of us would expect: GOP positions on immigration are anathema to latinos. Does any conservative think latinos find the idea of a lethally electrified fence at the border funny, or even a good idea?
Does anyone seriously question how gays will vote? Blacks? Does anyone seriously question how women will vote, given a choice of Obama or Romney?
It’s simple math. Romney has a huge problem, and he knows it. A lot of groups have been seriously put off by the GOP primaries, and now it’s only seven months to the election.
Posted by: phx8 at April 10, 2012 10:28 PMBillinFlorida: You’re saying I can’t point out Romney’s trouble with women…because Obama’s support overall is not that strong? Sorry. Romney is weak with women either way but keep on spinning.
I fail to see a source for your 70% repeal figure and just on the polls I’ve seen right now that seems laughably high. And why do you say Obama isn’t running on health care? One of the biggest splashes so far from his camp has been the Road Traveled video which featured the health care bill significantly. Also, his stump speech that he’s been giving all around the nation the past few months includes health care. So when you say 70% want it’s repeal and Obama isn’t running on the health care bill it becomes clear quickly that you’re not basing your opinion on reality.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 11, 2012 8:53 AMI’m not going to say I think Obama will win in a landslide but I do believe that the matchup between Romney and Obama comes with many flaws that favor Obama. It’s a long time to November though so we’ll just have to keep watching polls and see if Romney can avoid gaffes that destroy his standing with large chunks of the US population.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 11, 2012 8:57 AM“BillinFlorida,
This is supposed to be a political debating website, and it’s become really obvious that you simply don’t know how to debate because all you ever do is fling insults and try to insult people. I’m here to debate issues, not feed trolls.”
Posted by: Adrienne at April 10, 2012 9:44 PM
Adrienne, thank you for answering your absurd facts; you can’t back your facts up, so you call people trolls. So indeed, who is the troll on WB?
“Romney will not be able to run on his own record; his only choice will be to negatively attack Obama. Meanwhile, Obama will be able to run on a successful four years. An economy in the gutter has been transformed into a steady recovery.” Warped Reality
I fail to understand why Romney will not be able to run on his own record. Re/negativity; if telling the truth about Obama is negative, then so be it. But I find it interesting that you believe Obama would not run negative ads and would run on his successful record. What successful record would that be?
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rasmussen-Obamacare-repeal-healthcare/2011/01/14/id/382910
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law
“But then 70 percent of mainstream voters favor repeal of the healthcare bill.”
“Americans Do Not Think Individual Mandate Passes Legal Muster
The Supreme Court next month will hear legal challenges to the healthcare law, which are focused on the law’s requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance or pay a fine. Americans overwhelmingly believe the “individual mandate,” as it is often called, is unconstitutional, by a margin of 72% to 20%.”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152969/Americans-Divided-Repeal-2010-Healthcare-Law.aspx
If 72% of Americans believe the mandate is illegal; what will they think of obamacare when the SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional and Obama tries to fund it with some other means?
Re/women vote: 4 months ago he was losing the women’s vote. So your confidence that Obama has the woman’s vote locked up is about 7 months early.
President Obama has the election in the bag.
The left has succeeded in creating its desired government dependent populace and there is no disputing these people will continue to vote for those who promise them even more of their “freebies” they have been conditioned to believe they are entitled to.
The left has effectively:
Convinced people Romney is a conservative and anybody to the right of him is a right-wing nutjob extremist.
Made the case that breaking immigration laws is ok and all against illegal immigration are racists.
Made standing up for freedom of religion and freedom of choice, a war on women.
Led people to believe other peoples paychecks are taxed less if they make more money.
Made not believing in special treatment for others to mean one is racist and sexist.
Made patriotism a dirty word.
And, worst of all, they have convinced people that they are entitled to the fruits of others and a liberal ran government is the tool that will give it to them.
You add those effective moves to the fact that Obama is guaranteed the blind mass support of blacks and the election will be a landslide.
The only way Romney has a possible chance is if Dems shoot themselves in the foot with more fear based anti Constitutional gun control laws.
Posted by: kctim at April 11, 2012 10:20 AMBillinfloria:
Funny stuff. You started out saying “70% of Americans” then you switched to “70% of voters” and now you’re saying “70% of mainstream voters.” What does that even mean? Mainstream voters?
Not a single source you sited backs up such a high number. You’re simply employing the stale tactic of combining every person who wants the bill changed in any way into a giant group you want us to believe all hate the bill and therefore hate President Obama. I say stale because your side has been using it since the bill passed. I don’t think a supporter of the bill is going to truly pretend it has broad mainstream support but how far your side has to stretch to make it seem as unpopular as you say is very revealing.
“4 months ago he was losing the women’s vote.”
Was he? Source?
“So your confidence that Obama has the woman’s vote locked up is about 7 months early.”
I didn’t say he had it locked up, just that it’s a trouble spot for Romney. It is. You know it is. In fact I wrote in my post that Romney has 6 months to correct that.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 11, 2012 10:48 AMWell tell me AD, which counts more, 70% of voters, or 70% of Americans? I’m surprised you don’t want to include 70% of illegal aliens. IMO, 70% of voters will make the difference. But that still doesn’t matter; perhaps Mr. Funnyman Adam Ducker could show us just one poll showing a majority of Americans who want obamacare to stand? You can’t because it doesn’t exist. The 2010 election shows you where Americans/voters stand on obamacare.
Re/women vote: if polls show an increase in support of women for Obama, then it stands to reason it is an increase from a lower number. We don’t need a link to prove that, unless your numbers are a lie. Furthermore, you are trying to give us numbers of support of women for Obama/Romney; but what happens to those women who supported Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul? The only women’s poll number that counts is between Romney and Obama, and we don’t have that number.
The problem with polls is as I said before; you lefties on WB want to pick and choose your polls based on whether they make Obama look good or not. No polls that include Gingrich, Santorum, or Paul can be included in a Romney/Obama poll. Plus, if you are going to look at polls, you must look at all of them. Here is another example:
62% of voters think obamacare would cause them to lose their employee insurance and be forced on government insurance:
“Most voters still worry that the national health care law will cause some companies to drop employee health care coverage and think it would be bad if those employees were forced into a government insurance plan instead.”
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 11, 2012 1:47 PMkctim,
It has not been “the left” that has convinced people Romney is a conservative (?) and that everyone to the right of him is an extremist. The primaries and televised debates and candidate interviews did that. Republicans did it to one another. And people see that stuff. They notice when Republicans vote almost unanimously against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. They notice when Repubicans at the state level introduce one bill after another defining personhood at conception, or restricting abortion, or taking away a woman’s right to sue to fair pay, as WI Gov Walker just did. People notice the Blunt amendment, which almost every Republican Senator supported. People notice. The left is only calling attention to what the GOP has been doing.
The difference between the left and the right is that the left has the self-awareness to avoid picking fights over issues that will negatively impact elections, such gun control. The right lacks that self-awareness. They insist on pushing highly unpopular agendas. Now, a person on the left the right can righteously argue for the moral or constitutional correctness of their position, and someone else will surely disagree.
But at some point, you have to have the wisdom to pick your fights.
The Issa hearing photograph showing five old men testifying about birth control was a catastrophe. And as if that weren’t bad enough, Rush Limbaugh spent three days trashing a young woman who was not permitted to testify at that hearing as a “slut” and worse. Throw in GOP opposition to the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act for women, personhood legislation, and so on, and it turns into a broadly perceived War on Women.
It’s amazing how many Republican men do not understand how the attempt to restrict birth control as a matter of religious freedom is perceived by women. Again, it’s a lack of self-awareness, of how ones actions are perceived by another.
Romney is scrambling. After being asked about the Lily Ledbetter Act this morning, he said he would get back to the questioner, and an hour later came back saying he favored the Act. Remember, this is legislation almost every Republican opposed. It illustrates just how deep the GOP problems are becoming with the basic demographics of the 2012 population.
Posted by: phx8 at April 11, 2012 2:19 PMkctim:
The left has effectively: Convinced people Romney is a conservative and anybody to the right of him is a right-wing nutjob extremist.
OOOPPPPSSSS!
You could’ve knocked me over with a feather - all this time I would have swore I’ve heard Romney say he was a Conservative! Must have wax in my ears!
Unfortunately many of those on the Right who supported Santorum, Gingrich or Paul proved that many of you are “
nutjobs(sic).
Made the case that breaking immigration laws is ok and all against illegal immigration are racists.
I personally wish the immigration laws had been enforced when they were first enacted! As do many of the ‘so-called’ liberals you hate.
Made standing up for freedom of religion and freedom of choice, a war on women.
FREEDOM of CHOICE!!!
I believe the term you folks prefer is: PRO-LIFE, not PRO-CHOICE!!!! Get your terms straight!
You have got to be kidding! Instead of choice, the so-called Right wants to take us back to the 1950’s and earlier, right back to not even allowing women to have a choice over what happens to THEIR bodies. You would like to see contraceptive devices and pills removed from the market.
Do that and just who do you think is going to care for all the little unwanted teenage babies? The news just announced that there has been a major drop in teenage pregnancies. Have it your way and that drop will rise so fast your heads will spend.
Yeah, yeah - we’ll just adopt them all, right? And just who is going to adopt them? YOU? Right now, the most adoptable babies are white newborns. Not Black, Hispanic, or bi-radical. There are many reasons for this, but one of the most valid one is economics. Blacks, Hispanics, and Biracial couples are amongst the poorest groups in the country. They can’t afford to adopt! Why do you suppose so many of them are up for adoption NOW?
You also want to over-turn Roe vs. Wade,ALL in the NAME of YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, and TO HECK WITH MINE!!!!
Yeah, I know.. I must not be a true Christian… Well, the Lord will have to figure that one out - NOT you folks! Thank GOD!
Led people to believe other peoples paychecks are taxed less if they make more money.
This just happens to be true. Why do you think that Warren Buffet is behind this? You think he is an idiot? He didn’t get rich by giving it away. However, his conscience evidently must hurt quiet a bit now, since he is behind the “Buffet” rule.
Romney pays less in taxes than I DO! 15 percent, my foot! My tax bracket puts me in the 20-22 percent range, and I don’t have enough money to donate to all the charities I would like to, let alone make enough to pay for the higher education bills I have had for MY 6 children. They have ALL had to work to help pay for their college education.(Did them the world of good too)
Betcha Romney’s kids don’t work! That’d be absurd! I’d just love to see all his tax deductions!
Made not believing in special treatment for others to mean one is racist and sexist.
Depends on who the special treatment is for… rich White people, or poor Black? It is racial most of the time. Sorry. You just don’t want to admit it.
How many rich Blacks can you name vs. how many rich White people can you name? What about Hispanics? or Bi-Racial couples? Oriental? Native Americans? Women?
I betcha you can come up with several White rich folks,(all MEN) and maybe one or two Black, and none of the other five?
Made patriotism a dirty word.
WHAT THE HECK????!!!!
I don’t know where you got this idea!!! Certainly not from this Blog! Whether we agree or not, I honestly believe that everyone here is just as PATRIOTIC as another! Why do you think people feel as strongly as they do about certain issues? Because they care about those issues, and what they will mean to OUR Country. THE UNITED STATES!
One doesn’t have to wear a military uniform to be patriotic, you know. On can fight with words,deeds,money, guns,or without guns, and still be extremely PATRIOTIC! JEEZ!!!!
Posted by: Highlandangel1 at April 11, 2012 2:54 PM
Billinflorida: “Well tell me AD, which counts more, 70% of voters, or 70% of Americans?”
Neither of them are a real measure of support for repealing the healthcare bill so I don’t see how it matters. Find out what it means to say “mainstream voters” and then maybe I’ll accept your figure of 70%.
“…perhaps Mr. Funnyman Adam Ducker could show us just one poll showing a majority of Americans who want obamacare to stand?”
I’m glad you’ve retreated from 70% to a simple majority. An overall average of 50.5% favor repeal to an average of 39.8% against repeal. I agree the bill is not that popular. I just don’t understand why your side goes to such great lengths to say things like “70% of Americans favor repeal” and so on.
“The only women’s poll number that counts is between Romney and Obama, and we don’t have that number.”
Sure we do. Look at how the Fox News poll worded the question:
If the presidential election were held today how would you vote if the candidates were …
Now, if it asked who do you support: Obama, Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich, etc., then you’d have a point. Instead the question is about a matchup between Obama and Romney and Romney falls short by 12 points.
One thing Romney has going for him though is he has more support from conservative women than Santorum, Gingrich and Paul do. Romney has tried to stay away from the war against women as much as he can.
Adam:
It’s a long time to November though so we’ll just have to keep watching polls and see if Romney can avoid gaffes that destroy his standing with large chunks of the US population.
Oh the Rmoney been connecting with the common man all over the place — for instance there’s a new video of him talking about all the horses he owns. Yeah, Ann’s partial to her Austrian-Warmblood dressage horses, and Mittster’s got himself a Missouri-Foxtrotter quarterhorse don’t you know.
Bwahahahah!
kctim:
The left has effectively:
Convinced people Romney is a conservative and anybody to the right of him is a right-wing nutjob extremist.
Excuuuuuuuse me, but Rmoney SAID he is “SEVERELY CONSERVATIVE”!!!
And lots of other right-wing nutjob extremist stuff!
Not to mention the fact that he’s also becoming quite the conservative fashion icon too!
Republican Allan West meeting with constitutents.
From WaPo:
“When a questioner asked West about Marxists in “the American legislature,” some in the crowd jeered, but West took a different approach.
“No, it’s a good question,” he said, adding: “I believe there is about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.”
After a long pause, West adds that he is talking about the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group of 76 of the more liberal Democrats in the U.S. House.”
Not that, you know, conservatives to the right of Romney are nutjobs. Oh no. Of course not. Far from it. Perfectly reasonable. And Allan West would be an ideal VP choice too. That would help counter the influence of communists in the House of Representatives.
phx8:
Not that, you know, conservatives to the right of Romney are nutjobs. Oh no. Of course not. Far from it. Perfectly reasonable. And Allan West would be an ideal VP choice too. That would help counter the influence of communists in the House of Representatives.
Indeed, Rmoney-West will surely usher in American Red Scare Number Three!!! And, this time we’re starting out fully assured from the beginning that they ‘have no sense of decency, sir. At long last, they have no sense of decency.’ Yet, and to again paraphrase Joseph Welsh to Joe McCarthy: ‘if there is a God in heaven, it will do neither them nor their cause any good!’
I think the biggest problem for the conservatives is the unfounded belief that they have popularity to burn.
They don’t. They can’t alienate people left and right, no matter how right they feel they are or actually are without eating into the margins that got them their House majority. They can’t win the Presidency if one side of the political spectrum can’t stand him because he’s not a true believer, and the other side can’t stand him because he’s out of touch and elitist.
I’m not sure what the outcome of all the SuperPACs will be. For one thing, too many of their messages are thuddingly obvious, and all too many annoying to their audience. For another thing, SuperPACs don’t do real political groundwork. If Obama brings a massive ground game to the election, Romney might not be able to keep up.
I won’t count these chickens before they hatch, but I will say this: counting on people to share your hatred of a candidate is a poor way to win an election against them.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 11, 2012 9:31 PMStephen, we can take your whole post and substitute the word “socialist liberal” for conservative and come to the same result.
The biggest problem with socialist liberals is that they can’t comprehend that there are people who think differently than they do. Welcome to he real world Stephen.
BTW; once again the left on WB does not fail us. I wondered why all the talk about the women’s support. I should have realized that once again th left on WB is carrying the water bucket for Obama and company. What is the daily talking points from the Obama administration: you got it, “women’s support”. So once again we find liberals unable to carry on a conversation without quoting the daily talking points of Obama.
Posted by: Frank at April 12, 2012 8:40 AMPhx8
Just as with Obama, primaries are one thing and what the record shows is another. Romney has the problems he does because real conservatives do not believe he has a conservative record and him trying to run as a conservative is laughable to most of them.
The left never just calls attention to something, they take something and twist and spin it until they find what pisses people off and then endlessly promote it as truth, just as they did with the contraception fiasco.
Both sides always feel like they have more support than they really do and there is always some who will pick a fight and get shut down.
That is why I say Obama has the election in the bag UNLESS dems do such a thing over gun control or something.
The photograph thing was one of those brilliant BS things from the left that I was talking about. There were five guys basically debating who should pay and it was turned into five guys deciding if women can use birth control or not.
Rush is a radio host who can say what he wants. While it is another one of those brilliant lefty moves to make it look like EVERY Republican rep agrees with him, it is BS. If that was the case, then every Dem is like Thaddeus Matthews and afraid of the evil white mans whiteness rubbing off on to them.
So why was Fluke not permitted to “testify?” What’s the whole story with that?
“It’s amazing how many Republican men do not understand how the attempt to restrict birth control as a matter of religious freedom is perceived by women.”
It’s amazing how many women don’t care enough to actually find out the truth. Birth control would have still been available on every corner and in every office. The issue was about who pays for it: the person wanting or needing it, or someone else who did not want to.
Yes, Romney is scrambling and he will fail in his bid to become President. Heck, he probably wouldn’t have even won without all the lies, spin and mistruths.
Posted by: kctim at April 12, 2012 9:40 AMFrank:
You’re like a broken record at this point. I really wish the left was as organized and top down with our “talking points” as you pretend we are. You’d really be in trouble then.
If you can’t take part in discussions of topics that trend in the media or the national conversation without whining and crying about it then by all means stop wasting your time and ours.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 12, 2012 10:26 AM
Kctim, spin and half truths are what elections are famous for. There is no law saying that conservatives have exclusive rights to this kind of behavior.
Both conservatives and liberals are hoping to spin a win.
There is no forum in this country where issues can be thoroughly vetted and the people can decide for themselves, there are only spin masters. Citizens have to be willing to work hard to find the facts hidden within the spin.
I would credit conservative talk radio and cable news networks for making this behavior paramount in our election process.
It is a fact that more conservatives than liberals support this behavior. The conservative spin masters brag about their ratings war with liberals spinners. Of course many of those who support this spin garbage don’t see it as such, but as gospel.
Yes, liberals should not be counting their chickens before they hatch because Romney can win this election and drag more than the current 80 conservative members of the NAZI party into Congress on his coattails.
The thing is that Adam West can declare Democratic Congresspeople communists and get reelected. Good spin trumps most Congressional voting records as a reason for reelecting. A majority of Americans don’t know their representatives Congressional voting record, only their party affiliation and their spin.
Posted by: jlw at April 12, 2012 10:38 AMThere were five guys basically debating who should pay and it was turned into five guys deciding if women can use birth control or not.
That debate was always about whether women could spend their own money on birth control or not. When a woman works for an employer, she is compensated through a combination of a wage as well as a health coverage. When a woman uses the health coverage to pay for care, she is spending money that she has earned and not someone else’s money. The failure to understand this fact is why the GOP stumbled into this “war on women” meme.
Rush is a radio host who can say what he wants. While it is another one of those brilliant lefty moves to make it look like EVERY Republican rep agrees with him, it is BS.Democrats get away with that accusation because Limbaugh holds a unique position of influence amongst the GOP’s conservative base. Plenty of Democrats are willing to condemn things said by Thaddeus Matthews. Most Republicans find themselves in a different position.
Birth control would have still been available on every corner and in every office. The issue was about who pays for it: the person wanting or needing it, or someone else who did not want to.
The question was whether women could use the health care coverage that they earned to pay for it or not. If they had to use their own cash, they would essentially be paying for it twice.
Posted by: Warped Reality at April 12, 2012 10:39 AMHighland
IF you paid attention to candidates, you would see that they claim to be what they aren’t in order to drum up votes. Obama pretended to be a centrist to get moderate votes and moderate Romney floats over the conservative line to get conservative votes.
I doubt that you have too much wax in your ears, you probably just need to do a better job of processing what you hear.
“I personally wish the immigration laws had been enforced when they were first enacted! As do many of the ‘so-called’ liberals you hate.”
Sigh. I have not been back long enough for you to understand my politics, but I can assure you that I “hate” the politics, not the people.
As to your point, the majority of Democrats are moderates, not liberals/progressives and I understand that it is the latter group that promotes the rhetoric that anybody supporting laws to fight illegal immigration are racists.
FREEDOM of CHOICE!!!
I believe the term you folks prefer is: PRO-LIFE, not PRO-CHOICE!!!! Get your terms straight!”
I do have my ” terms straight,” in fact, my terms are based on fact, not politics such as yours. Why? Because one is NOT pro-choice simply because they support abortion, we are pro-choice because we actually believe in choice for ALL.
Because of that, your use of “you folks prefer,” is ridiculous. You see, I support abortion, so I have no problem with women getting abortions. In fact, I don’t even care if women use it as a form of birth control. Your body, your choice. What I do have a problem with is people being forced to pay for it against their will.
You are not pro-choice if you don’t believe others also have the right to choice.
“You would like to see contraceptive devices and pills removed from the market.”
I have already shown you to be wrong about me on that. But tell me, exactly what laws have been enacted to remove such things from the market? None.
Apparently, you like to use stereotypes of the evil right to support your opinions, not facts.
“Do that and just who do you think is going to care for all the little unwanted teenage babies? The news just announced that there has been a major drop in teenage pregnancies. Have it your way and that drop will rise so fast your heads will spend.”
Actually, if I have it my way, people who “say” they support helping in such cases would have to put their money where their mouth is, wouldn’t they. You could no longer say “I support it so everybody must pay,” you instead would have to say “I support it so here’s my money.”
“Yeah, yeah - we’ll just adopt them all, right? And just who is going to adopt them? YOU?”
Hell no not me. I’m not the one pretending that I care. When I do care about something, I actually support it, I don’t try and mandate others to support it for me.
“Why do you suppose so many of them are up for adoption NOW?”
One reason is because people who “say” they care just sit back and wait for government to do things for them? Another reason is because people have been conditioned to believe that they are not responsible for their own lives.
“You also want to over-turn Roe vs. Wade,ALL in the NAME of YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, and TO HECK WITH MINE!!!!”
LOL!
1 - I’m a freaking atheist, I have no religious beliefs.
2 - Why must your beliefs be respected in order to get something, but the beliefs of others do not have to be respected when it comes to paying for that something?
“You think he is an idiot? He didn’t get rich by giving it away. However, his conscience evidently must hurt quiet a bit now, since he is behind the “Buffet” rule.”
Evidently his conscience doesn’t hurt so bad that he has been paying what he “says” he should be paying.
“Romney pays less in taxes than I DO! 15 percent, my foot! My tax bracket puts me in the 20-22 percent range,”
What would your capital gains on investments rate be? 15%?
What bracket would Romney fall into if he did nothing but your job for a year? 20-22%?
Romney paid around $3 million in taxes for 2010. Are you sure that is less than you paid in taxes?
“Betcha Romney’s kids don’t work! That’d be absurd! I’d just love to see all his tax deductions!”
Why should you care about that at all? They are not your kids and they are not a burden on you or government at all.
Envy is a terrible thing.
“Depends on who the special treatment is for… rich White people, or poor Black? It is racial most of the time. Sorry. You just don’t want to admit it.”
Spare me the 99% progressive talking points. I do not need money to be content in my life. I do not pity myself for not having as much money as my neighbors and I sure as hell don’t sit around whining while trying to figure out how to use government to force others to give me money.
In a supposed free society, the only special treatment that matters is that which creates laws that unfairly mandate special treatment of one over another.
“I betcha you can come up with several White rich folks,(all MEN) and maybe one or two Black, and none of the other five?”
I betcha I don’t care one way or another. I betcha it is easier to blame others for one’s own failures than it is to work hard and succeed.
“I don’t know where you got this idea!!! Certainly not from this Blog! Whether we agree or not, I honestly believe that everyone here is just as PATRIOTIC as another!”
I didn’t question anybodys patriotism, I said the left has made patriotism a dirty word.
Love of country, the flag that represents it and the US Constitution is now mocked with terms like ‘blind American exceptionalism,’ ‘wrapping oneself in the flag’ and ‘the status quo.’
The far-left can’t look at people honoring the flag and say ‘to each their own,’ they instead question ‘all this for a flag?’ and condemn it as worshipping.
The most damning thing though is the lefts relentless pursuit of dividing us into hyphenated groups. It is no longer PC to see oneself and especially others as an just a plain ol American.
Posted by: kctim at April 12, 2012 11:58 AMToday’s news in Romney’s-connecting-with-average-Americans:
Posted by: Adrienne at April 12, 2012 1:24 PMOn the topic of women’s support — and Romney and his Female Republican supporters failing badly there’s this.
Posted by: Adrienne at April 12, 2012 2:22 PM“That debate was always about whether women could spend their own money on birth control or not. When a woman works for an employer, she is compensated through a combination of a wage as well as a health coverage. When a woman uses the health coverage to pay for care, she is spending money that she has earned and not someone else’s money. The failure to understand this fact is why the GOP stumbled into this “war on women” meme.”
Tell me Warped, are employees compensated LESS if they choose not to use the health care plan the company offers? No, they are not. Why? Because health coverage is part of the benefits package that is offered to all, not part of the wage the two parties come to terms on. (Yes, I know few are afforded the luxury of negotiating benefits along with pay.)
So, if an employee is not paid more or less based on whether they use the companies health coverage or not, it is dishonest to lump the benefit in with wages.
“Democrats get away with that accusation because Limbaugh holds a unique position of influence amongst the GOP’s conservative base. Plenty of Democrats are willing to condemn things said by Thaddeus Matthews. Most Republicans find themselves in a different position.”
And yet plenty of Democrats didn’t have to condemn Matthews, did they? Nope. Because it wasn’t talked about non-stop.
Democrats get away with hunting people like Rush for the same reason nobody knows what the hell Matthews said.
“The question was whether women could use the health care coverage that they earned to pay for it or not. If they had to use their own cash, they would essentially be paying for it twice.”
ONLY if they were required to pay for the company benefit, which they are not.
Two women, same company, both making 30 grand a year.
One pays the company 3600 a year for the company plan.
One chooses a different plan outside the company and pays 3600 a year for that plan.
BOTH women still go home with $26400.
So, if an employee is not paid more or less based on whether they use the companies health coverage or not, it is dishonest to lump the benefit in with wages.
I don’t understand your logic here. When an employer offers health coverage, it is being offered as compensation in return for the worker’s labor. A worker chooses to work for an employer that offers health insurance in lieu of an increased wage. Whether or not the worker utilizes the benefits is irrelevant.
Here’s an example, when I was a teenager I worked for a vegetable farm during the summer. In addition to my wage, I was also compensated with fresh vegetables that I was able to eat during lunch. Somedays, I wasn’t terribly hungry at lunchtime, so I didn’t eat any vegetables, but I didn’t receive any more money because I didn’t eat my vegetables. However, this doesn’t mean that those vegetables that I did eat weren’t compensation for my labor.
nobody knows what the hell Matthews said.Nobody knows what Matthews said because no one listens to Matthews. He’s a smalltime radio host in Memphis and that’s it. Limbaugh is nationally syndicated and has ~10 million listeners. You might have a point if you had a prominent Democrat on the record as refusing to condemn Matthews, but you don’t. Whereas I can easily produce dozens of examples of Republican politicians who refuse to condemn Limbaugh and even go out of their way to apologize if they accidentally offend Limbaugh.
ONLY if they were required to pay for the company benefit, which they are not. Two women, same company, both making 30 grand a year. One pays the company 3600 a year for the company plan. One chooses a different plan outside the company and pays 3600 a year for that plan. BOTH women still go home with $26400.I don’t understand your point. If comprehensive insurance is for sale for $3600 it doesn’t matter if the company negotiated the price or if it was bought from a 3rd party. Posted by: Warped Reality at April 12, 2012 3:47 PM
Adam Ducker; you seem to be getting a little testy about being accused carrying the water bucket for the Democrat talking heads. It’s one thing to have an inteligent discussion about politics and it’s another thing to watch the libs on WB repeat the daily talki ng points of the Democratic Party. The talking points are nothing more than talking points. No truth, just talking points…
Re/women’s rights: what, no slams on Hillary Rosen for insulting every stay at home mom in America. I just love to watch you clowns implode. You can’t help yourselves. You hate everything and everybody. I will ask this question of anyone on WB; has anyone ever seen a happy liberal? Liberals are the most depressing people on earth.
Posted by: Frank at April 12, 2012 3:58 PMWarped
Are you talking about a company health plan where the company pays the entire premium or a more common plan where employees contribute part of their pay each payday?
If it is the former, then I agree with you.
Re: Rush, how can Dems condemn something that they are not told about? You know damn well a Republican “smalltime radio host” speaking such racist remarks would have been front page news nationally.
Popularity is not a valid excuse for differential treatment.
“I don’t understand your point. If comprehensive insurance is for sale for $3600 it doesn’t matter if the company negotiated the price or if it was bought from a 3rd party.”
It matters if the company is trying to pass off their plan as part of your compensation and you are not using it.
I have never been penalized or rewarded according to whether I used the plan the company offered or not.
Frank: “No truth, just talking points…”
Of course. We can’t discuss real issues in the election like women voters because you’ve labeled them talking points and say they have no truth. Thanks for that. Sorry we got off track. Now moving on to something you think has much more relevance and truth: Look at how unhappy every single liberal on the planet is and how we hate everything and everyone. Funny stuff. Don’t call us clowns while you’re waddling around in those big fat shoes and honking your bright red nose.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 12, 2012 5:39 PMI’ll tell you what AD; why don’t we discuss something fresh in the news instead of the same old liberal talking points:
Let’s look at the time line of events:
“Sen. Barack Obama ripped into a Republican ad today that targets comments made by his wife, Michelle, and called the GOP tactic “low class” and “detestable.”
The Illinois senator told “Good Morning America” that he expects hardball tactics from the Republicans if he becomes the Democratic presidential nominee.
“But I also think these folks should lay off my wife,” he told “GMA” as his wife chuckled beside him.”
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story?id=4881883&page=1#.T4cbfC_Cz8B
When Jay Carney was asked about Rosen’s comments he played dumb, “I know of at least 3 Hillary Rosen”
“Jay Carney on Rosen’s WH visits: I personally know three women named “Hilary Rosen”
“Having said that, White House visitor logs indicate that “Hilary Rosen” visited the White House 35 times.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/295838/hillary-rosen-frequent-white-house-visitor
Poll: 97% of Americans support Ann Romney:
Now the result (damage control):
WH calls for Rosen to apologize and Michelle my Belle comes to the defense.
IMHO, it is the Democrats who have launch an attack on women.
“I won’t count these chickens before they hatch, but I will say this: counting on people to share your hatred of a candidate is a poor way to win an election against them.”
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 11, 2012 9:31 PM
You just don’t get it do you? We don’t hate obama, we just want to be rid of him as president. The Republican party has liberals, moderates and conservatives among its ranks. We are all united against this socialist president and the left leaning democrat party and most of its slate of candidates for the house and senate.
Americans know infinitely more about obama that we did four years ago and it would be difficult to argue that many like him as well, or more, now…than then. We have seen the man in action and understand his motives and intentions and most Americans are not pleased with his miserable performance.
Being of a liberal mind in politics does not convey desire for a socialist agenda for the nation. My liberal friends on WB are hoping no one will notice the failures of the obama promise of hope and change. Are the majority of the electorate more “hopeful” today than four years ago? Do the majority of the electorate approve of the “change” obama and the dems have wrought?
Republicans have no desire to deny anything to anyone who can pay for it with their own money. Democrats wish to provide everything to everyone with others money.
This November the majority of the electorate will vote for those candidates they perceive as best able and so minded as to change the direction of our slide into socialism. They will vote for those they believe still cherish and value our Constitution. They will withhold their vote to those who promise ever more on credit and higher taxes, on those who wish to cause energy and food prices to spiral ever higher, on those who would flaunt our national heritage of constitutional law, on those who use class envy to divide Americans, and on those who applaud dependence and denounce self reliance.
RF, Stephen and the rest of the libs on WB cannot comprehend why conservatives disagree with them. I would venture to say most libs on WB are either in college, on welfare, or work for a government. Therefore their minds are infiltrated with the federal handout mentality. The vote results of 2010 are a prelude of things to come. One of the left’s talking points is that the TP is finished and lost it’s drive. Not true, we are alive and well in America. The Obama administration is in panic mode. They send out their operatives like Hillary Rosen and then have to backpeddle when the polls go against them. We are seeing a meltdown of the left and I promise their rhetoric will become more shrill.
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 12, 2012 6:29 PMI agree Bill. I heard a great line today on the Michael Savage radio show. He said…”Obama campaigned as the great reformer and now we know, he is just a great performer.”
As we say in Texas, all hat, no cattle.
Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2012 6:41 PMHahahaha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2G3wGVAnlQ&feature=share
Posted by: Billinflorida at April 12, 2012 6:49 PMbillinflorida,
Until today, I had never heard of Hilary Rosen. I occasionally watch CNN, and I could name a half dozen CNN personalities, but Rosen would not be one of them. Apparently she is a “CNN Contributor.”
Why do you say liberals believe the TP is finished and has lost its drive?
Why would you say the Obama administration is in “panic mode”? Again, who is Hilary Rosen? Is she really an Obama operative planted at CNN? Please explain.
What polls are going against Obama? What meltdown? Please explain.
Posted by: phx8 at April 12, 2012 7:43 PMAre you talking about a company health plan where the company pays the entire premium or a more common plan where employees contribute part of their pay each payday? If it is the former, then I agree with you.
I originally had the former in mind, but I fail to see how the latter would change the circumstances.
Re: Rush, how can Dems condemn something that they are not told about? You know damn well a Republican “smalltime radio host” speaking such racist remarks would have been front page news nationally. Popularity is not a valid excuse for differential treatment.I think a smalltime conservative radio host without much influence could pass by undetected by the national media. Rush Limbaugh has no counterpart on the Left, no one wields as much influence as him. GOP politicans routinely have to apologize to Limbaugh if they refuse to accept what he says in the slightest way. Neither Matthews nor anyone else has that power over the Left.
It matters if the company is trying to pass off their plan as part of your compensation and you are not using it. I have never been penalized or rewarded according to whether I used the plan the company offered or not.
If the company offers you health benefits, it is part of your compensation whether you use it or not. I was offered vegetables as part of my compensation when I worked on that farm and they were mine to eat whether I ate them or not. I did not have a choice to receive money in lieu of vegetables because working for food was a condition of my employment.
Billinflorida, Frank & Royal Flush,
Come back to me when you have something substantive to discuss. Hilary Rosen’s question was despicable, but she has no relevance to our discussion except as a pinata for us to take whacks at.
Posted by: Warped Reality at April 12, 2012 7:50 PMNews reports indicate that North Korea launched the missile despite the goodies the Twerp in the White House promised to persuade them not to do so.
Reports indicate that the missile launch failed, but that is not of importance. That the launch was made indicates that Korea and other dictator led countries in the world hold obama in contempt and regard him as a toothless dunce.
He is not feared by our enemies nor respected by our friends. His great Sec State, Hillary Clinton, has again proven how worthless she is as well in foreign affairs.
Both obama and Hillary abetted and promoted the Arab Spring with disastrous results and even more disaster to follow.
This bunch must be removed from office and replaced with competent folks who understand how to protect the free countries of the world…our freedom and economies.
I see the hand of both China and Iran behind the actions in Korea and this fool in the Oval Office merely dances to their jig. Fortunately, such malfeasance and criminal stupidity will stop in January 2013.
Posted by: Royal Flush at April 12, 2012 7:55 PMFrank: “IMHO, it is the Democrats who have launch an attack on women.”
One Democrat, a woman no doubt, gets out of line and you find that as somehow evidence that the Democrats are the ones attacking women? Excuse me while I try not to laugh so hard I pass out. I see your silly example from the left and I raise you 101 examples from the right. Oh, but the right was so mean to Sarah Palin and her daughters so they are the one’s who hate women, right? Dang bunch of angry, depressed liberals…
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 12, 2012 8:08 PMRoyal Flush,
What do you think the Obama administration should have done differently in regards to North Korea and its missile launch?
Most people hold Hillary Clinton in high regard as a Secretary of State. Why would anyone think she is worthless?
Arab Spring seems to have gone well. Dictatorships and corrupt governments have been overthrown in Tunisia and Egypt. Khadaffi is dead. Osama bin Laden is dead, along with most of Al Qaida. American troops have been withdrawn from Iraq without a bloodbath. Syria is rough, but after a horrendous civil war, they seemed to have reached a temporary cease fire.
Again, what do you think Obama and Hillary should have done differently? What do you think Republicans would do?
Posted by: phx8 at April 12, 2012 9:43 PMAD, someone has a lot of time on their hands to sit around and list all this bullshit. That’s right Adam, I said bullshit. If it wasn’t for Rush Limbaugh, you guys wouldn’t have anything to say.
Have you ever met a happy liberal? I haven’t. In fact, judging by the remarks of the lefties on WB, I would say most of you have to visit the Prozac licking block each day just to survive. I wonder what the stats are on liberals or conservatives committing suicide.
Let’s see; first we find conservatives are more compassionate than liberals:
http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/surprise-conservatives-are-more-generous-than-liberals/
Happiness, yes here we go, from none other than PBS:
“PAUL SOLMAN: Are you unhappy, do you think, because of the inequality, economic inequality in this country?
MAN: Well, yes.
PAUL SOLMAN: Study after study, it turns out, finds conservatives happier than liberals.
Yale social psychologist Jaime Napier has a theory as to why.
JAIME NAPIER, Yale University: Economic inequality really does affect people’s subjective well-being.
PAUL SOLMAN: Napier’s work has convinced her conservatives are happier than liberals because they think there’s equality of opportunity in America.”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec11/makingsense_12-09.html
“For three decades, the General Social Survey has asked a nationwide sample of adults, “Taken all together, how happy would you say you are these days? Would you say that you are very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy?” Here is a representative sample of the results:
In 2004, 44 percent of respondents who said they were “conservative” or “very conservative” said they were “very happy,” versus just 25 percent of people who called themselves “liberal” or “very liberal.” (Note that this comparison uses unweighted data — when the data are weighted, the gap is 46 percent to 28 percent.)
Adults on the political right are only half as likely as those on the left to say, “At times, I think I am no good at all.” They are also less likely to say they are dissatisfied with themselves, that they are inclined to feel like a failure, or to be pessimistic about their futures.
It doesn’t matter who holds political power. The happiness gap between conservatives and liberals has persisted for at least 30 years. Indeed, the difference was greater some years under Bill Clinton than it was under George W. Bush. Democrats may very well win the presidency in 2008, and no doubt many liberals will enjoy seeing conservatives grieving out about that — but the data say that conservatives will still be happier people than liberals.”
http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/04/23/conservatives-are-happier-than-liberals-discuss/
Conservatives are more closely identified with evangelicals; liberals are not identified with evangelicals. I will use the dailykos and although I disagree with most of what they say, I find the dailykos considers evangelicals as the enemy:
Since most liberals are atheist and are not identified with evangelical Christianity, I would have a tendency to believe that are unhappy because they have no assurance of eternal life.
Frank:
Bonus points for continuing to deflect away from the war on women by attacking liberals as unhappy and godless.
I wonder what role education plays in personal happiness. After all, they do say ignorance is bliss don’t they? You have any studies about that?
I don’t doubt those studies overall though. I just like how the source you cite actually calls you absurd:
The data don’t say that all conservatives are happy, that all liberals are unhappy, or that all conservatives are happier than all liberals. Such claims would be absurd and wrong.
Yes, absurd indeed. Good work.
Speaking of absurd, you could say 100% of atheists are liberal (not true, by the way) and that would still not mean most liberals are atheists. There’s just too many liberals and too few atheists for that silly statement to ever be valid.
Posted by: Adam Ducker at April 12, 2012 10:56 PMWarped:
Hilary Rosen’s question was despicable
I strongly disagree.
Adam:
One Democrat, a woman no doubt, gets out of line
I don’t think Hillary Rosen was out of line at all. In fact, I think she is absolutely right to draw the distinction she was making.
Because Mitt Romney is out there claiming that “women care more about economic issues than they do about reproductive rights” — even though most women care about BOTH. Yet, whenever he gets any kind of question regarding women’s issues, he always immediately comes out with the claim that he “listens to his wife” on these issues.
You guys, and Obama and Michele, and all of his advisers may now be out there saying that they don’t agree with Rosen’s comments, and that the candidates family should be totally off limits, but I don’t agree with that view.
I think Ann Romney would natually be off limits — BUT, since Mitt HIMSELF has been claiming that HIS WIFE IS AN EXPERT ON WOMEN’S ISSUES AND HE ALWAYS LISTENS TO WHAT SHE SAYS ABOUT THEM, it seems necessary to discuss Ann Romney’s life and lifestyle, in order to compare it to all average American women’s lives and lifestyles.
So, does matter that Ann Romney was born rich, married rich and has never once held down any job outside of home and raising children?
Yes, because most women are not born rich, do not marry rich, and have to work in order to live.
Does it matter that Ann Romney knows nothing whatsoever about women’s economic issues in the workplace?
Yes, because her husband is claiming he “listens to her on all women’s issues,” despite the fact that she’s never once had to hold down a job, or have to worry about money in any way, shape, or form.
Following Rosen’s comments, Ann Romney took to twitter to say:
“All moms are entitled to choose their path”
This is incorrect. Most moms are not so entitled to choose. Most women must work a job, and are therefore not entitled the way she has been to stay at home while raising their children. So she does not understand the required paths, nor the “choices” that are available to most women in America.
She also said that she: “made a choice to stay home and raise five boys.”
Shouldn’t we take a moment to ask ourselves if Ann Romney really did make this choice? I think that perhaps this claim is a bit doubtful. Because Ann Romney was only sixteen years old when Mitt proposed marriage to her and she accepted. And she was only nineteen when they got married and started their family. So Ann Romney never experienced life as an independent adult woman living on her own before she got married. She went straight from her fathers house to her husband’s house.
Additionally, seeing as how the Mormon church views the role of women, and families and considers the need for couples to have children as extremely important, I’m not at all sure we can say she truly made a “choice” here. Women who are Mormon and wealthy are practically expected to be stay-at-home wives and mothers who give birth to many children.
Do most women go from their fathers house to their husbands house without ever working a job? Do most women have the choice to stay at home and raise their children without ever working a job? Do most women have the economic means to raise large families? No, most women in America do not marry so young, and must work jobs rather than stay at home while they are raising their children. And, most women cannot afford to have such a large families.
So again, Ann Romney is clearly not an expert on what most women in America face when it comes to life and work experiences and having children and raising them.
Should Ann Romney really be viewed as an average “stay-at-home mom” whose job it was to “raise her five boys”? Are we really to believe that she has had no Nannies to help her take care of the needs of her many children? No Drivers to take them to school and to after-school activities and events? No Cook? No Housekeepers and maids to clean her home and do her family’s laundry? No Handymen, and Gardeners, and Groundskeepers to maintain their many properties? Surely she has had all of these people helping her while she was staying home and raising her children.
Do most women in America have those many people working for them? No — not even close. So, Ann Romney doesn’t understand anything about all the hard work that most women in America must do to raise their children — in addition to the work they do outside of the home in order to earn their living and take care of their children.
Ann Romney has now said she “has suffered.” It’s probably safe to say she is referring to the fact that she has Multiple Sclerosis — which truly is a terrible and extremely expensive to treat disease. I feel sorry for her for this reason and no doubt she does suffer. However, she is also luck enough to have never have to worry over not having the very best health care to treat her disease, nor has she had to worry that she would not be able to afford to keep receiving it. Nor has her husband or any of her children ever had to worry about the high costs of health care.
Ann also claims that riding horses has acted as a form of therapy and relaxation that aids her MS — and it’s nice that she can afford her many (at least six figures each) dressage horses, and the thousand dollar dressage saddles and all the other accoutrements dressage calls for, and a stable to house the horses in, and a trainer and riding partner, and stable master and stable hands to feed and take care of the horses and clean out the stable, and for the often expensive veterinarian needs and requirements of her many horses. In fact, Ann Romney’s horses are so top notch and well taken care of that they’re World Cup Champion grade.
Do most American women suffering with MS have any of those things? No, of course they don’t. Many sick women in this nation cannot even afford basic treatments their diseases. For that matter, do most American women who are healthy never have to worry over the high cost of health care for themselves and their families? No, most women in America do worry about the ever-expanding high cost of health care, and many families can afford no health care insurance at all. Additionally, people who have sick children often don’t even get the parental leave they need from their jobs in order to try to deal effectively with a child’s illness.
So, again Ann Romney while personally very lucky in this regard, she is very far from an expert on the subject of the health care needs for most American women.
It’s fair to talk about these things since Mitt has made these claims about his wife. And I think Hillary Rosen has a right to draw our attention to what has to be a distinct lack of expertise when it comes to her understanding of the realities and struggles of life for most American women.
Posted by: Adrienne at April 12, 2012 11:06 PMAdrienne,
I think the Democrats missed a bet with the whole manufactured controversy over a comment by someone I’ve never even heard of before now. The conventional wisdom is that the wives and other family members of nominees are off limits when it comes to criticism. However, Romney has kept bringing his wife front and center to counter the perception of a GOP War on Women. Fair enough. She seems likeable enough. She even donated to Planned Parenthood. Anyway, after the comment by that person, whoever she was, Democrats immediately apologized and insisted no one should criticize spouses. That will probably be the end of that, yet I think Democrats missed an a bet.
But in this case, I think the comment was justified, and it would have made good political sense to do turn the discussion towards Ann Romney. You outlined her background quite fairly. The fact is, Ann Romney grew up wealthy, married wealthy, and never worked for an employer a day in her life. And that’s fine. But her life experience of wealth and privilege is so different from that of most people, so very different, that discussing it would have made that difference even more obvious, and drive home just how out of touch the Romneys are with the lives of the 99%. I don’t think there’s anything sinister about Ann Romney, not at all. I just don’t believe she has any way of appreciating what life is like for most Americans, and I don’t believe she has the ability to advise her husband about the challenges most women today face. She doesn’t know. It’s not her fault. But let’s not pretend she does know.
Posted by: phx8 at April 13, 2012 12:14 AMThere are Many good and proper Motions that can be put to the United Nations General Assembly, and it does not have to be Serbia that puts these motions, because the United Nations is the International Community, and not the American Led West.
It does not matter if these Motions have a Majority Vote, as long as they are Globally Publicized, because any Majority for America proves that they Bribed, Pressured, or ordered their Puppets to help supply a Majority.
We have much evidence of American Arrogance and Hubris, and of the Clinton Democrats’ supposed Humanitarian intervention in Kosovo that helped the Islamic Terrorists against the Innocent Non Albanians, and there are some interesting things associated with the Kosovo Albanian Flag, and that Flag can be found on the Internet.
We know that Bill Clinton started this Illegal and Immoral War to deflect attention away from Monica Lewinsky and the white stain he left on that blue dress.
The Hubristic American minds used the fact that the map of Kosovo does look like a human orifice, but Monica Lewinsky should not be asked to testify to this in a Court of Law.
It is the same blue colour as the dress Monica Lewinsky wore when President Bill Clinton left a white trail of semen on it, and the Kosovo map has a white trail of stats above the map of Kosovo, and President Bill Clinton may have been looking at a human orifice at that time.
This was done Intentionally and Hubristically We all know what sick people the Clinonites’ are, and this should be the topic of a Motion that is forwarded to the United Nations General Assembly.
“I wonder what role education plays in personal happiness. After all, they do say ignorance is bliss don’t they? You have any studies about that?
I don’t doubt those studies overall though. I just like how the source you cite actually calls you absurd:” Adam Ducker
I will answer your second point first:
You say you don’t doubt the studies overall and then you say my link calls me absurd…really, does it? Let’s look at what is said again, after he presented his data and chart showing conservatives to be happier, of which you also agree. Then he says:
“The data don’t say that all conservatives are happy, that all liberals are unhappy, or that all conservatives are happier than all liberals. Such claims would be absurd and wrong.”
I realize I’m only a conservative and not nearly as intelligent (explanation later) as the left, but I take this to mean that the data doesn’t mean ALL conservatives are happy, and that ALL liberals are unhappy, or that ALL conservatives are happier than ALL liberals. In other words, he presents his data on conservatives and liberals as a whole and not specific. Then he goes on to say:
“The happiness differences here do not indicate that conservatives are better than liberals, righter than liberals, or even that they deserve to be happier. In fact, a major criticism of conservatives by liberals is that they have no right to be so happy-that they really should feel worse because they are misguided, or even malevolent. I’m not claiming here that the right wing merits their relative happiness. You can be the judge of that.”
This is a true statement; the left is unhappy and are angry that conservatives, as a whole, lead much happier lives. Now you ask what relevance does this have. Good question… The left believe they are the protectors of the poor and downtrodden; they believe they are the compassionate ones, but their compassion is based upon using other people’s money and not their own. But statistics show it is conservatives, by a wide margin, give of their own money to charities and to the support of the poor and downtrodden. Liberals on the other hand, tend to be greedy with their own possessions. Since you give the quote, “ignorance is bliss”, I will quote “it is better to give than receive”.
Speaking of ignorance is bliss; this brings us to your first question, “I wonder what role education plays in personal happiness.” One would think that a higher education would mean one would be happier. But the common thinking among liberals is that they are much more intelligent than conservatives. Is this what you are saying Adam? You do realize this is an elitist mentality? So basically you are saying that conservatives are too ignorant to understand the complexities of society and we just cling to our religion and guns”. Therefore your belief that conservatives are less educated would also have to include the fact that conservatives are more religious. Since conservatives are more closely identified with evangelical Christianity, then that must also be the result of being less educated and more susceptible to being duped by religion. Is this what you are implying Adam?
By the way, President Bush (you know, that ignorant backwoods man from Texas) had a IQ higher than Al Gore (you know, the one running around saying we are all going to die).
Regarding Hillary Rosen: why does it not surprise me that Adrienne and phx8 have no problem with personal attacks on Ann Romney, even though Obama demanded that his wife and family remain off base?
The left loves to argue the daily talking points of the left; well even though not planned, Hillary Rosen’s comment have become the talking points of the day. And her comments reflect the “war on women” attitude of the left. Adrienne and phx8 are the proof.
Warped
“I originally had the former in mind, but I fail to see how the latter would change the circumstances.”
In the latter, you are paying a portion of your wages to receive the benefits. You are not paid more money by the company in order to do that. You are not paid less money if you choose not to do that.
Anyway, I’m just an average Joe and have never worked in the big corp world, so I can only speak from the experience of friends, family and myself. And around here you don’t pay your employer and call it compensation.
Rush has 10 million listeners and, IMO, that is who GOP politicians are apologizing to when they do something dumb.
It all boils down to the left not being accepted by the people as Rush has been, so they must destroy Rush and his silence his views.
To be honest, I support free speech so I don’t really care what Rush or Matthews say, I just hate the hypocrisy.
Regarding Hillary Rosen: why does it not surprise me that Adrienne and phx8 have no problem with personal attacks on Ann Romney, even though Obama demanded that his wife and family remain off base?
The left loves to argue the daily talking points of the left; well even though not planned, Hillary Rosen’s comment have become the talking points of the day. And her comments reflect the “war on women” attitude of the left. Adrienne and phx8 are the proof.
Oh, it’s so shocking — and how DARE WE! Lets all wring our hands over the idea that a politician’s wive might actually come under scrutiny for her lifestyle, and the things she does, and the things she advocates for!
Attacking politicians wives? Why it’s JUST UNHEARD OF!!!
After all, NO ONE on the Right has EVER made any remarks about Hilary Clinton, or Teresa Heinz Kerry or Michele Obama! No, the right has NEVER ONCE uttered a disparaging word against any First Lady or potential first lady — EVER!!! And because of their completely PRISTINE track record of never saying a single critical or harsh thing, that means Ann Romney HAS GOT TO BE COMPLETELY OFF LIMITS to talk about!
When her husband claims that he gets every single bit of his information about women’s issues from her — while supporting every single bit of the GOP’s regressive and relentless War on Women’s economic and reproductive rights and general well-being we should all just quietly nod and keep our thoughts to ourselves!
Frank: “You say you don’t doubt the studies overall and then you say my link calls me absurd…”
It does call you absurd. You’ve stated multiple times you’ve never met a happy liberal. I know plenty of happy liberals and plenty of sad angry conservatives. I know better than to form black and white world view about it. You’ve walked back the idea that you think every liberal is unhappy and I’m glad to see that. There is no evidence to back it up but you and I agree on the studies that liberals are generally less happy than conservatives.
I for one thing come off to many online as an unhappy person though I score high on various measurements of optimism. I do tend to vocalize my unhappy thoughts while secretly holding a great deal of optimism. One problem seems to be that people online tend to use the “you’re so unhappy” argument a lot to put down those they disagree with. You see it every other day on this site and you’ve used it yourself against multiple liberals here.
“By the way, President Bush (you know, that ignorant backwoods man from Texas) had a IQ higher than Al Gore…”
I’ve said myself before on this site that President Bush was on of the most educated presidents we’ve ever had. But why was it he had to play the role of ignorant backwoods man from Texas to get you folks to vote for him? I wonder. Was it because he wanted to appeal to the ignorant masses of red state values voters?
“But the common thinking among liberals is that they are much more intelligent than conservatives. Is this what you are saying Adam?”
Multiple studies show people who identify as liberal to have a higher IQ than those who identify as conservative. That of course is just like the happiness study you cite. Not every conservative is an ignorant mouth breather and every liberal a snobby intellectual. Being able to articulate your ideas in writing the way you do for instance clearly puts you somewhere in the above average intelligence range like myself. I’m no brainiac but I am just slightly above average with IQ.
phx8:
But her life experience of wealth and privilege is so different from that of most people, so very different, that discussing it would have made that difference even more obvious, and drive home just how out of touch the Romneys are with the lives of the 99%.
I’ll go further — the idea of having such out of touch multimillionaires running this country when the vast majority of American’s are struggling so hard in this economy is incredibly dangerous.
Let’s face facts here: NEITHER of the Romney’s have to work for a living. People like these in an obscene la-la land of so much wealth and privilege that they can afford that regressive mindset which is actually a patriarchical throwback to another era entirely — but the rest of America CAN’T.
I don’t think there’s anything sinister about Ann Romney, not at all.
The only thing I find sinister is that Mitt Romney and the rest of his 1% party of millionaires want to set women back, and undo everything feminism has had to fight so incredibly hard for — while dishonestly claiming to do so at the behest of of their religious convictions and their wives. It’s bullsh*t. Things are already hard enough for women in America and all the Republicans want is to make it worse — much worse.
I just don’t believe she has any way of appreciating what life is like for most Americans, and I don’t believe she has the ability to advise her husband about the challenges most women today face. She doesn’t know. It’s not her fault. But let’s not pretend she does know.
Exactly — and yet this is really not about Ann Romney. It’s about Mitt Romney using his wife as an excuse to force the GOP’s regressive religious/plutocratic agenda on the entire country.
Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2012 1:13 PMThat should read: “People like these live in an obscene la-la land of so much wealth and privilege…”
Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2012 1:17 PMLOL!
Right on cue:
Sarah Palin: Hilary Rosen Comments ‘Awakened Many Mama Grizzlies’
Right, because Big Mama Grifter herself is such an expert “stay-at-home mom” who feels the need to defend all the Republican women who married men wealthy enough to keep them at home with their broods — while blaming Obama for what Rosen said, and denouncing the “Democrat Party” for “class warfare”!
Hilarious! I actually enjoy Palin — this woman has raised idiotic gobbledygook and hypocrisy to such insane, never-before-seen levels that I consider her entire jaw-dropping persona to be much like Surrealist Art!
Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2012 3:11 PM
Adrienne,
Did you know Palin endorsed Allan West as a VP candidate? She can hardly speak without inducing another forehead slapping moment of disbelief.
phx8,
Yes! Of course Palin would pick West — who else would the amazing Reactionary Performance Artist endorse?! Naturally the Republican Congressman who just called most of the Democrats Communists would be her very first choice! And in the next breath she’s plopping herself down onto the Fox TeeVee Set for a big whining complaint session on how incredibly insulted she is by how Rosen (and by “Democrat” association, Obama!) stated horrible true facts about Ann Romney’s utter lack of real world life and work experience!
HTML Formatting Tips:
<strong>bold text</strong>
<em>italicize text</em>
<u>underline text</u>
<strike>strike text</strike>
<a href="http://domain.com/link">link text</a>
<blockquote>quote text</blockquote>
By clicking the "Post" button you agree to abide by the Rules For Participation. Please report abuse and inappropriate behavior to editor@watchblog.com.
