You're really grasping at straws, ex.

Hello again, Steve:


No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

You're really grasping at straws, ex.I don't know about this straw stuff.. Me thinks, perchance, it's YOU who's grasping... Because this is very simple... It's about three little teeny words, and whether they were spoken on a certain day by a certain president...

Your guy, Romney, said they weren't. But, we KNOW they were! I don't know what else there IS to say about that. You can continue to DENY reality, or you can continue to let me beat you up. I hope you continue.. I'm having a wonderful time.

excon

I find it comical that this is the thing that had the biggest impact in a 90 minute debate .

I find it comical, too. And like I said, Crowley DID admit Romney was right after all. And you know, even though CBS poll gave a slight edge to Romney overall, Romney hammered him on the economy 65% to 34%. That was easy against a guy that says low gas prices means a bad economy and whose idea of lowering corporate tax rates is to raise them. People are going to vote their pocketbooks and Obama is going to lose.

Hello again, tom:


I find it comical that this is the thing that had the biggest impact in a 90 minute debate .What I find even more comical than that, is when Romney was closing, HE, himself brought attention to his 47% statement, and stuck his jaw out for the president to slug...

And, the president obliged him.

First off, Romney won the toss. How did he let Obama go last?? Big mistake. Then giving Obama THAT kind of opening was so luscious, I'm STILL chuckling over that one.. I think Obama infiltrated the Romney campaign.. It COULDN'T have been scripted any better for Obama...

Excon

Hello again, Steve:


People are going to vote their pocketbooks and Obama is going to lose.You're right about the first part, but WRONG about the second.. That's because the people in Ohio are working BECAUSE of Obama, and they're going to reward him for it..

And, without Ohio, Romney loses.

Excon

That was easy against a guy that says low gas prices means a bad economy I wonder how he explains the low gas prices at the end of the Clintoon reign ?

On Sept 20th Jay Carney admitted (http://www.americancrossroads.org/2012/10/jay-carney-on-920-the-white-house-hadnt-called-benghazi-a-terrorist-attack/) no one called the Benghazi incident terrorism.


On September 20 – eight days after Obama claims to have called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror” – Jay Carney affirmed to reporters that the White House had never called it “a terrorist attack.”

From the gaggle on Air Force One, en route Miami, 9/20/2012:

Q: Can you — have you called it a terrorist attack before? Have you said that?

MR. CARNEY: I haven’t, but – I mean, people attacked our embassy. It’s an act of terror by definition.

Q: Yes, I just hadn’t heard you –

MR. CARNEY: It doesn’t have to do with what date it occurred.

Q: No, I just hadn’t heard the White House say that this was an act of terrorism or a terrorist attack. And I just –

MR. CARNEY: I don’t think the fact that we hadn’t is not — as our NCTC Director testified yesterday, a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly in the Benghazi area. We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda’s affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

While Romney may have left Obama an opening it sucks for him that his lame defense based on a search of his transcripts that found the word "terror" puts it right back in the media. The fact checkers that jumped on Obama's boat last night are all admitting Obama's claim was false and Romney was right. Obama can raise his hackles all he wants, but finally coming under some media scrutiny is mad mojo for him.

Pictures leaked from Romney's office:

http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/65313_485233244844282_188173004_n.jpg

Just admit the bully boss got spanked. And for the record, speculators and oil companies have more affect on price of gas than any president, since its traded as a commodity and the world market sets the price.

Loved this cartoon (http://wegots.it/images/stop-the-debate-i-want-to-hear-more-about-this-binder/) that flowed out of the "binders full of women" meme.

Obama's Female Debate Coach Complained About 'Hostile Workplace' at White House (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-female-debate-coach-complained-about-hostile-workplace-white-house_654745.html)


Last night, President Obama presented himself as a crusader for women's issues. He later tweeted:


Mitt Romney still won’t say whether he’d stand up for equal pay, but he did tell us he has “binders full of women.” OFA.BO/LMVWmZ

— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) October 17, 2012

What's interesting about this is President Obama's own history with women in the work place.

When one of President Obama's debate coaches, Anita Dunn, worked at the White House, this is what she reportedly had to say about her experience there:

“This place would be in court for a hostile workplace. ... Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

In the same piece, former economic adviser Christina Romer is reported as saying, "I felt like a piece of meat."

“‘I felt like a piece of meat,’ Christina Romer, former head of the Council of Economic Advisers, said of one meeting in which Suskind writes she was ‘boxed out’ by Summers,” reported the Post.

Time magazine called Obama's White House a "Boys' Club."


Would women rather be in Romney's binder or treated with hostility like a "piece of meat?"

Funny how that surfaces a year after the incident. I don't remember you guys being outraged then, is now a better time?

Anita Dunn: Not Merely a Liar, but a Foolish One - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/277721/anita-dunn-not-merely-liar-foolish-one)


Dunn says she was quoted out of context and told The Post on Friday that she told Suskind “point blank” that the White House was not a hostile work environment... “I remember once I told Valerie that, I said if it weren't for the president, this place would be in court for a hostile workplace,” Dunn is heard telling Suskind. “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

Book: Women in Obama White House felt excluded and ignored - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/suskind-book-female-advisers-in-obama-white-house-sidelined-and-ignored/2011/09/16/gIQAAOSSXK_print.html)


“There isn't a single woman in this ad,” Dunn said. “I was dumbfounded. It wasn't like they were being deliberately sexist. It's just there was no one offering a female perspective.”

The ad was later reshot, with women included

Nice try.

Anita Dunn: Not Merely a Liar, but a Foolish One - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/277721/anita-dunn-not-merely-liar-foolish-one)



Book: Women in Obama White House felt excluded and ignored - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/suskind-book-female-advisers-in-obama-white-house-sidelined-and-ignored/2011/09/16/gIQAAOSSXK_print.html)



Nice try.


Lets take a look beyond the words. What is Obama really doing ?

(quote)


According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).


http://freebeacon.com/hostile-workplace/

You can't draw conculsions from such statistics a median is simply the mid point in a series of numbers and the larger the number of lower numbers the further down the scale the median will be. Now if you had said that the number of females employed in senior roles is significantly less than males your statistic might have provided evidence of bias, but you have not provided any evidence that females doing equivalent work are paid less..

The point here is that skill sets are different and responsibilities are different and they produce different income outcomes. I don't expect these "lower paid" female employees are expected to put in the equivalent hours of their "highly paid" male counterparts

Funny how that surfaces a year after the incident. I don't remember you guys being outraged then, is now a better time?

Dude, you're the one that thinks all I do is hammer Obama and Democrats. You just proved your own argument wrong. Good job.

White House Payroll Up 14% Under Obama (http://www.newsmax.com/US/white-house-salaries-Obama/2012/06/30/id/444092)

Job description is what defines equal pay for equal work. And I would have to breakdown those averages between males and females. Now we can debate how many of each gender or where they are assigned.

Dude, you're the one that thinks all I do is hammer Obama and Democrats. You just proved your own argument wrong. Good job.There was a reason for it not being a big issue, as Tal showed your rag source lied about the context.

More Romney debate LIES,

As Governor, Romney's Eagerness to Hire Women Faded - NYTimes.com (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/as-governor-romneys-eagerness-to-hire-women-faded/?ref=politics)


It was perhaps not his best moment. By Wednesday morning, skeptics pounced on his claim, citing a 2007 academic study that concluded that when Mr. Romney left office in December 2006, the share of women in top policy-making jobs was actually smaller than it was under his Republican predecessor.

Moreover, women's-rights advocates said that Mr. Romney had falsely claimed to be the inspiration for promoting women to high positions when in fact a women's political organization had conceived and largely executed it.


Though Mr. Romney clearly misspoke, it is interesting to note that he claimed to have appointed more women to top jobs than any other governor, when the two studies measured percentages, not raw numbers.

Were you to use raw numbers, you'd find that 21 governors named more women to top posts than did Romney, Saidel said, largely because a lot of states give governors the right to name lots of appointees. Those governors chose more women, but they chose even more men, putting them behind Mass in the share of appointees.

Maybe the dog ate his homework.

Pictures leaked from Romney's office:

http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/65313_485233244844282_188173004_n.jpg

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/383562_539853106044147_1108796255_n.jpg

Romney's Proposal to Cap Deductions Would Not Pay for His Tax Cuts - NYTimes.com (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/romneys-proposal-to-cap-deductions-would-not-pay-for-his-tax-cuts/)

Those pesky tax policy guys again, so when do we get more details.

Look, start from the base that everything is on the table and that they will steadily eliminate each option so to not piss off too many voters in each sector until they find, like so many others, that you cannot eliminate anything. All you can really do is tweak the system at the edges or you can be sensible and decide that you can put a total cap on the whole thing by going back to the minimum tax, that's what happened before.

With mortgage rates low, you can bet that they will think we should eliminate the mortgage interest deduction, but wait if we do that we kick the housing market in the guts. With church attendance falling they will think we can eliminate that part of charitable deductions, but there are still too many mormons that would piss off. On and on it goes until there is no way to get it done. It's like cutting red tape, how do you do it without doing what Pol Pot did

The Tax Policy Center is a Leftist front group for the DNC. They are run by the far left Brooking Institute and the even farther left Urban League.Anything they publish has the same credibility as a DNC press release.

Hello again, tom:

This is NOT difficult... I don't need a think tank to tell me how to subtract... The numbers don't add up. If you have a mathematician to link me to that says they do, link away.

Otherwise, I'm satisfied with the way I add.

excon

Mitt Romney's Tax Plan and Tax Policy Center's Skewed Analysis (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/tax-policy-centers-skewed-analysis-of-governor-romneys-tax-plan)

Hello again, tom:

Thanks, but that link didn't tell me that Romney's plan works.. It just says that the TPC is wrong..

Look.. I KNOW what 20% of the taxes are. I KNOW how many MAJOR loopholes, I mean deductions, there are. I KNOW what's left if we cut them out. I KNOW that he wants to INCREASE spending on the military. I just want to know how it adds up... It's a simple request.

What? Is he afraid that I'm going to LIKE 'em too much?

excon

He wants the nation that spends 41% of all military spending to spend more, what sort of ratbag is this guy, he must be smoking dope or it's america against the world, pure meglomania

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures)

Ex, what is Obama's plan? So far he's running on a the same theme of "liar, liar pants on fire" and "forward." What the hell is "forward?" Quite frankly I think Romney could win by using Giuliani's first slogan, ‘you can't do any worse."

The biggest lie of the night :

OBAMA: Barry, I think a lot of this campaign, maybe over the
Last four years, has been devoted to this nation that I think
Government creates jobs, that that somehow is the answer.

That's not what I believe. I believe that the free enterprise
System is the greatest engine of prosperity the world's ever known.

I believe in self-reliance and individual initiative and risk
Takers being rewarded.

Hello again, Steve:


Ex, what is Obama's plan?In terms of THIS particular issue, take a look at the grand bargain that the Republicans REFUSED to do.. In terms of the REST of his agenda, add up the total of what the senate BLOCKED, and you'll have the rest of his plan... He hasn't been shy about proposing legislation..

Excon

Nice try Tom, but the Heritage Foundation is hardly non partisan,

The Heritage Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Foundation)

And they have an agenda based on conservative views,

■Improve economic performance by lowering marginal tax rates and making other growth-oriented changes;
Another name for trickle down economics
■Enact a new tax code that raises the same amount of revenue as the previous tax code (revenue neutrality);
No deficit reduction thru taxes
■Broaden the tax base to achieve revenue neutrality; and
Redistributes taxes to the lower 20%
■Maintain the current distribution of the tax burden across all income levels (distributional neutrality).
Raises no new revenue

The American economy is consumer driven and ignoring the DEMAND part of supply and demand is a recipe to stop economic circulation and strangle the economy.

That's not capitalism, but extractionism. Wealth redistribution to the already rich that eliminates the safety nets and government services to cities and states and shifts the burdens of servicing the debt to the ones that have the fewest resources thus slowing, if not stopping any growth potential.

In case you cannot see the implications of such policy, let me break it down in real practical terms for you.

Sucking all the loot from the economy is robbery!!

Clinton had it right but rich guys rather have a deficit, serviced on the backs of everyone but the 1%, so they can control the money and have a ready army to go invade and extract the wealth of other countries.

Keeping us all in line with a theocracy that protects the plutocrisy, and aided and abetted by right wing loonies who hope to one day enjoy their own ascendence into the oligarchy, and wield power themselves.

The business model is broken, and has become a system of wealth extraction that hordes resources, and subverts the goals of the many to the values set by the few.

I submit the ideas of Mitt Romney as the example to be rejected by the American people, and all those who cut there own throats to fulfillthe lies and promises of FALSE hope by those who worship power, and money as their god, under the guise of capitalism.

ITS NOT!! But it will be funny if it were not so sad the right wing loony tunes will in the end want there due.

Nice try though but we are all wary of another business man conservative who wants to return to the old policies that damn near destroyed the world economy.

George W. Bush Haunts Mitt Romney - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-17/romney-quest-haunted-by-george-w-bush.html)


2012 is not 2000. We have deficits rather than a balanced budget. We have historically high unemployment rather than historically low unemployment. We've seen what the financial system can do when left unchecked. We've watched tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 fail to spark economic growth and seen a rising stock market fail to lift middle-class wages. We do need new thinking. But Romney isn't offering any. His problem isn't that the public is unfairly judging him by Bush's policies. It's that they're fairly judging him by Bush's policies.

Romney Will Solve the Crisis with the Exact Same GOP Plan of 2008, 2006, 2004... | Next New Deal (http://www.nextnewdeal.net/rortybomb/romney-will-solve-crisis-exact-same-gop-plan-2008-2006-2004)


But the same playbook is there in 2006, as it was in 2004 and 2008, and as it is in 2012. Domestic oil production, school choice, trade agreements, cut spending and reduce taxes and regulations -- it's been the conservative answer to times of deep economic stress, times of economic recovery, times of economic worries, and times of economic panic. Which is another way of saying that the Republicans have no plan for how to actually deal with this specific crisis we face.

The conservative solution is to go back to the failed policies of GWB.

The biggest lie of the night :

And he said it with a straight face?

Romney has lied with a straight face for years so DUH!!

In terms of THIS particular issue, take a look at the grand bargain that the Republicans REFUSED to do.. In terms of the REST of his agenda, add up the total of what the senate BLOCKED, and you'll have the rest of his plan... He hasn't been shy about proposing legislation..

Well that's about the most obvious dodge I've ever seen.

FYI, the Republican-led House brought Obama's $3.6 trillion budget up for a vote this year. It went down 414-0. In the Senate which no longer bothers with budgetsit went down 99-0. His previous budget went down 97-0 in the Senate.

No, he's not shy but even his own party doesn't take him seriously. I mean hey, that's 610-0 in 3 votes.

Nice try Tom, but the Heritage Foundation is hardly non partisan,

And neither is the Tax Policy Center . You use your 'fact checkers ' and I'll use mine.

Well that's about the most obvious dodge I've ever seen.

FYI, the Republican-led House brought Obama's $3.6 trillion budget up for a vote this year. It went down 414-0. In the Senate which no longer bothers with budgetsit went down 99-0. His previous budget went down 97-0 in the Senate.

No, he's not shy but even his own party doesn't take him seriously. I mean hey, that's 610-0 in 3 votes.

Senate rejects Obama budget in 99-0 vote - The Hill's Floor Action (http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/227857-senate-rejects-obama-budget-in-99-0-vote)


The House earlier this year unanimously rejected Obama's budget.

The White House sought to provide cover for Democrats to vote against the Obama budget resolution before the vote, arguing the resolution offered by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) was different from Obama's budget because it did not include policy report language.

Democrats made the same point on the floor Wednesday in explaining their votes.

The Senate also voted on four GOP budget blueprints, which were all defeated.

President's budget sinks, 97-0 - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com (http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/163347-senate-votes-unanimously-against-obama-budget)


The president's budget called for ending tax cuts for the wealthy and a three-year domestic spending freeze, saving an estimated $1.1 trillion over 10 years. Democratic senators at the time called it “an important step forward”, “a good start” and a “credible blueprint.”

No Democratic senator was willing to support it, however, after Obama discussed a more ambitious plan at George Washington University to save $4 trillion over 12 years. Republicans criticized his speech for lacking detail.

You asked.

and neither is the Tax Policy Center . You use your 'fact checkers ' and I'll use mine.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Policy_Center


The Tax Policy Center (TPC) is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. Based in Washington D.C. United States, it aims to provide independent analyses of current and longer-term tax issues and to communicate its analyses to the public and to policymakers in a timely and accessible manner. The Center combines national experts in tax, expenditure, budget policy, and microsimulation modeling to concentrate on four overarching areas of tax policy that are critical to future debate: fair, simple and efficient taxation, social policy in the tax code, long-term implications of tax and budget choices, and state tax issues.

You guys are biased.

Hello again, Steve:


FYI, the Republican-led House brought Obama's $3.6 trillion budget up for a vote this year. It went down 414-0.Considering that you just said Obama was a liar, I wouldn't have posted THIS right wing lie. But, you guys got balls, that's for sure... I've heard you spread this piece of trash before too, but I hopped you'd come to your senses WITHOUT me slamming you first. Wishful thinking, huh?

Here's the truth about those votes.

You are correct that the two times Congress voted on the president's budget requests, both times they were voted down. But the job of passing a budget resolution is not the president's. That responsibility falls to Congress, and even then the president doesn't sign it. The president has no role in passing a budget. The president can cajole Congress about passing a budget and advocate for positions and funding levels, but in the end, Congress approves the budget resolution for their own purposes.

Citing those votes leaves a wrong impression, namely that the votes were ANYTHING MORE than political theater. I would STOP cruising those right wing websites if I was you..

Excon

The House has passed budgets . They sit on Harry Reid's shelf collecting dust. Since they then refuse to pass their own version ; so a budget never gets to a conference committee.
No ;it is the Dems that have caused gridlock .

Hello again, tom:


No ;it is the Dems that have caused gridlock .Maybe you can explain something then... You know how government works. Spending originates in the House.. If they don't authorize it, it don't get spent...

But, if the Senate BLOCKED those budgets as you say, how is the government paying its bills TODAY? We ARE paying our bills, no? SOMEBODY must have passed a budget somewhere.

Excon

Does Congress Even Need to Pass a Budget? (http://prospect.org/article/does-congress-even-need-pass-budget)


So how does the federal government operate without a budget?

With a whole lot of “Continuing Resolutions.” These bills, called “minibuses” by those who are gleefully in the know, keep the government going by feeding the beast with more money every couple of months. The last one that had a fuss surrounding it came late last year, just before the Christmas holidays, when a partial government shutdown loomed. Congress was embroiled in a fight over the payroll tax extension, and the passage of the budgetary measure was used as a bargaining ploy in the tussle. (Congress eventually passed the payroll tax extension in February of this year.)

I know, it's a liberal source, but conservatives seldom tell the truth!

Hello tal:

I didn't know that.. So, the "continuing resolutions" pass, don't they? Presumably they're NOT blocked. Soooo, if the REAL spending stuff isn't blocked, what's the point in telling us about blocking things that don't count? Do they think we're going to go for the okee doak?

excon

Its like when Romney said he would take every opportunity that comes up to bash the president, and make everyone think Obama's policies have failed and his foreign policy is unraveling.

Its just like the voter suppression and war on women, tactics to take the government back, and hide THEIR tactics.

Its like calling the working poor lazy and irresponsible so you don't call them on their irresponsibility,and blatant robbery (LEGAL of course).

Its like the war on drugs, sounds good doesn't it? Who goes to jail? Not Johnny in the Burbs where most of the good dope is used!

They point a finger and blame YOU for what they are doing, knowing they have enough loonies to not see that THEY are doing it. Best example is voter fraud and that Sproul guy.

What you fell for that INTEGRITY of the vote spin?? You think the right will admit they want ALL the money, and you get NONE??

You asked

I didn't ask anything, but thanks for confirming what I already said.

In what seems to be an increasingly silly season of the President of the United States running a campaign on "liar, liar pants on fire," Big Bird and binders, Chris "tingle" Matthews thinks it's unconstitutional (http://washingtonexaminer.com/chris-matthews-is-challenging-obama-unconstitutional/article/2511086?utm_source=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinio n%20Digest%20-%2010/18/2012&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinion%20Di gest#.UIA11GfpzKd) to tell POTUS "you'll get your chance."

What a moron.

I'm sure it's OK thought for Romney's son to offer up that he'd like to take a swipe at the president. That's some good child rearing there.

As far as I know jokes are still protected by the constitution also.

If only it were...

And by the way, I think it is pretty good child rearing when a son comes to the defense of his dad for him repeatedly being called a liar, ESPECIALLY by the president.

And by the way, I think it is pretty good child rearing when a son comes to the defense of his dad for him repeatedly being called a liar, ESPECIALLY by the president.
His dad wasn't called a liar. His words were said to be untrue. And they were.

In other words, Romney lied.

In other words, Romney lied.
Yes, he did.

Hello again, Steve:


In other words, Romney lied.I don't know. We had a lot of posts yesterday about these three little words. You SEEMED to accept that Obama said them YESTERDAY, but today no, huh? What happened?

Let me see if I can help... Act of terror... Yup. I looked them up... He STILL said them. Romney LIED!

Excon

Exie, no one denies he said the words "act of terror." What he did not do was call the actual event a terrorist attack. We've been there, too.

I showed where 9 days after the attack his press secretary said no, they had not called it a terrorist attack (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/whos-winning-705934-26.html#post3300246).

I showed where two weeks later he stood in front of the UN and placed the blame squarely on the video (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/whos-winning-705934-25.html#post3300082).

I showed where the so-called moderator acknowledged Romney was right. You however seem to be in denial in the face of mountains of evidence that we've been right.

Monday Obama is going to get pummeled over this issue. I know he and Crowley think they were clever setting up Mitt with the transcripts ;;but that is just going to bite Obama in the butt when he has to go into it in detail.

I know he and Crowley think they were clever setting up Mitt with the transcripts
What??

That's what I said.. set up. You think it a coinicidence that she had the transcripts on her desk ?

Edit... and that wasn't the only time in the debate. She constantly ran cover for the President . If she had any integrity she would've gotten the President to answer the question ,which was "
"Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?"
The President dodged the question not even pretending to answer it.

And eventually it seems Hillary will be cleared (http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/18/hillarys-non-mea-culpa/#ixzz29gqCKauG) and the blame will fall squarely on Obama.


After the Clinton legal team had a chance to review the State Department cable traffic between Benghazi and Washington, the experts came to the conclusion that the cables proved that Hillary had in fact given specific instructions to beef up security in Libya, and that if those orders had been carried out — which they weren’t — they could conceivably have avoided the tragedy.

Clearly, someone in the Obama administration dropped the ball — and the president was still insisting that it was not his fault.

In the end, then, Hillary decided to assume responsibility to show that she was acting more presidential than the president.

I am told by my sources that she firmly believes that when the State Department cable traffic is made public, either through leaks to the press or during formal House committee hearings, it will exonerate her and shift the blame for the entire mess onto the president.

Obama should learn the lesson that eventually your lies are going to bite in the a$$ big time.

that's what I said .. set up. You think it a coinicidence that she had the transcripts on her desk ?
She had all sort of papers on her desk. She probably had a copy of O's birth certificate too.

How did she know R would say what he did? Sort of like how O's mom put the birth announcements into the Hawaii papers after O. was born, knowing he would be president someday and there would be a controversy about his place of birth?

And eventually it seems Hillary will be cleared (http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/18/hillarys-non-mea-culpa/#ixzz29gqCKauG) and the blame will fall squarely on Obama.
Obama "finally appeared to man-up"??

The blame was never not on him.

Really precognition does BO have it too?

She had all sort of papers on her desk. She probably had a copy of O's birth certificate too.

How did she know R would say what he did? Sorta like how O's mom put the birth announcements into the Hawaii papers after O. was born, knowing he would be president someday and there would be a controversy about his place of birth?

You know I'm not into phoney birther theories. However ;I would point out that Candy Crowley upon learning that Romney had selected Ryan as his running mate called the Romney team the 'death wish ' team. Her biases are well known and she should've been disqualified as moderator.


She also ran interference for the President at various times throughout the debate ;including the time Romney tried to answer the ridiculous assertion made by the President that Romney's plan for the auto companies would've caused a million job losses.

Crowley ran for cover after the debate ,and said on CNN that she was wrong about the Libya segment.

I read she is conservative, was trying to be fair and in the middle.

you know I'm not into phoney birther theories. However ;I would point out that Candy Crowley upon learning that Romney had selected Ryan as his running mate called the Romney team the 'death wish ' team. Her biases are well known and she should've been disqualified as moderator.
LOTS of Republicans were shocked and horrified that Romney had picked Ryan as his running mate.

Romney's plan for the auto companies would've caused a million job losses.
It would have.

Crowley ran for cover after the debate ,and said on CNN that she was wrong about the Libya segment.
No, she didn't.

What Crowley said on CNN after the debate: Romney “was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word.” But on the same network Wednesday morning, she said she was in no way taking back her original interjection.

“Listen, what I said on that stage is the same thing I said to you actually last night,” she told Soledad O'Brian. “[W]e got hung up on this 'yes he said,' 'no I didn't,' 'I said terror,' 'you didn't say terror.' … So I said, [President Obama] did say 'acts of terror, call it an act of terror, but Governor Romney, you are perfectly right that it took weeks for them to get past the tape.'”

Asked if that was a backtrack, Crowley said, “No. The question was — we got so stuck on that 'act of terror.' Now, did the President say this was an act of terror? The president did not say — he said 'these acts of terror,' but he was in the Rose Garden to talk about Benghazi, so I don't think that's a leap.” (The exact phrase Obama used: “no acts of terror.”) (Washington Post et al.)

I read she is conservative, was trying to be fair and in the middle.

Now that's funny.

Now that's funny.
She's a Republican and conservative.

She's a Republican and conservative.

In what world besides yours?

In what world besides yours?
I Googled her name and asked what political affiliation.

I Googled her name and asked what political affiliation.

I watched her behavior, a much better clue. Alan Colmes tried to say she was likely a Republican because of a quote in the NY Times, "I started being a vegetarian on the Bob Dole campaign in 1995."

Uh, sorry Alan, she COVERED the Dole campaign for CNN as a reporter. She's no conservative.

Hello again,

The fact that you CAN'T find out her political affiliation means she's a GOOD journalist... Good journalists aren't going to let LIES get past them, and she didn't.

excon

The silly season just gets sillier. Not only does Chris Matthews think it's unconstitutional to tell POTUS he'll get his turn in a minute, Whoopi Goldberg tried to trap Ann Romney on The View. Apparently Romney dodged Vietnam and might not be a good Commander-in-Chief because she read Mormons aren't allowed to serve in the military.

Ch9-j_NDHJg#!

Morons.

God and country: Mormons mix missions, military service (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765608238/God-and-Country-Mormons-mix-missions-military-service.html?pg=all)

The fact that you CAN'T find out her political affiliation means she's a GOOD journalist... Good journalists aren't going to let LIES get past them, and she didn't.

I wasn't the one looking, I just responded to the pathetically silly notion she's a conservative.

Her role that night wasn't a journalist either ex, her job was moderator and good moderators don't become participants and tip the scales in one direction repeatedly.

The View is indeed a show for morons.

The View is indeed a show for morons.

Why else do you think Obama loves to go on the show?

Why else do you think Obama loves to go on the show?You have no class.

You have no class.

As if you could be a judge of such things. After all it was you who tried to paint Romney as a bad parent because his son defended him against Obama's smears. This is a guy with no class:

MSNBC's O'Donnell Challenges Romney Son To Fight: "Take Your Best Shot" (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/18/msnbcs_odonnell_challenges_romney_son_to_fight_tak e_your_best_shot.html)

O'Donnell, just another moron.

So is okay to defend your dad, defend your candidate, but not your president? Its okay to lie in front of millions, and not get called on it?

No wonder you guys are confused about "act of terror", and "terrorists", and cannot accurately connect simple dots. Or extrapulate nuanced information. Or add 5 trillion to15 trillion, and cannot deduce how it adds to 0.

And you guys don't know what "is" is . Monday the President will not be able to hide behind Candy Crowley's skirt.

I don't care if you defend your president. Just don't be a moron like O'Donnell.

I don't care if you defend your president. Just don't be a moron like O'Donnell.

O'Donnell defended HIS president from the moron canpaign advisor who happens to be a son of the candidate.

So in your world it's bad for a son to joke about taking a swipe after months of team O doing nothing but taking swipes at his dad, but a host of a major network being a puerile a$$ is good? No wonder this country's going to hell.

So in your world it's bad for a son to joke about taking a swipe after months of team O doing nothing but taking swipes at his dadDo you see Omaba's kids doing this? Nope.

That's a rather pointless retort.

No big deal either way to me because talk is cheap and who cares? But if YOU guys can holler over anything that comes up, so can we. FAIR!!

That's a rather pointless retort.Because it makes your argument look stupid. :D

Because it makes your argument look stupid.

No it doesn't, but at least you finally admit your puerile motives.

All these political Current Event threads are stupid. These really serve no purpose at all but personal vendettas for the fanatics.

All these political Current Event threads are stupid. These really serve no purpose at all but personal vendettas for the fanatics.

And of course you've shown yourself to be above all that. Bwa ha ha!

Probably, as this is just a diversion in my web work during the day. Most of the time I'm correcting your misinformation... but then I remember how pointless that is.

Hello again,

When asked yesterday, he said he SUPPORTS a woman's right to contraception and he didn't believe than an employer should be able to prevent it...

But, he supports the Blunt Amendment which does the exact opposite..

Look.. The problem with his stance on abortion is he can't remember the last stance he took.

excon

He has Romnesia, the disease that makes you forget what you said to someone else (liars disease), but he stands by what he says whatever he says.

So he can say anything, and does.

When you're a mormon and Utah has a problem with you that can't be good:

Tribune Endorsement: Too Many Mitts | The Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.csp)

Probably, as this is just a diversion in my web work during the day. Most of the time I'm correcting your misinformation...but then I remember how pointless that is.

It is extremely pointless to try and 'correct' the truth.

When you're a mormon and Utah has a problem with you that can't be good:

Tribune Endorsement: Too Many Mitts | The Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.csp)

How shocking, a media outlet endorses Obama. Oh my.

He has Romnesia, the disease that makes you forget what you said to someone else (liars disease), but he stands by what he says whatever he says.

So he can say anything, and does.

Another of the top Obama strategies to save America; Seamus, Big Bird, binders, lady parts and now Romnesia. I guess that's all you can do since you can't run believably on Obamanomics.

How shocking, a media outlet endorses Obama. Oh my.I see that persecution complex/conspiracy theory is still in full gear.

That article is from Salt Lake City... Utah... home base of the Mormons... where he ran the Winter Olympics.

Hello again, Steve:


I guess that's all you can do since you can't run believably on Obamanomics.Believably?? I don't know. He's running on Lilly Ledbetter. That's an economic issue for women, and it's WORKING.

Excon

He has Romnesia
IS that like Obamanoids ?

Obamacare covers pre existing conditions. Good thing huh?

Obamanoids isn't a preexisting condition . It's what you get when you get Obamacare shoved up your keister .

I can imagine that would hurt if you were against it. Or didn't personally need it, but no doubt there have already been enough who like it already. Be easier on your keister when we finally get medicare for everyone.

Maybe your own govenor has a better idea. He has two years to come up with one.

Perhaps... Cuomo has to date been a better Guv than I ever imagined he'd be. Much better than his old man who was a pure ideologue . Much better than his disastrous term as director of HUD under Clintoon.

I think the govenors and the state legislatures are the key to implementing the changes that benefit both the state and the constituents.

I see that persecution complex/conspiracy theory is still in full gear.

I see your aversion to reality is in full gear.


That article is from Salt Lake City... Utah... home base of the Mormons... where he ran the Winter Olympics.

It's also the state the keeps electing Harry Reid. What's your point?

Hello again, Steve:

Harry Reid is from Nevada - a state with a heavy Mormon population. But, your point is taken...

Looks like we're TIED. Let's talk about a WIN for Romney in the popular vote, but a WIN for Obama in electoral votes. What's going to happen then?

excon

Excuse me, you are correct... it was early.

Let's have a tie and send it to the House.

Let's talk about a WIN for Romney in the popular vote, but a WIN for Obama in electoral votes. What's going to happen then?
In that scenario Obama wins under our rules .

Hello again, tom:

As Steve points out, a tie in the electoral college is possible.. The election doesn't go to the House, does it? I don't think the founders provided for that possibility.

excon

The election is decided in the electoral college ,not the popular vote. . Only in an electoral college tie does it go to Congress.(12th amendment)

Hello again, tom:

Uhhhh, WHICH house of congress? It DOES make a difference.

excon

The new Congress meets in joint session on January 6, 2013, to count the electoral votes (this count happens whether the election is close or not). If neither candidate has reached 270 Electoral Votes, then the House and Senate take over and elect the President and Vice-President, respectively.

It is the new Congress, inaugurated the first week of January, 2013, that will have the responsibility of breaking any ties.

What Happens if there is a Tie in the Electoral College? (http://www.270towin.com/blog/electoral-college/what-happens-if-there-is-a-tie-in-the-electoral-college)

Hello WG:

Wow. That sounds like a recipe for disaster. What if the House and the Senate don't agree, as I'm sure they won't?

excon

The House picks the President ,the Senate the VP according to the 12th Amendment .

Maybe there's a tie. There could be a heavily contested congressional fight that would last weeks. There could be a fiscal cliff catastrophe. There could be an astroturf uprising against the electoral college.

But there might not be a President.

Read more: The Possible Electoral College Nightmare Scenario Is Even Worse Than We Thought - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-possible-electoral-college-nightmare-scenario-is-even-worse-than-we-thought-2012-10#ixzz2A2juIBzp)

Hello again,

Hmmm... That sounds scary.

excon

Scary as opposed to having SCOTUS decide it ? Nah,we've had worse and survived . JQ Adams was selected by the House after a 4 candidate race in 1824 (word of warning to those who think 3rd party politics is a good idea) . Andrew Jackson won a plurality but not the majority .Jackson assumed that he's be President . But it was a 4 way race ,and under the 12th amendment provisions ,only 3 candidates could be considered by the House. Henry Clay was the man left out. But he was Speaker of the House ;so that made him a king maker.

Clay hated Jackson... nuff said... JQ Adams won out even though Jackson had the plurality . Coincidently Adams chose Clay as Sec State (at the time considered to be a key position for anyone who had Presidential ambitions) . Jackson spent the next 4 years calling it a 'corrupt bargain' ,and that helped Jackson win the Presidency 4 years later.

You know what's scary, Tom, is Romney thinks Russia is america's greatest enemy.

You ,like the President ,do not understand the difference between"enemy " and "geopolitical foe " .I don't happen to agree with Romney on that either ; our greatest geopolitical foe is China... our biggest "enemy" is jihadistan .

As I said before Tom there is a lot you don't like why are you going to vote for him?

Geo-political foe, that's board room speak for I'm smarter than you and I don't have a clue

I would say your biggest enemy is your capitalist enterpreneurs who think investment in China makes more sense than investment in america

Yeah blame America or Americans 1st . One thing you won't see from Romney is a bowing apology tour .That makes him heads and tails above POTUS O'BOGUS .

Hello tom:

If by that, you mean that Romney will DENY American complicity in the problems of the Mid East, then peace is a LONG way off..

SOLVING the problems over there is better than LOOKING macho. But, of course, we know from the 47% tape, that Romney has NO plans to FIX anything over there... He believes the problems are BIGGER than he is, and I agree.

excon

We've already seen by performance that the President is in over his head there... unless you think recruiting AQ to fight in Syria while claiming they are on the run is a good plan. Unless you think neglecting to attend national security briefings is something the Commander in Chief should be doing. Unless you think evading meetings with key allies is a good idea.

What we've learned about Obama is that he loves being President ;but he really doesn't love doing the job of President . Even Chris Matthews recognizes this :

Thrill Is Gone? Matthews Turns On Obama; 'I Hear Stories That You Would Not Believe' - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB4b11_LREA&feature=player_embedded#)!

Hello again, tom:

If Obama is in over his head, then Romney is too.. He's the presidents biggest foreign policy fan... You couldn't fit a razor blade between the TWO policies... Oh yeah, Romney is going to talk tough, but that AIN'T policy.

excon

His pivot to the center, after being far right was a sloppy move at best.

He probably doesn't like being president because he doesn't like people (http://nymag.com/news/politics/elections-2012/bill-hillary-clinton-2012-10/index2.html). That's kind of scary if you ask me.


Clinton, being Clinton, had plenty of advice in mind and was desperate to impart it. But for the first two years of Obama’s term, the phone calls Clinton kept expecting rarely came. “People say the reason Obama wouldn’t call Clinton is because he doesn’t like him,” observes Tanden. “The truth is, Obama doesn’t call anyone, and he’s not close to almost anyone. It’s stunning that he’s in politics, because he really doesn’t like people. My analogy is that it’s like becoming Bill Gates without liking computers.”

But he does like golf and the sound of his own voice, that should be enough reason to vote him in again.

The President lied through his teeth regarding Iraq. He (specifically Biden and Panetta ) bungled the 'status of forces 'negotiations with the Iraqi gvt and that is the ONLY reason there is a complete US withdrawal underway.

He probably doesn't like being president because he doesn't like people (http://nymag.com/news/politics/elections-2012/bill-hillary-clinton-2012-10/index2.html). That's kind of scary if you ask me.



But he does like golf and the sound of his own voice, that should be enough reason to vote him in again.

What is amazing is that this critique comes from his side ;not his political opposition. Chris Matthews went from the thrill up his leg to wondering why or if the President even wants the job .

Hello again, tom:

Bush lost Iraq a few months after we invaded... Since that opportunity for victory vanished, there's been JILLIONS of mistakes, MOST of which were perpetrated by the Bush neo-cons who are NOW running the Romney campaign. Even IF I accept that Obama blew the agreement you're talking about, Iraq was LOST long ago. If I were you, I wouldn't be looking for ANYBODY to blame for Iraq but yourself.

I've said on these pages MANY, MANY times, you can't win a war that you've already LOST.

excon

Bush left Iraq a won war even though there were mistakes made . Obama lost the post-war .Now the nation is the transportation highway for Iran to funnel supplies to the Assad regime.

By the way ;can't wait to see all the ads in swing State Virginia ;where Norfolk hosts the biggest Naval base,and the state heavily involved in the ship building industry, that the cuts in the Navy budget aren't significant.

tw ;can't wait to see all the ads in swing State Virginia ;where Norfolk hosts the biggest Naval base,and the state heavily involved in the ship building industry, that the cuts in the Navy budget aren't significant.

Apparently the bayonet industry is none too pleased (http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/23/barack-obama-bayonet-company-relevant-debate/#ixzz2A9My1eWm) with his snide, immature remark.


TMZ spoke with multiple people in the bayonet industry who tell us they were shocked and even offended when Obama brought up the weapon during last night's debate.

...

According to the official U.S. Marine Corps website, every Marine is STILL required to complete a bayonet training program... because "the weapon becomes just as effective [as a rifle] in close combat situations."

What happened to all those Obama failed policies that Romney now agrees with?

Enough debate, cast my vote today, this is over until the final count as far as I'm concerned. Naw I didn't go with the new version of the Bush neo cons!

Do you get your daily talking points straight from the DNC?

Apparently the bayonet industry is none too pleased (http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/23/barack-obama-bayonet-company-relevant-debate/#ixzz2A9My1eWm) with his snide, immature remark.

Not to mention the fact that we are about to surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban... and all their horses.

Hello again, tom:

I think we've talked before about the wars George W. Bush lost... Afghanistan was the first. He lost that one when he got all excited about invading Iraq..

So, you can't lose a war that you've already lost.. It's only blame that you can shift around... But, I ain't buying any of it.

excon

The time has come the Walrus said, to speak of many things, somehow I don't remember surrender being one of them.

A few years ago, in another century, the US surrendered Vietnam to the Vietnamese, oddly enough this hasn't necessarily being a bad thing for the Vietnamese. In the same century the US surrendered the Philippines to the Phillipinoes. I don't recall that necessarily being a bad thing. In this century the US surrendered Iraq to the Iraqi, I think the jury is still out on that one and common sense says that the sooner the US retreats from Afghanistan the better. Al Qaeda has now established itself in Mali so we can expect the US to need its resources to attack and subdue Mali, another place where foreign armies have not done well.

Thing is Tom, the US is too sophisticated to fight effectively in some of these places, because there are no set piece battles and they loose the advantage technology gives them, this is why they have resorted to drone strikes, targets of opportunity. Perhaps Obama was right, perhaps the day of the bayonet is over

No Obama isn't right ;his snarky ignorant comments about the military proved he's unqualified for the position he holds.

So should we start the draft back, or keep recycling people to fight a war YOU want? Have you volunteered yet?

Let the Afghans worry about their taliban countrymen.

Let the Afghans worry about their taliban countrymen.

Yes Tal I agree, it is time for the Afghans to sort it out. The vacuum doesn't exist now that allowed the Taliban to take over. If that benighted country wants to live in the seventh century, let it. What I say is pull the plug on both Afghanistan and Pakistan, why should any of us be supporting them. A little dose of reality goes a long way

So should we start the draft back, or keep recycling people to fight a war YOU want? Have you volunteered yet?

Let the Afghans worry about their taliban countrymen.

Your grandkids will be dealing with them.

No Obama isn't right ;his snarky ignorant comments about the military proved he's unqualified for the position he holds.Actually he proved that he's up-to-date on the US military requirements and he really put Romney in his place. You are one of the very few fervents who view that exchange as a negative for Obama... but then again you view everything as a negative for Obama so it's understandable.

The only thing Obama knows about the Navy is that they play basketball on the deck of the Carl Vinson . How does the adm plan on doing it's "pivot the Asia-Pacific region" with a depleted fleet ?

What is "pivot the Asia-Pacific region"?

What is "pivot the Asia-Pacific region"?

Pivot to the Asia-Pacific region..

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/02/opinion/la-oe-boot-defense-pacific-pivot-20120702

Bah, not interesting, certainly not to the voters.

Hello again, tom:

Let me see. If I were going to trust one of 'em, I'd pick the guy who got Ben Laden and NOT the guy who thinks Syria is the path to the sea for the Iranians...

Bwa, ha, ha ha ha.

excon

What's the hurry? What's driving events for a "pivot" by so many boats at once? Or is this another neocon hunt for WMD, or the business interest to cash in?

Or contractors trying to stay in business? All of the above?!

Who pays for this after a tax cut for the wealthy?

That's because you haven't thought it through . Iran's path to Mediterranean Sea is now through the Suez Canal. That is a path that presents a number of choke points the US fleet dominates . The Syrian relationship is crucial to Tehran for a number of reasons like supplying their surrogate terrorists like Hezzbolah . But it is also true that Tehran is building a naval base in Syria that will give them direct access to the Mediterranean ,and in doing so;threaten the Israeli coast .
Iran to Build Permanent Naval Base in Syria - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6q8wfmm3M)

Whats the hurry? Whats driving events for a "pivot" by so many boats at once? Or is this another neocon hunt for WMD, or the business interest to cash in?

Or contractors trying to stay in business? All of the above???!!!

Who pays for this after a tax cut for the wealthy?

Ummm the pivot is the Obama policy . It happens to be a policy I don't object to because as I said yesterday ;our greatest geopolitical foe is China.

Hello again, tom:

Thought it through?? I'm not smart enough to think.. But I AM smart enough to look at a map.. THAT casual observation tells me that Iran and Syria don't share a border. There's a country in the way, and those people may NOT want to give 'em a path...

Look. You can try to cover for this dildo, but it doesn't make him look smarter...

excon

1 nuclear submarine = 4,000 horses and 23,487 bayonets

Hello again, tom:

Thought it through??? I'm not smart enough to think.. But I AM smart enough to look at a map.. THAT casual observation tells me that Iran and Syria don't share a border. There's a country in the way, and those people may NOT wanna give 'em a path...

Look. You can try to cover for this dildo, but it doesn't make him look smarter...

excon

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-syria-crisis-iran-iraq-idUSBRE88I17B20120919

Dude, if you don't see the Syria-Iran alliance you're the only one. Oh, and they have these things called planes that fly in the air right over countries and stuff.

Exclusive: Western report - Iran ships arms, personnel to Syria via Iraq (http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-western-report-says-iran-ships-arms-personnel-183854532.html)


UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Iran has been using civilian aircraft to fly military personnel and large quantities of weapons across Iraqi airspace to Syria to aid President Bashar al-Assad in his attempt to crush an 18-month uprising against his government, according to a Western intelligence report seen by Reuters.

Hello again, Carol:


1 nuclear submarine = 4,000 horses and 23,487 bayonets It's better than that... Or worse, if you're a Romney guy... Only 14 Trident submarines, when taken together, carry almost HALF of our thermonuclear fire power. Think about it, FOURTEEN boats..

excon

Hello again, Steve:


Oh, and they have these things called planes that fly in the air right over countries and stuff.So, Romney was talking about a path to the sea in the AIR, huh? Really?? Dude! If planes can fly where they want, why couldn't Romney say the Iranians have a PATH to our DOOR??

Like I said to tom.. You can try to cover up for this dufus but it doesn't help your credibility with ME.

Excon

Pay attention here ex, I know you have a short attention span these days...

You just said, "there's a country in the way, and those people may NOT wanna give 'em a path..."

Those things called planes that fly in the air right over countries and stuff give 'em a path.

Of course before the Obots screwed up the status of forces agreement ,the Iranians would not consider overflight of Iraqi air space

And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a pretty clear Russian-Syrian-Iranian alliance? And doesn't the Russian navy have a Mediterranean Sea presence? And isn't Syria on the Mediterranean?

Sometimes you just have to lead these people by the hand.

Hello again, wingers:


Sometimes you just have to lead these people by the hand.

Pay attention. Nobody is denying that Syria and Iran are friends.. I'm DENYING that Syria is Iran's PATH to the sea.

Now, you can spin it anyway you like, but ordinary regular people KNOW what a path is, and it AIN'T in the air.

Romney doesn't know his way around the world. When his lips move, it's John Bolton speaking. If you liked Iraq, you're going to LOVE Iran.

Excon

If John Bolton is his advisor then all the more reason to vote for Romney.

Iranian warships already docked in Syria (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/Iranian-warships-dock-at-Syrian-naval-base-China-warns-of-civil-war/articleshow/11965180.cms) this year and it's pretty obvious to all except the UN that they don't like Israel very much, just down the coast from Syria if my geography is correct.

Hello again, Steve:

I don't know what's happened to you... Can you not follow the discussion?? Over on post #396 I made fun of Romneys' IGNORANCE of geography.

THAT has been the thrust of my discussion, and NOTHING else.. Nobody is saying that Iran and Syria aren't friends, and nobody is saying that either of them like Israel.

But, NONE of that has to do with Romney NOT knowing that Iran has it's own access to the sea.. He WASN'T talking about airplanes... You know it, and I know it. As you pointed out, airplanes don't NEED paths.. The more you SAY he was talking about airplanes, the more it becomes EVIDENT that you KNOW he's a dumbkoff.

Since you KNOW he's an IGNORANT man, why would you want to put the reins of the nation into his hands? Do you really hate it here that bad??

excon

Iranian warships already docked in Syria (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/Iranian-warships-dock-at-Syrian-naval-base-China-warns-of-civil-war/articleshow/11965180.cms) this year and it's pretty obvious to all except the UN that they don't like Israel very much, just down the coast from Syria if my geography is correct.

And we have ships in the Straits of Hormuz, and everybody knows that.

Since you KNOW he's an IGNORANT man, why would you want to put the reins of the nation into his hands? Do you really hate it here that bad??

And Obama thinks there are at least 57 states. What's your point, that a word misspoken or omitted equals ignorance? How do you explain Biden then?

I remind you again that you were the one talking about "a country a country in the way, and those people may NOT wanna give 'em a path..." and that [B]my response (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/whos-winning-705934-41.html#post3305970) was pointing out the irrelevance of that claim. But like I said, I know how short your attention span is so I get that you can't stick to what even you were saying.

Nevertheless, try this little exercise, Syria is Iran's logical path to the "Mediterranean" sea. You really don't see a strategic reason for having a naval presence based in Syria as opposed to the Suez route? Dude, open your own eyes. Here's a little geography for a visual reason why:

Hello again,

During the next administration, the Middle East will blow its head off. Those two wars Bush started and LOST are going to come back to haunt us. If Romney is elected, John Bolton, I mean Romney OR Israel will DO something that sets it off.

Frankly, Obama is no different. Except he knows about paths and oceans and stuff.

excon

It was such a big gaffe that neither Bob Schieffer or Obama questioned the statement. Of course a more nuianced view of the statement would also include a strategic pipeline for oil and gas transportation to the Mediterranean.

Nah that can't be it.
Syria's Pipelineistan war - Opinion - Al Jazeera English (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/201285133440424621.html)


Maybe those sanctions aren't as ironclad as the President thinks .

Tom, desperation has kicked in.

And we have ships in the Straits of Hormuz, and everybody knows that.

That was the first time an Iranian warship has been in the Mediterranean since 1979.

Yup they are resorting to the tired old Republicans are stupid meme.

Should we sink them now, or wait?

I'm sure Obama has a drone for that, too.

Yes we do tend to drone on

Anyone noticing the weirdness in the news lately ?

North Carolina Registers Over 583 Democrat Votes Over the Age of 112 - Charlotte Conservative | Examiner.com (http://www.examiner.com/article/north-carolina-registers-over-583-democrat-votes-over-the-age-of-112)


Or If true does anyone care ?

UN Backed OSCE Sending Observers To Monitor U.S. Election (http://www.inquisitr.com/371778/un-backed-osce-sending-observers-to-monitor-u-s-election/)

Here's your answer: (and it's not just democrats, its any voter who fits that criteria)

It has been brought to my attention that the NC State Board of Elections has a glitch in their record keeping.

Example: If you registered to vote, let's just say in the 1950′s or 60′s, AND you did not fill in the “Date of Birth” section on the voter registration form, then your date of birth, in the electronic database, results in a 'DEFAULT DATE' of January 1, 1900.
I'm pretty good at Internet Research. :D

Have you heard about Colorado and what happened with their web site and registering on it?

Here's your answer: (and it's not just democrats, its any voter who fits that criteria)

I'm pretty good at Internet Research. :D

So you don't consider it odd that the number keeps growing and not decreasing ?

Have you heard about Colorado and what happened with their web site and registering on it?

Got a link ?

Got a link ?

On Tuesday, the last day of voter registration in Colorado, the state elections website got four times its normal traffic, enough to swamp the servers and crash the page. Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler says the site got 162,713 visits that day, with 36,206 people either registering to vote or updating their registrations.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/12/14396380-colorado-online-voter-registration-up-in-smoke?lite

I just hope those voters can show up at the polls and be able to vote, no matter who they vote for.

On Tuesday, the last day of voter registration in Colorado, the state elections website got four times its normal traffic, enough to swamp the servers and crash the page. Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler says the site got 162,713 visits that day, with 36,206 people either registering to vote or updating their registrations.

Colorado online voter registration, up in smoke - The Maddow Blog (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/12/14396380-colorado-online-voter-registration-up-in-smoke?lite)

I just hope those voters can show up at the polls and be able to vote, no matter who they vote for.

Colorado doesn't have EDR. Election Day Registration. So Im not sure how they can resolve that one.

Colorado also has an issue with registering illegals (http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-co-conducts-more-citizenship-checks-003647376--election.html).

They also seem to like Romney, he packed 'em in at the Red Rock (http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21839256/romney-ryan-rally-at-red-rocks).

Check out the video the Denver Post put together:

Video: Romney, Ryan Rally draws huge crowd at Red Rocks (http://photos.denverpost.com/2012/10/23/video-romney-ryan-rally-draws-huge-crowd-at-red-rocks/)

APNewsBreak: CO conducts more citizenship checks - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-co-conducts-more-citizenship-checks-003647376--election.html)

Dumm said everyone agrees ineligible voters shouldn't cast ballots. But she argued that Gessler should focus on more important issues, like making sure the secretary of state's office website functions properly to allow people to register to vote, and coordinating with clerks on election issues before November. She said the 441 figure amounts to a "rounding error" in the greater scheme, considering there are 3.5 million registered voters in Colorado.

Excuse me... Sen. candidate Murdoch (Indiana) Conception from rape is something God Intended... - Democratic Underground (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021619219)

https://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=89304

UPDATE: Watch US Senate candidate Murdoch scramble to explain himself after calling rape pregnancies a "gift from god" : thinkprogress (http://inagist.com/all/260916940330110976/)

To close to Halloween?

Back to that phony narrative, eh? Once again we're talking real issues and you guys keep making it about small things. There was nothing wrong with what Mourdock said, it was thoughtful, considered answer that takes into account the difficulty of the issue.

You guys seem to think there is nothing difficult about abortion, it's not a baby so it's disposable. The mom might struggle to raise it so it's disposable. It might have a birth defect so it's disposable. The woman just isn't ready for a baby so it's disposable. It was unintended so it's disposable. It was the product of rape so it's disposable.

Sorry folks, but the most innocent form of human life isn't disposable. Like Mourdock I admit it isn't an easy issue, but even in cases of rape or incest it's still life.

Mourdock: People 'twisted' rape comments (http://cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2012/10/24/sot-in-mourdock-rape-comments.cnn)

Once again we're talking real issuesLike your Big Bird post?

You guys seem to think there is nothing difficult about abortion, it's not a baby so it's disposable.No one ever said that - YOU said that. It's disgusting.

There was nothing wrong with what Mourdock saidYes there was but you're too committed to admit it.

Hello again, Steve:


it's still life.It is, but you forget there's ANOTHER life involved.

Excon

Once again we're talking real issues
Like your Big Bird post?

Are you really that ignorant or just that full of hate and intolerance? Look up the word "contrast."


No one ever said that - YOU said that. It's disgusting.

Well that answered my first question. Now look up the word "seem."


Yes there was but you're too committed to admit it

Bullsh*t, which is all you offer.

It is, but you forget there's ANOTHER life involved

And the circle begins again. I don't discount any life involved, hence the admission that it's a difficult issue. Really ex, we've been all over that and quite frankly I'm bored with straw men.

Condescension and insulting - is that how you are in real life or just here?

I'm bored with straw menThen for the love of the Flying Spagetti Monster (blessed be his noodle) stop using them in all your arguments!

Condescension and insulting - is that how you are in real life or just here?

Depends on whether the other person is being an a$$hole.

Hello again, Steve:


Really ex, we've been all over that and quite frankly I'm bored with straw men.

Certainly, if you can dismiss the mother as a straw man, then it's no wonder you hold the position you do... I suppose you HAVE to do that in order to divorce her so completely from the equation.

Thinking people, however, realize that there's TWO lives involved.

excon

Um, I just said "I don't discount any life involved." The straw man is claiming I "divorce" the mother from the equation as your side divorces the baby from the equation.

Round and around we go,where we end upat nobody knows- Ballof confusion

You want facts? Mitt who hasn't worked at bain since 2001(?),will pocket $750 mill from the moving of Sensata to China, and won't pay taxes on it.

And this is after a record year for profits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW1fGcwpecg

Bain Capital Closes Sensata's 170 US Jobs- Outsourced to China | Politicol News (http://www.politicolnews.com/bain-capital-closes-sensatas-170-us-jobs-outsourced-to-china/)

And I know you don't believe a senate composed of Murdock and Akin won't bring up an anti abortion bill as the first order of business, and Mitt will sign it. He said he would, and I believe him.

And I make money on the shares of stocks I own too. What's your point ? He has had no management responsibilities at Bain for over a decade .

And again the guy that complains we don't take responsibility is blaming someone else. Again, Romney not worked for Bain since 2001, but if he can pocket $750 million from his $8 million in Bain funds more power to him, that's a damn good return for his investment.

http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/400225_10152211050655035_976151994_n.jpg

And the puerile nonsense is back.

At least that's a real undoctored pic, it's funny.

Unlike your cartoony very-adult-like posts:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/whos-winning-705934-16.html#post3293511

People in glass houses...

At least that's a real undoctored pic, it's funny.

Unlike your cartoony very-adult-like posts:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current...ml#post3293511

People in glass houses...

Dude, really? The puerility in that link is the president of the United States pinning his reelection hopes on Big Bird and Elmo.

Dude, really? The puerility in that link is the president of the United States pinning his reelection hopes on Big Bird and Elmo.And Romney takes it from his wife! Right in the magic underwear!
The fact that you really believe that Obama pins all his hopes on Big Bird and Elmo is more telling of the way you think than of Obama.

And Romney takes it from his wife! Right in the magic underwear!
Attacking his religion now, nice.


The fact that you really believe that Obama pins all his hopes on Big Bird and Elmo is more telling of the way you think than of Obama.

Two quick things then you can return to your hateful juvenile ways.

A) I did not say the word "all."

B) Romney is not the one running on Sesame Street, lady parts, binders, bayonets, Seamus and "Romnesia." Obama is in desperation mode and he may be president, but Romney is presidential.

Well I'm off to a haunted house with my son and my daughter is off to a dance. You have fun with your outrage.

Attacking his religion now, nice. It's not an attack when I state a fact.

It's not an attack when I state a fact.

Stated no, joked yes. It was an attack on his religion no matter you twist it.

I'm winning. Why? Because US politics doesn't mean a thing to me. Frankly, I'll be glad when the election is over so I can stop hearing about this crap. :)

And again the guy that complains we don't take responsibility is blaming someone else. Again, Romney not worked for Bain since 2001, but if he can pocket $750 million from his $8 million in Bain funds more power to him, that's a damn good return for his investment.

And the workers should be glad for him too, right?? So if it happens to you, then you have no job, no insurance, no regrets right??

And the workers should be glad for him too, right??? So if it happens to you, then you have no job, no insurance, no regrets right???

As if I've never been there. Life is not fair, and some of us don't impose on others in a vain attempt to make it so. As Hillary might say, man up dude. Or, get over it.

Then Romney is your man all right.

Do you not realize the sheer silliness, make that audacity, to hang a noose on a guy who has no say in the matter, a private citizen who has been gone from the firm for over decade? Face it Tal, America is not buying the "Mitt the ogre" strategy because it's a bald-faced lie.

Actually "Mitt-the-outsourcer" is getting a lot of play. It seems to be an enduring meme.

Duh, that's the point. It's gotten tremendous play and it's not working. People saw Romney wasn't the evil ogre he's been portrayed to be on Oct 3rd and his ratings keep climbing. Now they see that petulant poser Obama for what he is.

I disagree I think it is working. I think people do see him as a cold calculating capitalist whose only concern is his personal wealth and that of his buddies. But you're right, the election itself will tell the story.

Hello again,

There's plenty of reason not to like Mitt, but outsourcing isn't one of them. Even today, Boeing is holding a seminar for its suppliers to teach them HOW to buy from Mexico. To them, outsourcing is GOOD.. I agree.

We had a run here in the US. We could pay our people $19.50 an hour because there wasn't anybody else in the world who could do that work. And there wasn't any place for them to do it, if there was..

That's changed. The only way we've been able to stay on top is creating new industries, and we've done that a lot... And, now that's changed too. The people who would ordinarily develop new industries are "uncertain". They're caretakers, not entrepreneurs. You hear the disdain the right wingers have over ANY government investment in our future... They make fun of the losses and point fingers. They haven't a clue.

The banks that caused our decline are right back on top doing the SAME thing. Nobody is trying to stop THEM. THEY'LL send us to hell much quicker than Medicare will.

Buy gold.

excon

Ex, I love investing in the future. Unfortunately government sucks at it, or haven't you noticed?

Your guy keeps running around saying "forward, we can't keep trying the same old thing," yet you and him want to try the same old thing, government picking losers in the market. Not interested.

Since we hear so much about that Republican-created fiscal cliff, FYI...

Obama’s fanciful claim that Congress ‘proposed’ the sequester (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-fanciful-claim-that-congress-proposed-the-sequester/2012/10/25/8651dc6a-1eed-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_blog.html)


As the saying goes, success has a thousand fathers, while failure is an orphan. And if there ever is an orphan in Washington these days, it is that odd duck known as “sequestration.”

We’ve earlier written that there are bipartisan fingerprints over the looming defense cuts that Mitt Romney has sought to pin on President Obama. Now, in the final presidential debate, Obama sought to toss the hot potato of sequestration — the process that is forcing those defense cuts and reductions in domestic spending — into Congress’s lap.

Fortunately, there is a detailed and contemporaneous look at the debt ceiling deal that led to the current budget crunch: Bob Woodward’s “The Price of Politics.” The book clearly had the full cooperation of top White House and congressional officials. With the help of our colleague, we took a tour through the relevant sections in order to determine the accuracy of the president’s statement.

The Facts

The battle over raising the debt ceiling consumed Washington in the summer of 2011, with Republicans refusing to agree to raise it unless spending was cut by an equivalent amount. Obama pressed but failed to get an agreement on raising revenue as part of the package. Woodward’s book details the efforts to come up with an enforcement mechanism that would make sure the cuts took place — and virtually every mention shows this was a White House gambit.

...

The Pinocchio Test

No one disputes the fact that no one wanted sequestration, or that ultimately a bipartisan vote in Congress led to passage of the Budget Control Act. But the president categorically said that sequestration was “something that Congress has proposed.”

Woodward’s detailed account of meetings during the crisis, clearly based on interviews with key participants and contemporaneous notes, make it clear that sequestration was a proposal advanced and promoted by the White House.

In sum: Gene Sperling brought up the idea of a sequester, while Jack Lew sold Harry Reid on the idea and then decided to use the Gramm-Hollings-Rudman language (which he knew from his days of working for Tip O’Neill) as a template for sequester. The proposal was so unusual for Republicans that staffers had to work through the night to understand it.

Oddly, Lew in Tampa on Thursday, publicly asserted the opposite: “There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger…. [It] was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure at the end.”

This prompted Woodward to go over his notes and interviews once again, to make sure he had gotten it right.

“After reviewing all the interviews and the extensive material I have on this issue, it looks like President Obama told a whopper,” Woodward said. “Based on what Jack Lew said in Florida today, I have asked the White House to correct the record.”

We had been wavering between Three and Four Pinocchios. But in light’s of Lew’s decision to doubledown on Obama’s claim, we agree it’s a whopper.

Four Pinocchios

Just sayin'

Romney at Bain Capital: Big Gains, Some Busts - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140850713493694.html)


Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.

Government loans failure rate - Bing (http://www.bing.com/search?q=Government+loans+failure+rate+&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=government+loans+failure+rate+&sc=0-13&sp=-1&sk=)

Obama DOE Picked More Energy Winners Than Silicon Valley VCs - CleanTechnica (http://cleantechnica.com/2011/10/21/obama-doe-picked-more-energy-winners-than-silicon-valley-vcs/)

Brookings: "DOE (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/09/28/330464/brookings-doe-loan-guarantee-program/)


The third alternative energy loan program, the 1705 loan guarantee program, is the one responsible for the present furor because it guaranteed loan to Solnydra. After reductions to the program, it was appropriated $2.5 billion, the amount the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) predicts the program will eventually cost taxpayers once the all the spending authority is used up (loans are allowed to have a maturity of 30 years). That cost projection assumes 12.85 percent of the loan value given out will end in default. So Solyndra's guarantee, which represented 2.8 percent of the 1705 portfolio, leaves considerable room for further defaults without losses exceeding budget costs, even if the government recovered nothing. But that is highly improbable. The federal government owns the assets of borrowers that default and can manage or sell them. OMB expects the program to recover almost half of its losses in such cases. Solyndra's assets are reportedly worth $859 million, so it's conceivable that taxpayers will not lose any money.

Had to include this,

http://news.yahoo.com/jon-stewart-pick-winners-losers-130654540.html

Dude, the difference is in who's losing my money, me or Obama. It is not the government's role to gamble MY money.

You mean OUR money since you are hardly the only one invested in the future of the country, and you can always do what your hero Romney did, get a great accountant, and pay hardly any taxes.

HMMM!! Are you sure you aren't part of that 47% who pay no taxes already? Lets see your tax returns mister!!

Hello again,

I don't know.. If Romney is winning, why did he send John Sununu out to make racist comments about Colon Powell?

Why did Romney flat out LIE to the workers at a Jeep plant by telling them that ALL their jobs are being shipped off to China.

Why did Trump get caught red handed by Letterman trying to sell ties made in China AFTER he BAD MOUTHED Obama for his policies on China?

Why is Ryan campaigning in states that DON'T matter? I'll tell you why.. It's because he holds the SAME view on rape and abortion as do Richard Mourdock and Todd Aiken, and he MUST be kept away from the press...

Other than that, Romney had a good day.

Bwa, ha ha ha. Obama in a landslide.

excon

PS> (edited) Oh yeah, I almost forgot... REPUBLICAN Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's chief of staff during his time as secretary of state said, “My party, unfortunately, is the bastion of those people, not all of them, but most of them, who are still basing their decision on race,” Wilkerson said. “Let me just be candid: My party is full of racists. And the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander-in-chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin.

Sununu just said the obvious. That's the same argument your side has been making about why whites are voting for Romney so what's the problem?

Oh, and Letterman also took Obama to task forlying about Romney's automaker column.

Hello again, Steve:


Sununu just said the obvious.Personally, I have more respect for General Powell... Liking Romney, but supporting Obama simply because of his skin color, would repudiate his ENTIRE career.

That you believe Colon Powell WOULD do that, says more about YOU than it does him.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Yes, I have more to say...

Do YOU have honor? Do you UNDERSTAND honor? If you do, then you'd understand that HONOR wins over skin color.

That you HAVE honor, as I believe you'll tell me you do, but that a BLACK man doesn't, and the reason why is "obvious", tells me you're obviously a racist.

Yeah, I know you don't like it.. But, a spade IS a spade.

excon

Dude, after 5 years of libs of all walks accusing us of hating Obama because he's black because we say "basketball" or "golf" you have NO business preaching to me about HONOR.

Hello again, Steve:

I don't wrap YOU into what Republicans say. I wrap YOU into what YOU say.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Instead of attacking me, why don't you ask yourself WHY you think a man with Colon Powell's credentials would throw the country under the bus, a country he risked life and limb to defend, in the name of RACE??

Do you NOT believe the black community is capable of honor? It appears you do not... That's a text book example of racism...

excon

No sir, you're wrapping me in straw. You KNOW there is nothing racist about me, show me some of thaf HONOR and stop pretending otherwise.

There is a lot more to the sequester story than whose idea it was, and the inability of the super committee to do its job is what led to the sequester, and all the branches of government had to sign off on it.

Obama to supercommittee: Get a debt deal (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/11/obama-to-supercommittee-get-a-debt-deal/1)


Congress set up the "sequester mechanism" -- automatic budgets -- as a spur to help the supercommittee find at least $1.2 trillion in cuts to the deficit over the next 10 years. The supercommittee was created as part of the debt ceiling agreement reached by Congress and Obama in August.


The sequester was agreed to by both parties to ensure there was a meaningful enforcement mechanism to force a result from the Committee. Congress must not shirk its responsibilities.

Sequester is a bi partisan agreement for work to get done, and has been used before.

OMB | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative_sap_105-1_hr2003-h)

Doesn't matter who proposes it, its been part of he process since 1997.

Hello again, Steve:

I've known you a long time.. You're my friend. I don't think you're a racist, but I don't know what lies in your heart. There are people who talk about black people and watermelon and AREN'T blowing a dog whistle. And, there are those who are blatant racists... Now the ones who say that crap but AREN'T racist's, are at a minimum, pretty DUMB. In any case, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

In your case, all I know is what you say, and what you SAID about Colon Powell is racist.. There's nothing hidden here. There's no dog whistle.. Now, maybe you didn't mean it, but you didn't say that.

It's your turn to tell me WHY it's OBVIOUS that Colon Powell would support Obama.. Tell me WHY he's willing to throw the country, a country that he defended, under the bus in the name of RACE? I want to hear.

excon

Liking Romney, but supporting Obama simply because of his skin color, would repudiate his ENTIRE career.


No what repudiates his career is the fact that he made the case for WMD to the UN ,and then after the fact pretended that he did not believe what he told the UN . What repudiated his career is knowing that his Assistant Sec State Armitage outed Valerie Plame ;and yet allowed inspector Javert to go on a witch hunt and indict Scooter Libby .

I give Colin Powell props for a wonderful military career ;but as an Sec State he sucked. If that makes me a racist then so be it.

What I said about Sununu was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. If white guys are racist for supporting Romney then blacks are racist for supportimg Obama. I make no comment on Powell other than I'm disappointed.

Hello again,

Getting down to the wire. Romney looked like he was overtaking Obama. Then it stopped. Maybe he shouldn't have lied about Jeep. It has the sound of desperation.

excon

Yeah, it hurt Obama's feelings. Poor little baby.

Hello again, Steve:


Yeah, it hurt Obama's feelings. Poor little baby.Yeah, I heard there was a right wing email saying that... It may even be so, poor fellow.

But, what's MORE important, it hurt the Jeep factory workers feelings. Romney thought they were too dumb to actually KNOW what the future was for their plant...

And, they're going to PAY HIM BACK bigtime..

How stupid is Romney anyway?

Excon

Yeah, I heard there was a right wing email saying that... It may even be so, poor fellow.

And the Orwellian day continues. Yesterday Huffpo was spewing right-wing talking points according to Tal, and today it's Clinton (http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/clinton-obamas-feeling-hurt-over-jeep-ad_658105.html) according to you.

Obama the victim. LOL.

Yeah it hurts Romney so much that the OFA has decided to pump campaign $$$ into Michigan ads . Really ? How could Romney be competitive in the state of the auto bailout ? In fact ,Romney is competitive in states he shouldn't be ,like PA .
The left has become unhinged in their panic . They are back to cheap Bain talking points and charges of racism with every other breath. They mock Romney for collecting food and supplies for Hurricane Sandy victims.

collecting food and supplies for Hurricane Sandy victims.
Hurricane victims don't want food and supplies, nor does the Red Cross. And some of that food was a set-up by campaign workers.

Yeah ;I guess a former Governor wouldn't know what is needed . Around here they have already begun distrubting food ,water and dry ice from our county minor league Baseball field .
At the rally there was a table “piled high with flashlights, batteries, diapers, toothbrushes, mini-deodorants, fleece blankets, cereal, toilet paper and canned goods” along with two large television screens calling for donations to the Red Cross .

yeah ;I guess a former Governor wouldn't know what is needed . Around here they have already begun distrubting food ,water and dry ice from our county minor league Baseball field .
Romney was collecting Rice Krispies and granola bars.

Romney was collecting Rice Krispies and granola bars. yes he did ;I added a edit to my original . Those of course are useful supplies for people without electricity . They can be eaten without any cooking .

I guess Romney has changed his mind about Fema being immoral.

Romney was collecting Rice Krispies and granola bars.

Meanwhile the President did a symbolic flyover of Jersey Beaches . I'm sure there are pictures of him looking down at the devestation . He is acting Presidential of course . Of course all he need do is make sure the FEMA $$$ makes it to the state where the Governors know best how to allocate the resources. Even nanny Bloomy told the President to stay home .

I guess Romney has changed his mind about Fema being immoral.
He naver said it was... that was more left wing spin.

He naver said it was ...that was more left wing spin.
Romney: "Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that's even better."

I wonder how the private sector would be handling this disaster.

For a more balanced interpretation of his position ,read this :
No, Mitt Romney Doesn't Really Want to Kill Off FEMA - Jordan Weissmann - The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/10/no-mitt-romney-doesnt-really-want-to-kill-off-fema/264230/)

Listening to lefty talking points today? Both Mitt and Ann solicited donations to the Red Cross and I'm quite certain that any food bank would be more than happy to fill their pantries with donated food for the victims of Sandy. But leave it to the liberal media to crucify a guy for helping others, something Romney has a long history of doing personally.

y77ozPzKg5I

xm98fJ-iHS0

Listening to lefty talking points today? Both Mitt and Ann solicited donations to the Red Cross and I'm quite certain that any food bank would be more than happy to fill their pantries with donated food for the victims of Sandy. But leave it to the liberal media to crucify a guy for helping others, something Romney has a long history of doing personally.
He was so iffy as to what would happen to the donated food -- "I think" and "probably."

He was so iffy as to what would happen to the donated food -- "I think" and "probably."That's because he leads from behind.

To hell with what Romney was doing. The Prez was dead on it! No Katrina here folks!

What has he done ? Nothing but make phone calls to Governors and make a symbolic helicopter ride today. No Katrina here because local officials are actually doing their job (except the Mayor of Atlantic City)

Hello again, tom:


What has he done?You don't understand command.. Obama didn't have to fire the gun to have killed Ben Laden, and he doesn't have to drive a truck to manage the well oiled machine called FEMA.

Excon

You don't understand command.. Obama didn't have to fire the gun to have killed Ben Laden, and he doesn't have to drive a truck to manage the well oiled machine called FEMA.

If only he'd given the order to whack the terrorists in Benghazi...