I suggested yesterday that President Obama's closing theme appeared to be "trust." Increasingly, the pitch is coming without subtlety.
As part of his multi-state blitz yesterday, Obama began telling supporters, "We joke about 'Romnesia,' but the reason I bring this up is because it speaks to something serious and that is the issue of trust.... There's no more serious issue in the presidential campaign than who can you trust. Trust matters.... And here's the thing -- you know me by now. You know I say what I mean, and I mean what I say."
And what about his rival? Obama shared some candid thoughts with Rolling Stone.
As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president. After a thoughtful pause, she said, "Tell him: You can do it."
Obama grinned. "That's the only advice I need," he said. "I do very well, by the way, in that demographic. Ages six to 12? I'm a killer."
"Thought about lowering the voting age?" Bates joked.
"You know, kids have good instincts," Obama offered. "They look at the other guy and say, 'Well, that's a bull@!$%#ter, I can tell.'"
When reporters pressed Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer to see if the campaign wanted to walk that back, he did the opposite. "What is true is that trust is a very important part of the election," Pfeiffer said. "The president is someone who says what he means and does what he says and Gov. Romney's answers in the debates on domestic issues and foreign policy raise real questions about that."
Though it's very late in the game to introduce a new line of criticism, it's worth noting that the "trust" line may fall on fertile ground -- two weeks ago, a Washington Post/ABC News poll asked about whether the candidates are "honest and trustworthy." A 56% majority said this applies to the president, while 45% said the same about Romney.
Leave a Comment:
those 45% are idiots.
Willard is a human cipher with no core
Human?
As Benghazi has shown, Obama is a man we can trust, and who'll come to our aid when most needed. Just ask Amb. Stevens and the 30 people there.
I think Obama is a man we can trust - just look at Benghazi. Cries for help for 30 people ignored while the admin is sitting around looking at live feed, receiving calls and real-time updates. When you need him most, Obama will be there. Just ask Amb. Stevens and the other 3 Americans.
And he'll look at the American people in the eye and just speak the plain truth. I just don't know why it's taking so long for him to answer questions from the press on this. His admin is about transparency...right?
Tyrone - you are doing a disservice to the Maddow groupies when you discuss Benghazi and our late Amb. Stevens - this subject is off limits. Period Nada - leave it for the Commission to figure it out
Our great leader BO should not be blamed for this inconvenience - he was playing golf and has Billy the Kid and a even a more reliable hack Hillary Rodman to clean up his s--t.
Why was the military told three times to "stand down" and not attempt a rescue during this SEVEN HOUR preplanned firefight by known terrorists? Is the concern about a "military presence" worth four American lives?
"What is true is that trust is a very important part of the election,"
Trust is important, but character is pretty high on the list also! And quite frankly Mittens hasn't shown any real character; oh he can be a "character" (Disney, Looney Tunes, Michael Myers, et.al), but he hasn't displayed any. It's not just the flip-flops, because over time, everyone can have a change of opinion about issues - Mittens has been on every side of every issue all within the last year, even within hours of first voicing an opinion about a subject! That's not leadership! His lies along with just making stuff up, his inability to actually articulate a vision going forward other than "trust me", his unwillingness to release his tax returns - all add up to someone that isn't trustworthy, doesn't have character, and he stands for the emptiness of the GOTP policies - he is the strawman!
If he gets into office, we all (90%) might as well just turn around and bend over cause WE will get shafted hard!
I think Republicans play the Long Con. They know their tricks and brainwashing tactics worked. They can say and do anything and a majority of their party will just lemming right after them.
This election is a Litmus Test.
The Republican Party has put Republicans in a terrible position. Their credibility as voters and as people I'd consider listening to in an honest political discussion is no longer viable, if they vote for this candidate.
You can't be Conservative or Republican and care about what happens to America when you vote for Romney.
How do you support/vote for someone who lies so much, who changes positions so much, who shows no character and has very little evidence/experience to show any ability to lead/perform?
Not to mention, Obama has shown great character despite all of the GOP Obstruction. He has a very strong record to show for his leadership and I'd love to see an Obama presidency with a Democratic House and a Filibuster-proof Democratic Senate (60+ Dems). Imagine the progress America would make in that likely scenario.
Romney is a horrible candidate and Republicans lose credibility when they vote for such nonsense. Even if they don't see how good Obama is for America, they're better off sending a message to the Republican party that their candidates are horrible and they need to change direction (I know they don't like change) in who they propose as candidates and how they run a campaign, what issues they stand by or flip-flop from, or how stupid they think people will be to vote for them despite all of their lies and crappy candidate. They can vote for someone else if they don't want to vote for Obama.
And they should. At least they would show they care enough about our great country not to burn it down with another 4 years to turn it into a real third world country.
"... Mittens has been on every side of every issue all within the last year..."
-------------------------
That just means his positions are -- as BHO put it -- "evolving".
Right. Just ask Amb. Stevens.
When reporters pressed Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer to see if the campaign wanted to walk that back, he did the opposite.
F#%kin' right.
I'd say that when the Right walks back the hyperbole about ballooning deficits and their cause, the socialism of health care, birth certificates, and the end of America as we know it, then maybe Obama could think about walking this one back.
Walk it back?
By all means- walk it back: the same way Dick Cheney walked back his comment to Senator Leahey, on the senate floor!
(For those who have forgotten, it involved the "F word".)
Don't walk it back - Pay it forward.
You reap what you sow.
This election is important enough that I think it deserves more expletives...and I can think of several harsher ones for Romny
However my personal favorite isn't even profane: Fraud
Yeah, I'm still trying to save the world by using the leap year method, just go directly to the year 2014, do not stop go directly to this lucky number. Either that or starting all over with the number 1, let's see how can we do that? Do you think they'll buy it? It's worth a try. I've already started working on the book. The title is tricky though. Should I use new and approved or the latest and greatest, how about all is fair in love and war.
From a review of "On Bullshhit" by Professor Harry G. Frankfurt (emphasis mine):
Frankfurt, one of the world's most influential moral philosophers, attempts to build such a theory here. With his characteristic combination of philosophical acuity, psychological insight, and wry humor, Frankfurt proceeds by exploring how bullshhit and the related concept of humbug are distinct from lying. He argues that bullshhitters misrepresent themselves to their audience not as liars do, that is, by deliberately making false claims about what is true. In fact, bullshhit need not be untrue at all.
Rather, bullshhitters seek to convey a certain impression of themselves without being concerned about whether anything at all is true. They quietly change the rules governing their end of the conversation so that claims about truth and falsity are irrelevant. Frankfurt concludes that although bullshhit can take many innocent forms, excessive indulgence in it can eventually undermine the practitioner's capacity to tell the truth in a way that lying does not. Liars at least acknowledge that it matters what is true. By virtue of this, Frankfurt writes, bullshhit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.
Were I the Obama campaign, when asked if I wanted to "walk it back" I would quote that and say "We're not attacking him, we're merely pointing out the actual factual truth."
@Dragoon, Fraud, is bad enough. How would you like to be known as a fraud? Not me!
This man has no morals, scruples, no mercy for anyone but himself. A pittiful wimp of a creature. I think he measures up to Satin.
'Bull@!$%#ter': well played. Not walking it back? Priceless.
But cue the fauxtrage. The 'unbecoming' comments have already started. Break out the smelling salts, there's going to be a lot of fake fainting in the fox ranks.
Let 'em faint. Obama said the Emperor had no clothes because the Emperor has no clothes.
Thanks Coffee - just what I needed: a mental image of a naked Willard. /sarc
Now I may faint (or at least barf).
[shudder]
Get Enraged and Engaged:
Mooch the Vote 2012!
;-)
My apologies, Pretzel. Do feel free to replace this recklessly induced image of Mittens with the nekked person of your choice. :)
I don't think he can be naked? I though he had to keep on his magic underwear. It is about as bad. Take a look.....
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Picture+of+Mitt+in+his+magic+underpants+&view=detail&id=C22E6F0B6C78A712EE7B7B9B7EDA1CE9CE6DFB74
You think he does what he says? Many campaign promises left unanswered from his 2008 campaign. We can trust him to increase the debt, spend more money, increase taxes, let social security and medicare become defunct and unfunded. We can trust him to be completely untransparent, secretive and to engage in cover ups. We can trust him to lie to the American people on substantive issues. One thing we wouldn't have to trust him to do is campaign another 4 years, since that is all that he has done since he was elected and wouldn't need to do again after the Nov. election. We can trust him to demolish the standard of living for generations to come with his tax and spend policies. We can trust that we will fund our government programs using borrowed money from foreign countries. We can trust him to invest in more failing, bankrupt companies to the tune of millions and millions of dollars. Another green company going down the tubes today that is under criminal investigation. A solar company. He continues to pick losers for the tax payers to throw money at. GM is not healed as he says since it is using TARP funds to pay off TARP loans. Not much headway being made there. You could go on, and on and on if time and space allowed. Is that a record to vote for? I think not!
This is ROMNEY, right? A candidate who will lie when the truth would do.
Not exactly. Talking about Obama who is such a truth teller. Bengahzi is a recent and prime example.
Well bless your heart. Even if all of what you just said was completely true, which it isn't, Mitt Romney is by far worse. I think Republicans have Stockholm Syndrome. They need deprogramming on a massive scale and to stop drinking the Kool-Aid.
People like jes are the reason that Romney keeps lying.
Jes, Romney thinks you're stupid.
Got to love the Mitt wits, all spring and early summer they backed everyone and anyone including Palin, Ron I could have won the civil war if only Lee had listened to me Paul and the fat man Christie whining robme was unelectable as well as being a piece of crap but once it became clear that the Mitt wits over lords would pull every dirty trick in the republican dirty trick book to make robme their man they all jumped on the Mitt wit band wagon so now to hear them tell it they were 100% behind robme from day one.
And on this point, Romney is right.
Why else is it a 6-year old can spot a bullsh!tter like Romney but half the adults in the country cannot?
jes33 can't get off Bengahzi, #1 because it's last in, first out and #2, party before nation. The entire right has proven that with this nominee.
..and because every day the story Obama and his people made up and peddled for 2+weeks is proven to be a Lie.
Also we found out today they had multiple requests for help..they had real time intelligence..they had 7 goddamn hours...they denied those men help..and those men DIED.
So while you and many of Obama's supporters may not give a damn..anyone with a @!$%#ing conscience does.
One of my favorite lines from the Democratic Convention - "Romney gets the elevator, we get the shaft."
I trust both that Obama will be consistently more conservative than I want him to be, and that he is infinitely better than Romney.
What is the difference between Bain investing in companies using willing investors money and having a company fail, and the government using unwilling taxpayer money to invest in failing companies. Workers lose their jobs just the same. Liberals have a double standard. I choose for private investers to invest their money instead of the government. It is their risk and their gain or loss. Government shouldn't be getting involved in that arena. If they gain large amount of money because of their willingness to risk, good for them. The government doesn't have the money to be risking. I am sick of people criticizing Romney for his association with Bain that does exactly what Obama does but with the taxpayers money, but Obama gets accolades from the lefties. If a government subsidized company is a winner, everyone sings Obama's praises. If the government subsidized company is a loser, oh well, that's OK. It's only several hundred dollars of taxpayer money. Just a drop in the bucket, right? But let Private investors do the same, especially if Romney might have a connection and the critics come out in force. Workers are affected no matter who is involved, so lets give criticism and accolades to both sides and quit being so closed minded and quit having such double standards. The government shouldn't be in the business of choosing who is too big to fail and who the winners and losers should be. It isn't very good at it.
The only double standard is the ones you Mitt wits make up in your delusional minds. What part of robme being the sole owner and investor in Bain don't you get. Here is a clue pay your taxes like a good boy and stop whining about having to pay the government for the services you enjoy.
You think there's a double standard only because you have mischaracterized the investments. The government investment in Solyndra, for example, was a loan - it was hopefully going to be paid back.
Bain controlled companies that went bankrupt were due, almost entirely, by Bain forcibly raping the companies by paying themselves consulting fees, bonuses and dividends while strapping the companies with overwhelming amounts of debt to pay for them (not unlike Romney's tax cut plan).
Do yourself a favor and read this on how Bain operates.
Let us know if you still feel the same way after you read it and if you do, please explain.
Motive--who profits in return. Companies like Bain move jobs to places like China and the benefit goes to the company with some paltry benefit for the workers in China.
Looking at the POTUS' investment in GM as the counter example--some continued to loose jobs but the industry was given new potential and jobs at home were saved. GM, BTW, still makes a profit.
That is an obvious lie. The government did have the money and it successfully took the risk and it paid off for America.
Go whine somewhere with people who care about your misinformed rants. One person made good money often shuttering businesses and hoovering all the remaining money up and the other helped some companies--and so an entire industry stand on their own feet. Sure I'll congratulate the CEO for making a profit, but I'll cheer the man that fought the naysayers like you and won to save the industry. Ones a good CEO but the other is a hero.
Oh so you want to use Solyindra as the relevant example. You would like to concentrate on the 11.5 percent of the companies in that project who filed for bankruptcy. Fine, the administration took a risk and lots of money ended-up being wasted in the process. But the 88.5 percent success rate is impressive and outpaced expectations.
In the end, there isn't a double standard on the left as you try so poorly to describe. There is a President who receives lots of criticism from the left on important issues and a Republican candidate with his own successes that have nothing to do with running a country arguing that he'll magically turn it all around using mostly the same policy ideas that Bush had.
President Obama took the trillions Bush spent and put them back on the budget so we could account for them and start paying the deficit down. And then he did something that apparently only a Democrat can do. He started paying them down. 13 straight quarters of job growth while reducing the deficit is the kind of performance that we want in our elected leaders. Its the kind of performance that gets you an 88.5% return on your investment in clean energy.
Sorry jes. I am forced into the market with my mandated retirement. I am about to be forced into the market with my SS and health care if the Ryan plan goes into effect.
How is that choice? Risking my money in the stock market is not my choice.
NMC didn't you know money in the stock market is better then money in the bank after all if your really lucky and don't get a stock market crash why you will be in the top 1% by the time you retire. Then there is reality to bad the Mitt wits refuse to live in reality and try using GOP math to fudge their personal wealth delusions. To bad for Mitt wits that the only thing republicans have not failed at is crashing the stock market.
I know, right?
New GOP slogan:
Gamble your way to a secure retirement!
Invest all your savings in our stock market.
(lotz and lotz of tiny print here)
Jes: don't give up trying to talk to these libs, even tho you probably won't be able to get through to them.
those who drink too much Obama koolaid see everything through the lens of His greatness. Benghazi bores them. they don't understand what happened there but they know it's making Obama look bad, so they try to pretend it's not important.
you keep fighting the good fight over here. me, I'm going to whitehousedossier.com and commentarymagazine.com where they don't have any illusions about our Smartest President Ever .
Glenbeckibeckistanstan: You can tell alot about Romney by the company he keeps (Trump, Cheney, Beck, Mourdock, et al). His lies, Ryan's obfuscation, Faux (Fox) news ignoring and/or distorting facts and science - whether it's civil or women's rights (duh, why shouldn't it all just be HUMAN rights; seperate and still not equal, eh?), climate change, healthcare, Medicare, etc., pollute the discourse and prevent real progress. I love President Obama because he DOES believe we're all in this together and I trust him - literally - with my life!
Speaking of trust issues, this reminds me of the story circulating around about Romney's son Tagg having an investment in the private equity firm (H.I.G. Capital, LLC) that owns the company that is a national provider of election voting systems that are used in swing-states Ohio and Colorado (Hart InterCivic)? Just wondering if ther's any truth to any of this, and if so, WHY is it NOT being reported ANYWHERE? (H.I.G. is the 11th largest donor to Mitt Romney’s campaign. Four of H.I.G.’s directors, Tony Tamer, John Bolduc, Douglas Berman, and Brian D. Schwartz, are Romney bundlers along with former Bain and H.I.G. manager Brian Shortsleeve.) Just curious why this hasn't picked up any traction...
I have seen this story online and on Hardball last night.
The more you look at "rich people" and their finances, the scarier it all gets.
Interesting! Chris Matthews is one of the rich. Because he caters to the left and gets ratings. He must be talking about how scary he is.
Some links on this:
An article with video
Tagg Romney's company
Hey Jes, how big is your bladder anyway, that you can pee on fire hydrants all day like this?
How can it gain traction in this "liberal" media? Oh, wait.
Jes, why do you vote republican? That abortion thing? That Christianity thing? What?
A partial re-post of a comment I made recently elsewhere on the Maddow Blog (with apologies, but I think this bears repeating):
These machines intensely frustrate me (at least the ones with the OBVIOUS design "flaw" of being unable to provide a printed "receipt" at the time of voting - I know, not a "bug", it's a "feature", right?). I can't think of a good reason why our political "leaders" insist on using them other than to facilitate tampering with elections... as has been demonstrated repeatedly, hacking them is not all that difficult, by a variety of methods. Just consider the following chilling video demonstrations made available to the public by reliable sources:
Princeton University Exposes Diebold Flaws
Remote Vote Tampering Attack on a Sequoia AVC Voting Machine by Argonne National Lab
Computer Scientists Take Over Electronic Voting Machine with New Programming Technique
Scientists' Tests Hack Into Electronic Voting Machines in California and Elsewhere - no video at this link, but a VERY interesting article:
So-called "optical scan" systems used for vote tabulation are not invulnerable to tampering, but at least leave a paper trail that can be used for validation. These touch-screen only systems can be hacked and rigged with comparative ease, and there is simply no way to know your vote has been properly cast as you intended.
This is not a partisan issue, other than to the extent that one party more than another might feel it has an interest in leaving elections susceptible to being tampered with.
And, while I'm thinking about it, I'm a fan of NBC/MSNBC overall, but WTF is Chuck Todd's major malfunction at this point?
Chuck Todd: Voting Machine Concerns are 'Conspiracy Garbage'
Get Enraged and Engaged:
Mooch the Vote 2012!
;-)
Electronic voting machines gives the Republicans another avenue of advantage, simple as that.
But what chaps my knees, is that these machines don't become an issue until the time for voting comes down to the wire. The Bush elections, whether stolen or not, were major warnings, warnings not heeded by anyone.
Yet here we are again, the Republicans all busy around those machines, and everyone else suddenly concerned again. Well, it's too late for this election. It wasn't too late after the last Bush election.
We all as citizens have to ask "What haven't the Republicans messed with/cheated with to gear elections to their favor?" And after admitting there isn't anything, we have another 2-4 years to get all these machines removed or under some third party accountability. Otherwise we'll be concerned yet again...in another 2-4 years. And maybe that election will be even more pivotal than this one.
If the Republicans allow another election in 4 years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEzY2tnwExs
I'm happy that someone in the Obama campaign finally used the "trust" pitch that I recommended many months ago. I just wish they had followed the script I suggested ("Mitt Romney: You Can't Trust Him) and had done this much sooner. But, better late than never, I guess.
I'm glad they finally used the "bulls#*t pitch. "A rose by any other name....". I wonder what took them so long.
If there's one thing I've learned, the Obama campaigns (both 2008 and 2012) demonstrate patience and a really good sense of timing. You and I may be screaming for them to do or say something right now, but they've shown me more than a few times that they've thought things through. That's something the Romney camp seems (and often proves) they are incapable of.
OBAMA knows how to "walk like a man"!
O'Donnell claims that the word uttered was actually "bullshifter" like shape shifter. I like it either way.
I have always trusted obama, and still do. he has not signed a do no rais taxes pledge wityh norquist. he is one part of Washington that has not been hijacked. That in itself has made it 100 times harder for him to get things done. what we all should be looking at, is how to remove the whole lot, who were suppose to represent the people, and not this one person and his needs, nor the needs of his money. this is the saddest thing ive seen in my 52 years, and it has cost this country greatly. you all think the country should be doing better.....you need to research exactly what obama walked into that did not make the news. the gop know very well what sent this country into its almost worst depression. they dont have to tell you....read bout grover norguist and what he believes is best for all of us. And if you think it doesnt include you, keep reading. look at the man they have running for president, they should be ashamed, and in our history books they will. this information is all avalible on the internet, read these things for yourself.
For those of you concerned about our annual deficits and total debt (not talking to you libs, because we know you believe that's something someone else should and will pay for), google Eat the Rich on youtube. It is a calmly, and graphically shown expose about the ludicrous ideology of the Democratic party, and its belief that if the rich would "just pay a little more", all would be sunny in LaLaLand. It is a very good illustration of what $3.7 trillion in annual spending is doing to us, and that the supposed solution of liberals is ludicrous. President O likes to talk about "math". Well, Eat the Rich is ALL math. THIS is why Obama is behind and is going to lose.
I am a reasonable, relatively conservative Republican, and do not see why a modest increase in taxes on relative wealthy people will hurt the economy. I also believe that contrary to what the Pentagon says, that the military will not be substantially affected (other than a decent number of job losses) by downsizing it for efficiently and getting rid of some programs which are obsolete. I am against abortion, but it is not even on the table as far as I'm concerned in the next 4-8 years or however long it takes to get our country back in solid financial shape. I couldn't give a rat's ass whether two gays can marry each other. I do wish they would keep their activities behind closed doors like most regular people do and dispense with the ridiculous "gay pride" parades and such where they flamboyantly display their sexual appetites. We are for having a reasonable safety net, although we would prefer to have it be more state and local controlled, spread out amongst more private institutions and churches and the like, so that the temptation to grow the leviathan state is muted. We are not monsters. We care about our children, our communities, and our country. I believe all people should have as much choice as possible in what they do with their money, where they send their kids to school, and as little interference from the government as possible in, for instance, opening a business (barriers to entry from regulations, fees, licenses, et al are a signficant part of what keep people working for these supposedly "evil" corporations in the first place). We don't believe that America should have an "open door" policy, whereby anyone who can brave the border is home free once they arrive on our soil and able to instantly have the taxpayer pay for their healthcare and education. This is not ethnophobic or racist philosophy. It is plain common sense and is simply a matter of survival for our country. Lastly, I don't believe, in general, in philosophies whereby force is required to obtain compliance with intended objectives. It seems to me that much of the logical extension of liberal philosophy with regard to economics will ultimately have to be established with more and more laws, more agencies and agents, more EPA compliance monitors, for example, more IRS agents. You will ultimately have to pass property confiscation laws or laws preventing the sale or transferral of property or money out of a state or out of the country. As I once learned, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You pass a law, the law is circumvented legally. So you pass a new law making the cirumvention illegal. And so it goes until you have a totalitarian state. What they have in common is they all use force by one party ultimately to obtain compliance in transferring wealth, paying for abortion services, closing charter schools, what have you. This is not my idea of freedom, freedom to just believe the way a certain "informed" elite wants you to, or else.
Dude.. do you have to write a f****g Manifesto to get your point across ?..
Your B.S. rhetoric on immigration is just that B.S. this is a land built by immigrants. I guarantee you if you search your family tree, you will find that you are not as caucasian as you may think.
Charter schools are just another way for republicans to slowly bleed the Department of Education dry so they can eventually get rid of it...
Which is why you see WAR CRIMINAL turned University proffesor Condoleezza Rice be in favor of Charter schools...
Whoitmay, you need to get your facts straight. There are several partners in Bain capital. You lie right along with the others who attack Romney with no facts to back it up. You think spreading lies is a good way to get a candidate elected. When that happens we all suffer.
We should all listen to jes33. Of all the posters on here, he is the only one who "knows".
Thank you, jes33. It'd be a relief not to have to think through the issues, not to have to look up anything to see what the real story is, not to have to worry about little things like stolen elections, fraudulent politicians, or lobbiest influences. We can all just ask you.
So Jes, where do you get all your information from, your source/s, the expert/s you go to?
Thanks Jes33. I found this info interesting....all invested in Bain Capital:
* Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund ($2.2 million)
* Indiana Public Retirement System ($39.3 million)
* Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System ($177.1 million)
* The Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension System ($19.5 million)
* Maryland State Retirement and Pension System ($117.5 million)
* Public Employees’ Retirement System of Nevada ($20.3 million)
* State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio ($767.3 million)
* Pennsylvania State Employees’ Retirement System ($231.5 million)
* Employees’ Retirement System of Rhode Island ($25 million)
* San Diego County Employees Retirement Association ($23.5 million)
* Teacher Retirement System of Texas ($122.5 million)
* Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System ($15 million)
* Purdue University ($15.9 million)
* University of California ($225.7 million)
* University of Michigan ($130 million)
* University of Virginia ($20 million)
* University of Washington ($33 million)
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/09/02/unions-and-university-endowments-have-invested-billions-bain-press-virtu#ixzz2ARxljtsF
Speaking of trust, I need some help with this one. You think this is just funny haha black on white love making or legitimate rape? I'm kind of torn to be honest.
Actually, you're an asswipe, but then given that you're a wingnut, it makes perfect sense. Why don't you go get found face down in a dark alley?
Actually, to be completely fair, in light of his other Vine commentary and some of the other material on his blog, I think Chris was just trying to be "funny" and fell short of the mark (most definitely in this case, sorry Chris).
As is generally attributed to the once-famous British character actor, Edmund Gwenn (Santa Claus in the 1947 version of the movie Miracle on 34th Street), "Dying is easy. Comedy is hard." (Although apparently his original locution was somewhat more elegant, I've always felt this phrasing was more effective.)
Get Enraged and Engaged:
Mooch the Vote 2012!
;-)
Funny sure. But wow. Rape is a gruesome horrible extremely demeaning human act. It's completely disgusting and the right wing is treating it like it's a game with different levels you have to beat in order for it to be really true. It can't possibly get any worse than having a major national political party (one that shares government power) telling us that women can shut down their reproductive cycle during rape, and if they don't they must carry and deliver the baby because it's the Will of God.
Yeah I was being funny at just how completely stupid and illogical we are forced to pretend in America.
Rape is a hideous crime !...
Yet I guarantee you if republicans win the majority in the Senate they willl try to introduce "personhood" legislation even in the case of rape and incest.
That's how sick and demented the republican party in Congress has become.
Women Across America better WTFU and vote for Barack Obama and down the democratic ticket line. Because as I see it, all republicans need is one more conservative supreme court justice and ROE V. WADE will be struck down.
Journalism in the Obama age shows the real media bias
A new Rolling Stone interview with the president shows subservience to power, not partisan favor, is what drives the press corps
"One would think that minimal intellectual curiosity, or at least base professional self-esteem, would prevent someone like Brinkley from completely squandering this opportunity by taking the time he was given to flatter and serve the president.
"But one would be wrong. He was given this time and access precisely because the White House knew how and toward what end he would use it. In other words, they knew he was a typical member of the US press corps and his behavior would therefore be reverent in the extreme.
"One cannot blame the White House for exploiting those eager to spit up hagiography masquerading as journalism. The fault lies with those who deceive the public by holding themselves out as journalists."
-- Glenn Greenwald
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/26/journalism-vanity-fair-obama
How revolting. Raoul Duke would not be pleased. RS should at least put a disclaimer in the piece stating, "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message".
Why don't you go back to wanking yourself? It's the only way most of you wingnut ever "get any."
Meh.
Republicans work so hard to "save America" from "them", who could be anyone, but not from Romney, who's violated most of the major points Republicans say they care about, like abortion (Stericycle) and patriotism (Caymans) and that big one, Christianity (Mormon).
I would take "Romnesia" over "Obamanomics" any day of the year
So you would take someone who changes his position on a daily basis, doesn't take a clear position on anything, and who blatantly lies to us regularly to serve as the leader of our country?
You certainly have some low standards there.
So, you carry a 50-gallon drum of Kool Aid around with you, so you have enough to pee on all these fire hydrants? If you are 65 you must suffer from premature dementia, like most Republican morons.
Hon, they all lie. That is the nature of the beast. If you can tell me that every word out of the Dems mouth is the total and complete truth, you have me on your side. Read the fact checks. There are lies, fibs and truth stretching on all side. I am NOT better off now than I was before this Administration and the Democrats control of Congress his first two years. If you are, good for you!
Don't have any stocks or a 401(k), pasco? Then I guess you wouldn't be better off. As for me, I have a better job now and my 401(k) is doing well, especially compared to January 20, 2009. My return so far this year is in the 35% range. Before 2010 my health insurance premiums were increasing 10-12% per year while benefits got reduced. The last two years my premiums have not gone up at all and coverage actually got slightly better. My taxes have not gone up - in fact they went down a bit thanks to the tax holiday Obama gave us.
Yeah I know - this isn't true for everybody. It wouldn't be true for everybody if McCain or Romney had won in 2008 either. No, we can't trust politicians to speak the truth all of the time. I just think Romney ought to try it once in a while at least; you can't believe a single thing he says.
Boy are you lucky. no 401k or stocks here. public retirement, but that does me no good until I can retire 15 years from now. Doesn't fill my tank or pay my bills. My house went upsode down, with all the others here in Florida, a little over 2 years ago. There are 42 homes for sale on my street, 23 of them empty and in foreclosure (according to my real estate agent). I pay my and my partners health insurance out of pocket. It went from around $1120 a month 3 years ago to $1375 today. One of my closest friends (among others i know) lost her 65K a year job and is now working at a hospital for $10.67 and hour. Lucky her, they just gave her a 1/2% an hour raise. Florida is down the tubes.....nothing in sight for us. I am from up north, went for a visit and things are not as bad as they are here. For me, it is not what they say, it is what I am living at the moment.
Hey, I'm truly sorry to hear that things aren't better for you. Obviously things just depend on where you are, and I don't blame anyone for voting based on their own circumstance. The thing is, we're all still Americans, and in spite of our political/philosophical differences, we need to support each other however we can. If we don't, it is the beginning of the end of American leadership in the world.
Thank you for being such a reasonable person. Well put, we ARE all voting on our circumstances. You know, we all come on here and spout our various viewpoints, somtimes to let off a little steam. Do you think any of them really cares about US? I personally do not think so. it is all about the money, fame and fortune for ALL of them. It only matters which corner we are in for us. And yes, Florida is in an awful mess. Hard to put the blame on any one person or administration. is it the Clinton red lining, the Bush tax years, the Obama years, the Democrats Congress, the Republican Congress, the war, the banks, Wall Street, Sesame Street (lol)? Who really knows. Probably a combination of all. All I know is that we are going to wake up on November 7th and be in the same situation. The top of one ticket will be celebrating while the other wonders what went wrong for them. We do not enter into their equation.
And BTW, that is a damn fine photograph of the President of the United States, the man actually running this nation.
No photo op of any title-grubbing empty suit will ever look this good.
I don't understand people like you. you are so enamored of Barack Obama that you literally DESPISE anyone who's against him. a "title-grubbing empty suit"? seriously? Mitt Romney may not be your cup of tea politically, but he's a decent man and he doesn't need the job!
he also gives a lot to charity (about 20% to Barack's 10% and Joe Biden's 1% and that's not a typo, Joe and Dr. Jill dig deep down and given one percent of their income to charity).
I could not possibly hate Obama as much as you hate Romney, judging from your comments. frankly, I think it's a little creepy that you're so personally invested. what ever are you going to do when Obama loses?
Anyone who was awake during W's 2 terms knows that trust is crucial -- and the GOP are masters of promising whatever sounds good and doing the opposite, as secretly as possible.
W promised in his first campaign that oh no, he didn't plan to do any "nation building" abroad -- yet when elected, he jumped on the first opportunity to go to war in the middle east and to build an enormous number of "forts" there, planning to stay for years as they milked the country dry of its oil (profits to Big Oil, not to US citizens or tax payers of course-- although they said the cost of the war would be less than $200B and that the oil would pay for it!). They constantly labeled their new laws X when they actually did Y. When they overturn Roe v Wade I'm sure they'll pass some new law eviscerating women's rights called something like "Women's Protection and Liberation Act". they make me want to throw up.
Is W running again? Whatever W left, Obama has made incredibly worse. Increasing the debt at rapid fire pace. Anyone listening to the Benghazi situation that is changing by the minute as details come in could never believe that Obama is commander in Chief material. They were begging for support and no one would send it even though there was suppor near enough to help. Obama will never accept any involvement in that, but is sits in his lap.
Looking for blame jes33, I think we have found it.
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
You also need to accept the blame!
Fine. Who trusts a President who REFUSES to help Navy Seals begging for help, but instead, orders them to "stand down" and let fellow Americans, including the Ambassador, be slaughtered? Who should trust that guy, who pretends to "get you," who would let you die rather than upset his political narrative, and who obviously doesn't get what it is to be a SEAL, since that Never includes leaving a fellow American behind, like Obama preferred.
111
Personally, I don't trust either Romney or Obama. Frankly, it baffles me why folks really "like" either of these guys. True, Romney looks slimy--I thought so the first time I saw him. He flip-flops. He lies.
... But so does Obama. The only difference is that Obama looks a lot better when he lies.
Another difference is that I don't trust Keynesian-style economics. I trust in supply-side economics far more. Romney is closer to the right answer economically, though he may miss the mark. That's why I'll be voting for the third party, which combines the economic truth that's more conservative-leaning with the social justice that's more left-leaning.
But please, people, don't bow down before Obama. There's no question that he has made many promises he has not kept, he has lied/covered up things (Fast and Furious, Libya), he has been very "generous" with his facts (FactCheck.org shows almost equal falsehoods/misleading facts between Obama and Romney when there are debates), and I don't trust anyone who runs in either the Republican or Democrat parties. Why? Because both are supported by banks. Banks which, by the way, have gotten through the Great Recession quite cleanly, with little to no real investigation over who was responsible for giving out the bad loans and yet one sees record profits.
I completely understand why Democrats hate and mistrust Romney, but please... don't then stumble into the ditch on the other side of the road.
Supply-side economics: "I think I'll start making some kind of product to sell to people. It doesn't matter whether it's a product people want or whether they can afford to buy it. They'll just buy it because I'm making it and selling it. Never mind that that they might want or need to buy other products or use what little money they have to pay off other debts; I'll make all kinds of money. It'll be great!"
If supply side economics worked, even to a small degree, why would we ever have a recession at all, let alone the huge one we just climbed out of?
At the risk of sounding egotistical, I don't think you understand how these things work. People don't just throw money around for no reason. They have to be motivated to use their money on something. Investors will only invest if they see the possibility of a return on their investment. A company wouldn't begin making Thneeds if they didn't think someone would be willing to buy them.
The best way to encourage investments to be made is to simply make investing easy. That's the idea behind the lowered capital gains tax/deregulation shpeal. Although it's popular to hate investors and Wall Street, people who invest money into things is what allows large projects to happen.
New, more efficient cars couldn't be made if people weren't willing to invest in the company to pay for the enormous design/manufacturing costs. Those people only invest because they want a slice of the pie once the profits start rolling in. If they feel that they won't get money back on their investment, they won't invest at all.
The recession didn't come from supply-side economics. It's generally understood that the housing bubble caused the recession, right? That bubble was caused when banks began giving out loans to people who couldn't afford them. Those people then went and bought houses that they could never hope to pay off. The banks that gave the mortgages, the people who took out loans they could never pay off, and the politicians who encouraged this risky ordeal are at fault, and that's what caused the recession, though I know that there is more to it than just that.
How would low taxes cause people to become unemployed?
Also, don't forget that no one forces people to buy things like a new home, new car, etc. People are responsible for (and free to) purchasing what they can afford and what they want. The down-side of taxes is that you don't have a choice as to whether or not you pay them and you don't have a voice as to what they are used for. The nice thing about the free market is that you get what you pay for.
Cybearg,
I was oversimplifying for effect. To some I'm sure it gave the impression I don't understand. At the risk of sounding egotistical, I don't think I'd have gotten an MBA in Finance with honors without understanding economics. I just don't believe supply-side economics works. If people don't have jobs, or decent-paying jobs, they won't have enough money to demand anything beyond their basic needs. Sure, investors and entrepreneurs only put their money where they see potential to make more. I get that.
I agree that the housing bubble was a huge part of the recession. Now, what caused that? Structured finance, where Wall Street created instruments that allowed banks and other lenders to disperse risk, sell off all their paper, then lend more. Lack of oversight allowed them to continue this cycle over and over until millions of folks were in houses and other debt they could not afford. Something had to give, and it did.
But what did the Bush Administration do about it? Tighten regulations? No. They cut taxes for everyone, thinking that this would spur spending, investment, and job growth. It didn't - the wealthy didn't use those tax breaks to create more jobs, and we got the Great Recession. Again, I'm oversimplifying. Of course there were other factors. The point is that we've tried trickle-down (supply-side) economics a number of times and it has never been shown to work.
TRUST IS IT? Today we found out why Obama has lied and lied and lied about the “Not Optimal” deaths of those 4 Americans in Libya, including our Ambassador. Today we found out that the CIA station there was begging to go help the Consulate, but they were ordered to Stand Down and not help. Today we found out that they waited because Obama ordered them not to go help, but after they waited, and were ordered not to help again, they disobeyed orders and went anyway. We found out that the agents that went to help saved most of the people in the Consulate, but because of the delay caused by their dispicable orders it was too late for the Ambassador and his assistant. We also know that there were planes and teams available in Italy, less than 2 hours away that could have saved all those live if they had been deployed in time. Obama refused to send help. And we know that two of the deaths were those CIA Station guys, the two Seals, who died as heroes saving many lives by disobeying their orders. All of that folks was known the day of, and the day after, Al Qaeda launched their attack. So why the LIES about a spontaneous demonstration that everyone knew never existed? Because Obama and his administration pulled all the security from Libya, then refused to provide help when the terror attack launched. Obama knows that the blood of our Ambassador and those other 3 Americans is on his hands. He knows his refusal to allow the CIA station to help from the start, and to send help from Italy is the reason for those, “Not Optimal Deaths, at Al Qaeda’s hands, on 9/11. Obama desperately wanted to hide the truth from the American people until at least after the election so he came up with a Cover Story and he lied. This is incompetence, negligence, and malfeasance at the highest levels. Is Obama, the President who let those people die, and then lied about it, what you want for 4 more years? That you trust for 4 more years? And shame on him for covering up the real reason those Americans died from the families. Shame on him from hiding the heroism of the CIA Station guys/Seals who gave their lives to save so many others. SHAME!!!
Surprised this isn't a top news story.
Could you cite a news article for this? I'd really like to read it.
@valwayne - When you say "Today we find out..." what you mean is "I saw on Fox News..."
PROVE IT DIP@!$%#!!
Just because you see it on a network who is constantly caught lying, including this issue (see MediaMatters.org) doesn't make it true. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true. They have no proof (that means evidence). See Fast & Furious, et al.
If you really gave a @!$%# about the truth you'd go to more than one 'source' for your information and I don't mean three different Right Wing 'News' Outlets. If you care about America, you'd inform yourself better than what you're doing now.
Try Again @!$%#bag.
Thanks Val. Have you ever noticed that when you make a statement on here that they do not agree with they start with the "cite a story" crap? well, either that or they are reduced to calling you a troll. For some reason that seems to be a popular thing on here. Not true when they make their own statements.
And today we found out Romney and his buddies will still say anything to get elected.
SO whats new?