Hey, remember when I thought I’d write about Mitt Romney’s book? I’m still doing that, I swear! But, Romney’s recently released jackass comments, and this post on it in particular, have me thinking about this chapter I made fun of a while ago. Specifically, he tries to lay claim to the idea that the GOP are now the party of the institutions that Truman set up in the wake of the Second World War. No it doesn’t make sense. But it’s hard to lay claim to that when, as Melissa McEwan points out:
MITT ROMNEY THINKS PEOPLE ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FOOD. MITT ROMNEY THINKS PEOPLE ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FOOD!!! OMFG MITT ROMNEY, CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THINKS HUMAN BEINGS!!! WHO LIVE!!! IN THIS COUNTRY!!! AREN’T ENTITLED TO FOOD!!!
You see, one of the most important documents that the UN ever passed was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It’s as powerful a statement of our common humanity as when it was ratified in 1948. From article 25 (emphasis mine):
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
The idea that there’s some good in letting people starve to death seems at odds with what Truman left us.
Mitt Romney is right about one thing: Some of the 47% who don’t pay income taxes are freeloading deadbeats!
“NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Nobody’s really talking about this slice of the pie, but Mitt Romney’s ‘47%’ who pay no federal income tax include several thousand of the highest-income households in the country. The Tax Policy Center estimates that 4,000 households with incomes over $1 million ended up with zero federal income tax liability in 2011. Another 14,000 made between $500,000 and $1 million.”
http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/1.....?hpt=hp_t2
Roger Rabbit Commentary: I’ll bet a bunch of them gave money to Romney’s campaign, too, so they could continue paying zero taxes.
I was up until 2 a.m. this morning doing my 2011 tax return. (Yes, I have a proper extension.) I paid over $13,000 last year. And that doesn’t count state and local taxes. And I’m not a millionaire. My refund is $1.44. I want to spend it to help stimulate the economy, but I’m not quite sure how.
Who Are The 47%?
“At some point, poor and middle-class Republicans need to connect all of these tiny, seemingly unrelated dots to see the bigger picture: These are not gaffes by Mitt Romney. This is Mitt Romney.
“Republicans, especially in the South, who are not rich, better take a good, long hard look at the man and what he said in the video. It may seem like Romney is trashing Democrats at the $50,000-a-plate dinner, but really he’s talking about Republicans.
“Eight of the 10 states with the highest percentage of filers who didn’t pay federal income taxes are red states that voted for John McCain in 2008: Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, South Carolina, Arkansas, and Idaho. … Conversely, of the 10 states with the lowest percentage of filers who didn’t pay federal income taxes, seven voted for Obama. …
“So if you were at that May 17 dinner at Marc Leder’s home in Boca Raton when Romney said all of these people who don’t pay income taxes voted for Obama — he lied, or didn’t know his facts.”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/.....hpt=hp_bn7
Have you heard yet what Mitt Romney, the raucous kid, did to a blind teacher? You haven’t? Well, here it is:
“The country’s attitude toward bullying is different now than it was when Romney was in school, and … [t]hat was so many years ago — the stuff of adolescence. So we overlooked the fact that he deliberately held a door closed while a sight-impaired teacher walked into it.”
And now, back to the 47 percent:
“Keep in mind a large portion of the 47% that Romney was talking about are middle- and low-income Republicans who voted for McCain. They are not Obama-loving Democrats. That’s not spin, that’s fact.
“And Romney’s characterizations of people less fortunate than himself are not gaffes. They are glimpses into the mentality of a man who pulled a prank on a blind teacher as a kid in high school and said he wasn’t concerned about the very poor as an adult. Isn’t it clear by now that these Romney hiccups are not just random occurrences that can happen on a campaign trail? What the video released by Mother Jones proves once and for all is that Romney is whom his words make him out to be.”
“Poor and middle-class Republicans can still vote for Romney. But they should at least know the truth about how he really feels about them.”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/.....hpt=hp_bn7
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Look, this guy is a born asshole. And that’s okay, he has a right to be an asshole, if that’s what he wants. But this juvenile asshole who never grew up doesn’t have a right to my vote, and he isn’t going to get it.
Today’s money quote:
“Maybe we’ll see Joe Scarborough pondering how a man confused by Stuart Stevens would have handled Osama bin Laden.”
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/17/.....hpt=hp_bn7
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Stuart Stevens, if you don’t know, is the somewhat bizarre political operative Romney hired to manage his campaign.
In case you’re wondering why I’m posting at 3 a.m., I’m decompressing from doing my tax return.
Well, I’m not a 47-percenter. The IRS gets lots of lettuce from me.
Rabbits are entitled to carrots! No hungry rabbits! Rabbits rule!
I think that that is an essential fact, something all these political pratfalls derive from.
The guy’s a dick.
It’s hard to eat food if you’re clinging bitterly to your gun and bible – no hands free.
If you beleive people are entitled to food, who is responsible for providing that food? Government or the individual who wants the food?
Look, we’re already established in that in this country, thanks to Republicans and more than a few Democrats, that the UN Declaration of Human Rights (duly ratified by the US) notwithstanding, people in this country have no right to housing, medical care, or necessary social services. Why should food be any different?
Thank goodness these idiots are almost all fundamentalist Christians with serious hangups about the human body (especially ladyparts). Otherwise, we’d have no right to clothing, either. It’s about all we have left.
You speak as if there was a dichotomy.
Government is people, my friend (to paraphrase Willard).
We all have a responsibility to craft a system where no one goes without food, shelter, education, dignity, recreation, meaningful work.
So far we haven’t accomplished that. Yet.
One thing is for certain, though, the “I GOT MINE” crowd is not going to get us there.
@12,
Corporations aren’t people. Neither are governments.
Notes from my drive in.
On liberal talk station they were discussing how romeny said he was going to ignore the 47% that wouldn’t vote for him.
On one of the conservative talk shows they were talking about how liberal love abortion
On the other conservative talk shows they were talking about true believers should just ignore the lies of the main stream media, their station was the only one who spoke the truth.
@ 12
dignity, recreation
Why, it’s undignified not to have a 60″ LED-lit flat panel in the living room. This must be added to the list of basic human rights.
And recreation requires government-provided trips to some tropical island so that persons worried that their welfare check might not cover their flat panel TV’s energy usage can unwind some of that concern.
No matter. Lib Despair’s children, once through with college and professional school, will foot the bill.
@15
Remember that? That was the original brand of bullshit you were peddling around here.
You prove everyday that that was indeed just bullshit – showing us your true colors: snide, entitled, greed-driven, and very very comfortable with deceit. In other words, a garden variety Republican.
If you believe people are entitled to food, who is responsible for providing that food? Government or the individual who wants the food?
Yes, all of the above and more.
Should we provide food for babies and toddlers too young to earn their own food?
Should we provide food for paraplegics too disabled to earn their own food?
Should we provide food for the elderly too infirm to earn their own food?
Should we provide food for the mentally ill too insane to earn their own food?
Should we provide food for the unemployed who cannot find work because Bain sent their jobs went to china?
Should we provide food for the homeless who not have place store and cook their own food?
Should we provide food for the vets too hurt and broken to earn their own food?
Or do we just let them starve in the streets if they don’t have rich patrons.
Ronmey appears to think so. SerCon appears to think so. Puddy appears to think so. Conservatives appear to think so. “If you are not rich, blame yourself” – Herman Caine
That’s why I vote for democrats.
Recreation. Ha! The 99% don’t need parks or play fields that they can access. If they cannot pay for the country club memberships or pay the entrance fees to the beach then they are just lazy and have their priorities in the wrong place.
SerCon is so right. We got ours, we don’t owe society nothing. We did it all by our bootstraps. Let them eat cake.
@ 16
And to think my intent was to make you THINK about whether you truly consider recreation to be a basic human right or entitlement, Lib Despair.
Do you? If so, why?
Do you think that an ever-broadening list of ‘rights’ diminishes the importance of the real, core rights that you really want to ensure are available to all?
What do you think, Lib Despair, when you aren’t spewing your liberal wish-list of utopian society components and are asked to be realistic?
Dignity? Serial Conservative is so right. Who needs that. Dignity means the state or quality of being worthy of honor or respect. If they are not in the 1%, if they are not wealthy, they are obviously not worthy of respect. They must obviously be lazy and or feeble minded. We need to go back to the serf system, where the serfs were not given any dignity, to give the incentive to stop being serfs. If they stay serfs then they must want to be serfs, dependent on the 1%.
@ 20
And to think I was raised that one shows respect to one’s elders but that once grown, one strives to earn that respect.
If my mother was still around I’d slap that bitch. She should have known that respect is to be demanded, as if it was someone else’s wallet.
@21
And that’s why you are a prince among men.
—
Did you wave or just drive by, when you passed your mother on the street corner with a “Please Help” sign? After all, what did she do for you lately (before she died)?
—
So, in your world, you lie to, cheat and steal from, humiliate and degrade any stranger until they earn your respect, because you owe them no human decency. Explains a lot about what you post.
“one strives to earn that respect”
You’re obviously not doing too well in that department, Bob, seeing as how you became a man who is preoccupied with posting very strange and pathetic whines on local political blogs about poor people having 60″ LED TV’s and vacationing in the tropics.
@ 23
Doctor Steve, if I was ever successful in earning your respect it would be my mother slapping me.
@9 I dunno…Sometimes I get the unavoidable impression that a lot of the gun-in-one-hand-bible-in-the-other folks just lean over and bury their faces in the trough.
@ 25
Sometimes I get the unavoidable impression that a lot of the gun-in-one-hand-bible-in-the-other folks just lean over and bury their faces in the trough.
Ladies and gentlemen, your Comment of the Day.
“Doctor Steve, if I was ever successful in earning your respect”
Don’t you fret, Bob, as that’s never going to happen.
Mitt’s remarks in the “clandestine” video are merely a confirmation from one of the “they” of George Carlin’s assertion in the middle of his well-known “Last Words” rant: “They don’t give a fuc…They don’t give a fuc….they don’t give a fuc…They don’t CARE about you!!!”
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights pretty much parallels “Catholic Social Teaching” as elucidated at length by the US Catholic Bishops. It’s been put into practice very effectively by several church-sponsored organizations like the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (look it up) and puts the Church in a bit of a conundrum with the hierarchy’s current dalliance with conservative politicians in the US.
In 1970, we made payments to individuals of $10.1 billion. In 2011, that figure had risen to $569.4 billion. That’s an average growth rate of “entitlement” pay-outs of 10.33% over the 41-year period.
On the other hand, US population in 1970 was about 203 million. In 2011, it had grown to about 315 million. That’s an average annual rate of about 1.08%.
Had population grown the same as the growth of “entitlement” spending, our US population would be about 11.43 BILLION people!! Given that the WORLD population is currently about 7 billion people, that 11.43 billion figure is something to marvel at. Anyone who doesn’t think entitlement spending is out of control hasn’t been paying attention.
Yes they can! Republicans Kill Veterans Jobs Bill! Veterans Jobs come up two votes short!
http://www.newser.com/article/.....ation.html
@25: They’re obese ignorant crackers bitching about the gubmint’ while hovering and sucking on their taxpayer funded HoverRounds and oxygen tanks, um, Rmoney’s base.
I like the way Colbert put it:
YLB is the type of deadbeat Romney is talking about. And before you fools get too excited about some of the polls, take a look at the Polling Demographics used on this AP Poll
http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK.....elease.pdf
You have to go all the way to Page 35 to see that they polled 50% Democrats and 37% Republicans. If you really believe Democrats are going to turn out by +13 % points, then I guess you can believe the AP Poll. I don’t.
I think it will be more like 3 % points in the end. That is quite a difference and if it turns out that way, it will render these types of polls useless in hindsight and call into question whether or not the purpose was merely to try and influence results.
Help the Helpless I say. But many on subsidies are life style unemployed. Certainly not 47% but there are plenty. The point is the lifestyle unemployed crowd addicted to handouts will vote 100% for Obama.
@20–
How is it “Dignity” for 3-4 generations of a family to be addicted to government welfare??
Seriously. A sense of entitlement allows many to ignore where there provisions come from….others. Redistribution of wealth. Obama has failed miserably at growing the economy. In fact, I see absolutely nothing he has done to allow that to happen long-term and sustainable. But hey, Obama wants the votes of handout addicts.
Yawwwn… So the klown is voting for a liar..
Like that’s a surprise. McSame said he was the same as Bush to the base. That was a lie. The base didn’t believe him for a second but felt a little better after McSame started mouthing the stuff they wanted to hear. Fear of the darker complected guy from big city Chicago sealed it.
Romney says he’s for the 53 percent. That’s a lie too. But if Romney says he doesn’t care about the rest of the country, the 47 percent?
Oh my, the base loves that. Us vs. “those people”..
That’s what the “base” is all about
@30
It doesn’t account for all the growth you’re talking about, but it’s something to take into consideration when using numbers the way you are.
LOL…
Two factually accurate, profanity free, posts that don’t accuse any other posters of anything and it appears I’ve been banned from posting at Red State. It took about two hours for them to ban me.
Only two hours?
@9 I don’t have that problem.
How is it “Dignity” for 3-4 generations of a family to be dependent on government welfare??
I think it’s terrible if it’s true. Show me the data. What percentage of families does that statistic apply to? Is it 1%? Are you rolling generational political and military families in to that statistic?
Free quality education and living wage jobs are the best means for getting out of that trap. Are you for paying for those?
@ 37
Michael, is your last name Moore?
@13 Government is us. We choose to use government to promote the common welfare. What is wrong with people banding together to ensure that no one is ever deprived of the basic necessities of life, even when the capitalist system fails to provide enough jobs for everyone who needs them? We insure our cars, homes, and lives; why can’t we insure ourselves against unemployment and hunger by paying taxes into a common pool of funds to be used for those purposes? If we’re called upon to defend our country in wartime, we can’t all be called upon to take care of our needy in times of economic stress? The only thing standing in the way is the selfishness of the greediest among us.
@19 I doubt very much the single-mom, multiple-job waitress whom that prick Stefan Sharansky got fired because she tried to shush his rowdy and undisciplined kid in a crowded restaurant was thinking about recreation when she got into the food stamp line.
@21 How much respect did Vietnam veterans get from the Romneys of the world?
@ 42
I believe the argument is more about how much care should be provided.
I don’t mind providing food and shelter. I think that providing recreation @ 12 goes beyond the role of government as I see it. I think that ‘dignity’ is a slippery slope and a term that can be used to justify an awful lot (large flat-panel TVs, for instance) that isn’t really necessary to ensure health and safety.
The demands for ‘basic human rights’ have grown to be idiotic in some aspects. When people stop listening to you because you ask for too much they also aren’t listening when you say that they aren’t providing enough of the very basic necessities.
@41
Nope.
I’m laughing about it. I didn’t even say anything that would normally get you banned. I hadn’t even seen Red State until a couple of days ago.
@30 Of course, the fact that 30 years of GOP economic policies plunged us into the worst depression since the 1930s has nothing to do with the growth in entitlement spending …
@33 “You have to go all the way to Page 35 to see that they polled 50% Democrats and 37% Republicans.”
Looks like a typical King County Council election.
So why do you suppose so many people reject the Republican Party, goatfucker? Could it be because they’re greedy, selfish, immoral, lying, thieving, incompetent assholes? Does that have anything to do with it?
@38,41
There were “moderators” posting replies to my posts within 10-15 minutes of my posts and both made comments to the effect that if I was going to post “that kind of stuff” that I couldn’t post there.
Two hours later I tried to post a reply and my replies wont post.
@48
I guess it never occurred to him that there are very few places in America where polling a random sample of Americans will get a 50/50 split of Republicans and Democrats.
@ 48
Rather than answer your question I’ll provide an apt post from WaPo:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ouldnt-be/
Look at the graph ‘including leaners’, at 2008. That’s where the D + 13 probably is coming from. Now look at 2012. That’s D + 5.
I think you are doing a disservice to yourself if you look at a poll that is skewed as heavily as D + 13 and think it presents useful information.
This ain’t 2008, and Obama ain’t a rock star.
If I were to answer your question I would point out that more than 50% of the population also reject the Democrat party, and there are plenty of adjectives to put in front of the word asshole to explain why, asshole.
@48 Perhaps people are getting tired of a GOP that works at killing American jobs first.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html
@34 “How is it ‘Dignity’ for 3-4 generations of a family to be addicted to government welfare?? Seriously.”
Seriously? If you want to get serious, then start by getting your facts straight. Here are some facts about government welfare:
* Corporate welfare is 5 times what is spent on helping needy individuals.
* Welfare programs never consumed more than 3% of the federal budget.
* The primary recipients of the largest federal welfare program were children abandoned by one or both of their parents.
* A large percentage of absent parents would rather support their car payments than their own children.
* The typical welfare recipient was a single mother who was on welfare for an average of 16 months while acquiring work skills, then entered (or re-entered) the workforce, and never returned to welfare.
* Multi-generational welfare families are extremely rare.
If you want to have a serious discussion about dependency and welfare programs, then you need to start by cutting out the wingnut bullshit and confronting the facts, because unless you do that, you’ll have nothing intelligent or construction to say about the subject.
If you want to talk, then let’s talk about such issues as barriers to employment. These include: Lack of education and work skills, lack of transportation and child care, health issues, and lack of jobs in the local economy. Many people on welfare aren’t job-ready. Some are too poor to own a car and live in areas with no public transportation. Child care is a big problem; it’s often either too expensive or unavailable. What is a single parent supposed to do, leave an infant or toddler at home unattended while she works?
One of the most effective ways to get people off welfare is to aggressively go after deadbeat fathers who thumb their noses at the courts and refuse to pay their court-ordered child support. All 50 states have federally-funded programs to enforce the payment of child support. Wanna guess how many of those deadbeat fathers vote Republican? Wanna guess how many Republicans in Congress want to cut funding for these enforcement programs?
Seriously. If you want to get people off government dependency, then get fucking serious about finding out who is on welfare, why they are on welfare, and what needs to be done to get them off welfare. Trust me, no one likes being on welfare, and no one chooses a welfare lifestyle.
@ 53
Trust me, no one likes being on welfare, and no one chooses a welfare lifestyle.
I really wish I could believe that.
@54 Trying living on a welfare check sometime. Then get back to us.
@37 I was kicked off Free Republic within 90 seconds.
@41 That would do it, wouldn’t it? It doesn’t take much for an unthinking rightwinger to conclude someone posting as “Michael Moore” must be THE Michael Moore. After all, how many Michael Moores can there be?
We see the same mentality in Florida and everywhere else where Republicans try to purge voters. If some guy named John Smith was once convicted of a felony, the GOP’s caging list scrubbers throw every John Smith in the state off the voting rolls.
Sometimes Republicans are so stupid you wonder if they’re capable of being malicious.
the GOP voting list scrubbers throw every black, gay or liberal John Smith who doesn’t vote republican in the state off the voting rolls.
Do you find it ironic that the party of no taxes is upset that 47% of the population isn’t paying federal taxes? Shouldn’t they be celebrated as a success?
@45 “I don’t mind providing food and shelter.”
Mitt does.
“I think that providing recreation @ 12 goes beyond the role of government as I see it.”
This is like the argument for voter ID laws: It aims at something that doesn’t even exist. Welfare doesn’t pay for recreation. Never has. So I don’t know WTF you’re talking about. Apparently a wingnut fantasy, as nearly as I can tell.
#53. Facts do not matter to conservatives. You can post till your fingers are sore and you will not be successful in making them admit they were wrong.
@51 I don’t know what you’re talking about, Bob. I’ve posted numerous comments about polls and all of these comments are cut-and-paste from news media sources, followed by my commentary. I have yet to post anything that claims Obama is ahead by 13%. In fact, I’ve glossed over national polls, because the president is elected by electoral votes so I’ve been focusing on the electoral vote count and the swing states where the candidates are only a couple percentage points apart. By definition, it’s not a “swing state” if it isn’t close.
And what I see is pretty clear: Obama isn’t going to win any of the 2008 McCain states. Romney isn’t going to win unless he can peel off several of the 2008 Obama states, including at least a couple of large ones. So this election is all about Romney trying to win in states that voted for Obama four years ago. For Obama, the election is about trying to defend his electoral majorities in those states. It’s that simple. This is one of the least complicated presidential elections in living memory.
And it’s made even simpler by the fact most voters locked in months ago and only a small number of swing voters in swing states are in play. The race isn’t even — the odds favor Obama and Romney faces an uphill climb — but it’s close enough to be a race.
I’ve never said anything differently, so I don’t know where you get this 13% b.s. from.
@51 Calling me an “asshole” is the only fact you’ve managed to get right so far. I take pride in being an asshole. It comes from my Republican upbringing. I used to be a Goldwater conservative.
@59 Good point. The one percenters can’t wait to join the 47-percent. How democratic of them.
Btw, I don’t see any trolls jumping on me for paying over $13,000 in taxes last year. I expected them to make fun of me for not having tax shelters.
@61 They couldn’t play if they didn’t lie. Their entire ideology is predicated on a fantasy world that exists only in their imaginations.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....97446.html
“Let Mitt Be Mitt”!
He’s fucked this thing up so badly now that that this is the only alternative he has left.
The full-throated primal scream of the insulated out-of-touch greedy asshole vulture capitalist financial elite.
This ought to make “The League of Delusionary Assholes” cum in their jeans for joy!
Finally a man brave enough to say what needs to be said! To articulate the conservative vision of America that has been diluted and perverted and co-opted by the craven (like the Senate Candidates worried now about re-election).
Go Mittens GO!!!
Turn Paul Ryan loose too!!!!
You got Rush and Glenn Beck and Dr.
KinkyLaura and Michelle Malkin and Michael Savage and the Hee-Haw Gang from the FAUX News Channel!!!!!DO IT!!!!
Scare the fucking be-jeeesus out of the American Electorate and put another nail in the coffin of the Republican Party!!!!!
YOU GOOOOOOO BUDDY!!!!!!
@56
I tried posting on Free Republic twice, both times my comments were held up so a moderator could read them first. Neither comment ever saw the light of day. Same deal as Red State, factually accurate statements, no profanity, didn’t accuse anyone of anything.
I guess these folk find reality offensive.
When the ultimate of conservative insiders like Peggy Noonan and David Brooks say you’ve screwed the pooch, I think it’s safe to say you’ve screwed the pooch.
Job Creators & conservative values! GOP Super Pac Mega Donor Sheldon Adelson will spend $35 Billion to create jobs in Spain!
http://www.jewishvoiceny.com/i.....Itemid=279
50. Michael spews:
@48
I didn’t say 50-50 split Michael.
I just don’t believe it is 50-37 Democrat.
That’s the point.
If you polled 50% R’s vs. 37% D’s, guess who would be winning??
Think about it.
It’s the pollster’s prediction about likely voters that sways the outcome of the poll.
Is that difficult for you to understand?
I hope not.
@51–
Precisely. These Democrat leaning pollsters are using 2008 as the basis for 2012 turnout predictions and sampling. Why not use 2010?? That is 2 years closer.
Perhaps it’s somewhere between 2010 and 2012 but you’d have to be real braindead to think the 2012 turnout will be the same as 2008. There is absolutely no rational basis for that assumption..other than trying to sway public opinion that Obama is still as popular now as 2008 when he clearly is not.
62. Roger Rabbit spews:
That’s not what he said Roger. He & I were both talking about the sampling group being 50-37 Democrat. And it is telling that despite that mix, Obama is barely ahead. But 50-37 is fantasy based on 2008. It’s not today and no basis for it other than Democrat wishful thinking.
@30, @36 It isn’t quite a fair comparison to lump the mass of “boomers” reaching retirement and straining Social Security and Medicare with the right’s mostly hypothetical “welfare chiseler” construct. Besides, the Social Security fund isn’t even part of what’s normally defined as “the federal budget”, only connected to it in that Congress has steadily borrowed from it to cover a portion of its perennial deficit. This is of course assuming some (most likely GOP-controlled) Congress doesn’t elect to declare a “day of jubilee” on itself and welch on what’s owed. Not only would that cause a great fuss here at home, but being as it would be tantamount to defaulting on a third of the national debt, any piece of paper with “United States of America” printed on it (including the ones with pictures of dead presidents) would immediately be useful for nothing but butt wipes.
re 10: “If you beleive people are entitled to food, who is responsible for providing that food? Government or the individual who wants the food?”
If you are born into a situation where you have neither land, capital, nor time to grow and provide your own food — you take it.
I’m sure as hell not going to beg for food.
@74
I was just pointing to things to take into consideration when looking at numbers like that.
@72
Because 2010 wasn’t a presidential election year and we’re all presuming that there will be a much higher turnout in 2012 than their was in 2010.
@71
Of course you didn’t. You also couldn’t figure out that a random sample would turn up either more Democrats or more Republicans, depending on where you did the poll.
The title of Pudge’s latest rant about President Obama over at (un)SP.
“Look at the Silly Monkey”
No, I’m not kidding.
@78
And they wonder why they’re sliding into extinction…
“I’m sure as hell not going to beg for food.”
Bob doesn’t seem to understand that there are far worse things that could happen to him than paying a few bucks in taxes for food stamps for the needy.
@78, 79
Yeah – I went and looked – posted at 7:30 this morning, and it’s gotten 6 whole comments.
Pathetic.
By that same lock, PI, I assume you are vigorously opposed to the US being ‘entitled’ to 25% of the world’s energy?
Please demonstrate the abundance of opportunities that these lazy freeloaders have turned their backs on in favor of the riches of welfare.
Show your work.
AMEN, brother Rabbit.
“Pathetic.”
Well, if it’s Pudge, it’s pathetic. Although some days a lot more so than others. Today looks to be one of those days.
Down with all you evil liberul protectionists do-gooders! You’re nothing but a bunch of Sheeple! My man Nutin’ Fancy tells it like it is!
re 78: I was tempted to comment as Curious George.
Clint sez, “If somebody’s dumb enough to ask me to go to a political convention and say something, they’re gonna have to take what they get”.
Heh. Did Clint just call Romney dumb? It could be worse. I suppose he could have said, “Thanks for the chance to promote my new movie about an old cranky guy, dumbfucks.”
“I was tempted to comment as Curious George.
Oh, please do. That’d be funny.
re 81 — “Yeah – I went and looked – posted at 7:30 this morning, and it’s gotten 6 whole comments.”
Pudge stated that commenters Ragnar and Saltherring expressed themselves in a ‘silly’ way — and that was in response to something a liberal commenter had said.
These guys are very unforgiving and they will NEVER forget or forgive a slight like that.
Republicans in Senate, led by Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, III, killed a bill to help put veterans to work.
Vets from Iraq and Afghanistan have a 10.9% unemployment rate, but who’s counting?
Vets certainly don’t count, and if they’re unemployed, their certainly part of the 47% of Untouchable Americans.
Shame.
You want food? Go work and then by yourself self some damn food. The world doesn’t owe you nutin’, son. I think that’s a great rule: if you don’t work, you don’t eat. It would cut down on our overpopulation problem.
Go checkout my man Nutin’ he tells it like it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....ature=plcp
The asshat troll “little maxee” says a photo id is pretty easy to get..
Tell that to this elderly lady:
http://www.pennlive.com/midsta.....puter.html
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201.....the-money/
JesusfuckingChrist!!!
Who is running this campaign????
The Three Stooges?
Holy fuck-balls. I had no idea Bobby Wayne lived in Spokane.
http://www.rockabillyhall.com/BobbyWayne.html
@ 54
I really wish I could believe that [no one likes being on welfare].
Why the hell not? That’s a serious question. The marginal utility of an additional dollar of income on the wealthiest Americans is, according to your dogma, so pervasively strong that we cannot afford to raise even the top marginal tax rate for fear that these people will go “John Galt.” Yet, for people trying to get by on welfare, the marginal utility of an additional dollar of income is so incredibly weak that you honestly believe their state is solely the product of lethargy?
The same economic incentives that operate at the top of the income ladder operate at the bottom, only with much greater force. People stay on welfare, because they can’t get a better deal. Getting them off welfare involves making it possible for them to find a better deal, not in ripping the safety net out from underneath them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/....._ref=false
Romney would totally do something like this…
…wait, he DIDN’T???
…he wouldn’t???
“nevermind”
@54 Don Joe,
What you wrote looks suspiciously like science, and that is the work of the Devil. You need to junk that thinking and just “BELIEVE!” brother.
Re the topic:
Here’s the thing. EVERY Republican fervently believes that people should go hungry, should not have access to available affordable health care, should not have housing, “you name it”.
Slick Willard got caught telling his and his party’s truth.
It is up to us to route this infestation from our political system this cycle.
Gekko/Galt is the anvil.
If you don’t want this disease in our system, you must be the hammer.
We the People
@99
It’s the same as that fool in Missouri talking about rape and pregnancy, they both got caught saying in public what they’re only supposed to say in private.
Good News For John McCain!
Leaked Romney Videos Make The Front Pages Of 41 Swing State Newspapers
Goldy Bait:
Mr. Attorney General, do you support your party’s presidential candidate’s position that government should not work to provide food, health care and housing security?
Will you vote for Mitt Romney in the election?
So much for “self deportation.” One more example of Romney being on all three sides of an issue.
He’s not going to round people up like the far right wants either, so why should they vote for him?
Let’s be very clear.
If you (or someone you know) makes common cause with Slick Willard and the Republicans you are on this guy’s side
Angry Republican in Texas Lynches Chair in Presidential Effigy
So, anyone interested in the fact that Al Queda has killed Americans on American soil for the first time since 9/11?
Obama official: Benghazi was a terrorist attack
Posted By Josh Rogin Wednesday, September 19, 2012 – 1:30 PM
The Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was in fact “a terrorist attack” and the U.S. government has indications that members of al Qaeda were directly involved, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday morning.
and
Collins said she was concerned by the lack of security at the Benghazi consulate, especially since there had been an attack on the mission in June and a more serious attack on the British ambassador’s convoy as well. Olsen said the U.S. government was aware of the danger but not of impending attack that killed the four Americans.
(Olsen is the director of the National Counterterrorism Center)
http://thecable.foreignpolicy......ist_attack
We knew there were problems in the past. We knew about previous attacks there and attacks on other nation’s diplomatic personnel.
And on 9/11, we had essentially nothing protecting our people.
You want a better country?
Maybe with food, health care and housing security in this, the wealthiest and most productive country in the history of mankind?
What did Michelle Obama, FLOTUS, say today in Greenville, North Carolina?
Gekko/Galt is the anvil
We are the HAMMER!
Congratulations, middle class, on the passage of the Affordable Care Act!
Now bend over:
Tax penalty to hit nearly 6M uninsured people
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press – 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly 6 million Americans — significantly more than first estimated— will face a tax penalty under President Barack Obama’s health overhaul for not getting insurance, congressional analysts said Wednesday. Most would be in the middle class.
The new estimate amounts to an inconvenient fact for the administration, a reminder of what critics see as broken promises.
The numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office are 50 percent higher than a previous projection by the same office in 2010, shortly after the law passed. The earlier estimate found 4 million people would be affected in 2016, when the penalty is fully in effect.
http://www.google.com/hostedne.....fda77612f7
Don’t I recall Obama saying something about none of your taxes will go up if you’re in the middle class?
Why, yes, yes, I do:
No family making less than $250,000 will see “any form of tax increase.”
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
http://www.politifact.com/trut.....-form-tax/
@ 106
Elections are always about hope.
I hope Obama gets his ass kicked.
Cap’n Crunch, one of the reasons people around here do not take you seriously, is that you take a single factoid and try to spin a whole story which invariably is a right-wing talking point.
…is spun into…
Of course, failing to mention that ‘Collins’ is Susan Collins, partisan Republican.
Moreover, you failed to include mention that the director of the National Counterterrorism Center said this…
How again do you defend against a planned attack that wasn’t planned?
You are a relentless propagandist, and not a very good one.
@ 109
Three days ago we had the US Ambassador to the UN go on five different Sunday TV talk shows and say it was because of the movie.
Now we have a guy saying we don’t have specific intelligence and you suggest that means it wasn’t planned?
The RPGs just showed up there, without foresight? People who knew how to use them? The safe house that wasn’t safe but was targeted directly, that just happened?
You’re too willing to shill for Team Obama here, Lib Sci. Of COURSE it was planned. They just don’t know everything about how it went down just yet, or they do and aren’t willing to share it.
After Rice’s performance on Sunday, do you really think Team Obama still has credibility here, Lib Despair?
Awwww…Cap’n Crunch has a sad :(
Sniveling, snide, greedy, entitled ‘bob’ hopes the plutocrats win.
Funny thing is, he refuses to do the work to achieve that end – he refuses to make an affirmative case for his candidate. He expects that this ‘doubt’ he’s trying to sow, the snarky points he tries to make, are somehow going to make a difference – it’s a really entitled point of view – much like Willard’s – that the situation is so obvious that they should win, and they get to be snarky, condescending assholes as they float across the finish line without breaking a sweat.
A point I’ve been trying to make to you for days, idiot.
You are talking, no, screeching out your ass about 9/11 so much I thought you were Rudy Guiliani.
You’ve been relentless about exploiting the situation to try to tar the Obama administration, WITHOUT A SHRED OF ACTUAL FACTS – because there are very few of them at this point that are accessible to the public.
Shit like this…
is nothing but speculation and fear-mongering. You have demonstrated nothing.
And therefore your points are, once again, transparent propaganda.
I’ll wait for cool, rational, competent GOVERNMENT WORKERS in State and DOD to get to the bottom of what happened before forming an opinion about whether and who failed that day.
In the meantime, when is Willard going to share with the American electorate the same number of years of tax records that he demanded of Paul Ryan, and John McCain demanded of him?
Yes. Don’t you? If not, why not?
@ 113
Two reasons:
1. Al Queda wouldn’t get involved over something as silly as a video.
2. There was a much bigger, more specific reason to get Libyans upset with the US:
U.S. intelligence is investigating whether calls to avenge the death of a Libyan-born al-Qaida leader — which surfaced less than a day before the assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi — provided part of the motivation for the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, sources tell the Washington Guardian.
Late Monday, on the eve of the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, U.S. intelligence learned of a new 42-minute video in which al-Qaida leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri implored Libyans to rise up against Americans and avenge the death in June of Zawahiri’s top deputy, Abu-Yahya al-Libi, in a drone attack.
In the video, Zawahiri asked Libyans, “What is your role in avenging the death” of al-Libi, answering, “fight and kill the crusaders”.
http://www.washingtonguardian.com/missed-signal
US thinks Al Queda was involved at this point. Al Queda’s # 1 sent a message to Libyans right before the attack.
There’s very little reason to think it was the movie. Very little.
Sure thing, Ambassador bob.
I followed your link @114…
John Solomon? Washington Guardian?
That’s the best you can do? Dispatches from the fever swamp? What next? “Drudge sez…..”?
*rolls eyes*
Even taking your link at face value….
You just can’t stop…you’re spinning stories out of whole cloth.
You’re not credible, spongebob.
@ 115
Asked and answered. You don’t like the answer, but it doesn’t diminish the reasons I gave.
Al Queda doesn’t organize protests. They organize attacks, which take time. They had people who knew how to use RPGs, they had the location of the ‘safe’ house.
Your silly response underscores your lack of a more substantive argument. What we saw with Rice on Sunday has been debunked and the Feds knew about the warning from Zawahiri a few days before. She went on TV and gave her dog-and-pony show because Team Obama told her to, not because the Defense Department was thinking it was a response to the movie.
@108 “I hope Obama gets his ass kicked.”
As my law school dean said, “Hoping and praying aren’t substitutes for studying.”
@118 A kid can use an RPG.
No, it hasn’t. As I’ve demonstrated over and over, your ‘facts’ are unsupported speculation and fever dreams about Obama.
You seem to think that this is incredibly technically sophisticated. I don’t think it is, and Libya is awash in such ordinance.
You engage in relentless speculation and couch it as reasoned and fact-based, which is a total joke. Just like you, spongebob.
@105, 107, 108, 110, 114, 118…
The “bob”, the Klownflake Klownservative (with the shitty accountant, btw if the idiot REALLY pays 29%-which I doubt)…is like a fucking PARROT.
You know, with the miniscule low processing power low information brain and the “random-playback” feature set on the Republican talking point of the minute.
@ 121
How many spontaneous terrorist attacks occur, Lib Despair?
Not many. They’re planned.
As far as the RPGs, much has been said about how accurate the attack was, indicating the attackers were skilled in their use. I don’t dispute that a kid @ 120 could use one but I doubt a kid could be accurate with it.
Lib Despair, the guy you all wanted to be VP in 2000 is pretty sure it was planned as well:
“I don’t think any of us are clear yet about who carried out these attacks in Libya, but from all that I’ve heard the murderous attacks on Libya that resulted in the death of four Americans were not accidental,” Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., added. “They were not just some kind of coincidental protests to this film, this anti-Muslim film. They were a well-planned and professional terrorist attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po.....hief-says/
@Serial Conservative,
Remember Somalia? In that case a helicopter was brought down by an RPG. That’s a hell of a lot harder to do than lobbing a few RPG’s and mortar rounds at a building setting it on fire.
In Somalia all they needed to bring down that helicopter was a bunch of kids with kites to track the helicopter, a pit in the ground to direct the RPG’s back blast into, and, of course, the RPG. Nothing hard to do, nothing fancy.
American’s aren’t superior to Libyan’s. There’s no rule that says poor brown people with minimal equipment can’t kill rich white people with tons of state of the art gear.
In Somalia, mistakes were made and after it happened the event was gone over, the mistakes were figured out, and changes were made. The same thing will happen this time. The screwups from Somalia and Benghazi wont happen again. But, that doesn’t mean screwups wont happen. There will always be the next screwup.
@125
It also seems odd to me that if this event upsets you this much that you’d support a man running for president that makes factually inaccurate statements about it. Romney couldn’t even get a simple timeline correct. Anderson Cooper got it right. Maybe it’s time to elect a gay Vanderbilt president?
@ 125
Interesting and I really can’t comment because I don’t know how far away the helicopter was or if it was in motion or hovering in place at the time it was struck.
The main point being debated is whether a planned terrorist attack occurred, as seems clear to me, or whether it was all because of a Youtube video, which Susan Rice claimed on Sunday and which Lib Despair takes at face value, growing evidence to the contrary.
If it was just a spontaneous protest that got out of hand, doesn’t this:
Wednesday September 12, 2012
US sends warships, Marines to Libya
In a show of force, the Pentagon moved two warships to the Libyan coast. Officials said one destroyer, the USS Laboon, moved to a position off the coast Wednesday, and the destroyer USS McFaul was en route and should be stationed off the coast within days, increasing the number of Navy destroyers in the Mediterranean from four to five.
http://www.dailymail.com/News/.....1209120033
seem like quite the overreaction?
@ 126
I’m a little peeved that Americans were killed on American soil on the anniversary of 9/11, yeah. Call it a character flaw.
Jesus, it was an act of war, we lost Americans, we’re responding by sending ships and troops, and you’re hung up on whether Romney spoke out of class?
Yeah, I’m in support of the guy who would have had our people protected. 9/11 should have been a lesson learned.
How can someone that doesn’t get the facts right protect anyone from anything?
No, it was not. You’re getting the facts wrong. The people of Libya were horrified by this and the Libyan government is working with us to track down the people who did this. This was the murder of 4(?) people by a group of thugs, possibly a criminal syndicate. But, it was not an act of war.
Let’s look a couple more events.
When the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 the Clinton Admin treated it as a crime and in March of 1994 4 people were convicted of that crime and were sent to prison. In 1997 two more people were convicted.
In the 2005 London Subway Bombings the British treated the bombing as a crime, not an act of war. The Brit’s started arresting people that planned the bombing within a couple of weeks and followed up with a few more arrests in 2007.
The 9/11 attacks were treated as an act of war and I think I don’t need to describe the clusterfuck that followed. But, I am a bit puzzled that you, or anyone, would be supportive of people that want to jump headfirst straight into the 9/11 clusterfuck model.
How can someone that doesn’t get the facts right protect anyone from anything?
No, it was not. You’re getting the facts wrong. The people of Libya were horrified by this and the Libyan government is working with us to track down the people who did this. This was the murder of 4(?) people by a group of thugs, possibly a criminal syndicate. But, it was not an act of war.
Let’s look a couple more events.
When the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 the Clinton Admin treated it as a crime and in March of 1994 4 people were convicted of that crime and were sent to prison. In 1997 two more people were convicted.
In the 2005 London Subway Bombings the British treated the bombing as a crime, not an act of war. The Brit’s started arresting people that planned the bombing within a couple of weeks and followed up with a few more arrests in 2007.
The 9/11 attacks were treated as an act of war and I think I don’t need to describe the clusterfuck that followed. But, I am a bit puzzled that you, or anyone, would be supportive of people that want to jump headfirst straight into the 9/11 clusterfuck model.
Oops, sorry about the double.
@ 129, 130
Yeah, I’ll take it back. Grassley called it an act of war. I read somewhere, of course I can’t find it now, that an violent act against a diplomat is the same as one against the nation he/she represents.
Trying to find definitions and none of them back me.
Had the Libyan government done it, I’d call it an act of war too. But, they didn’t and we need their help to bring the people who did do this to justice.
You know what’s funny?
Cap’n Crunch is here saber-rattlin’, pearl-clutching about ‘act of waaaaaaarrrr!!’…
…and yet his team killed, destroyed, terminated a bill that would address the horrific unemployment rate among American Veterans.
Every 80 minutes an American Veteran commits suicide. Their plight is shameful, and the Republicans in the Senate, using a filibuster and just 40 of 98 votes, prevented action that would address a huge, disgraceful injustice.
I wonder if Cap’n Crunch has a ‘Support the Troops!’ car magnet? Probably not, actually, that was SOOOOOO 2004.
Thank you, Michael, for so deftly dismantling the unctuous hypocrisy that oozes from our friend, Cap’n Crunch. You’re doing yeoman’s work.
@ 134
Nice segue, Lib Despair.
Republicans said the bill was in violation of the Budget Control Act, prohibiting new programs that would add to the deficit.
and
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee who raised the budget point of order, said the action simply requires the veterans committee to come back with a bill that does not add to the deficit.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the ranking member of the Senate veterans committee, voted against allowing the job corps bill to advance. He has introduced alternative legislation that includes several veterans job-training initiatives but removes the provision establishing the job corps.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html
Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, III, is a liar.
Richard Burr should talk to Rand Paul and Tom Coburn…
Let me repeat, according to Coburn…
“Wasn’t worth the effort.”
Shameful.
Don’t you find this shameful, Cap’n? Can you stop your “WAAAARRRRRR!!” cries for a moment and condemn the assholes on your side who are stabbing American veterans in the back?
We see here again on this thread how the little Republican boys with their little Republican dicks are on a hair trigger to screech, “ACT OF WAAAAARRRR!!!!!” but are completely unprepared for honorably dealing with the consequences of war.
Cap’n Crunch has company.
You know what’s funny?
This is funny…
Where is the troll who was incessantly posting Fox and Rasmussen polls and links?
Gone?