It’s Still Bush’s Fault!

I haven’t heard that (yet).  I do keep seeing that somehow Romney commenting twelve hours after news of the Libya attack was wrong and is impacting this situation.  Not much being said about Obama’s foreign policy.  Why did he decide to continue Bush’s use of drone warfare in foreign countries?  Even bigger question, why has he increased such attacks?  In Libya, Obama agreed to assist our NATO allies request for assistance  (France and the UK) despite the criticism that we did not know if the rebels were friend or foe to the US.  Egypt?  Didn’t Obama makes some speeches there promising a new era of peace throughout the Middle East?  (heh,heh, how’s that Hope&Change working for ya?)  And that may be a lesson for all, don’t make promises you cannot keep.  Obama can only promise peace on his part, the other people in the world have to agree to his proposal first, and this seems to be a rejection of that peace offering by at least some.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. The Obama administration is doubling down on its theory that the attack a week ago on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was a “spontaneous” act, despite the Libyan president calling that idea “preposterous.”

    The sharply divergent views on what led to the deadly strike in eastern Libya played out across the airwaves Sunday and are sure to generate more questions this week. In two interviews over the weekend, Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif joined other members of his government in declaring the attack a planned assault, possibly by an Al Qaeda-tied group.

    “The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous,” Megarif told NPR.

    But U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, in a string of interviews, stood by the administration’s position that the Libya attack was just part of the wave of protests over the anti-Islam video circulating on the Internet.

    “What sparked the violence was a very hateful video on the Internet,” Rice said on “Fox News Sunday.” “It was a reaction to a video that had nothing to do with the United States.”

    She also repeated the administration’s message that the attacks, which started Tuesday in Egypt and spread to more the 20 U.S. posts in the region, were “spontaneous,” not planned or timed for the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.

    “The best information and the best assessment we have today is that this was not a pre-planned, pre-meditated attack,” Rice also told Fox News. “What happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video. People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent. And those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya, and that then spun out of control.”

    It was a message that Rice would recite nearly verbatim on the other network shows.

    She said the FBI is investigating the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, and that more attacks are possible.

    Her comments were in sharp contrast to those Sunday of Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif, who in separate interviews with NPR Radio and CBS’ “Face the Nation” dismissed the notion that the attacks, at least in his country, were spontaneous.

    Megarif, president of the Libyan National Congress, also said the violence, including the timing, bears the markings of an Al Qaeda attack.

    He said the attacks were carried out by foreigners who have been infiltrating his country since the uprising ended the dictatorship of the late Muammar al-Qaddafi and that they used the Cairo protests as a cover to attack the U.S. Consulate.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/17/obama-administration-libyan-president-clash-over-explanation-on-consulate/#ixzz26jdIUvsc

  2. Some proof that the attack in Libya was a little more than a spontaneous eruption of violence.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/diplomat-killed-in-libya-to-fellow-gamers-assuming-dont-die-tonight/

  3. charlieopera says:

    So, what’s your point LOI? We need to go to war with the entire middle east, or is the Arab Spring Obama’s fault? I seem to remember the genius Bush pushing for democracy big time (one of the dozen excuses for going to war in Iraq, wasn’t it … regime change and to spread democracy)? And his democracy push backfired in Palestine and Lebanon …

    We know our government is one f***ed up operation … bought and paid for by the real powers that be (unions, right? … ha, ha) …

    Seriously are posts like this just because Romney is now falling faster than a rock in the polls … or are you reaching again?

    Let’s get back to what came first … the chicken (government) or the egg (the money that paid for it) and obviously both are interchangeable.

    How about stripping the money from those who wield it and changing the rules (letting workers set them)?

    And how ’bout those Buffalo Bills!

    • My point Charlie?
      Not sure I have one, if that’s OK? I think it is a strange reality that Code Pink protest legal wars started under GWB, but is silent over illegal wars started by Obama. Maybe they care more about their team than how the team plays the game? Pipes and brass knuck’s ok as long as it’s our guys doing them damage. Unions? I guess Chicago is going to be the test of their power. Rahm will bow down to them and any educational reforms or teacher evaluations will become a “third rail” in every state that allows collective bargaining. Or as it appears, he fights for his job and the kids, trying to actual reform and balancing his cities budget despite their unethical tactics.

      “How about stripping the money from those who wield it and changing the rules (letting workers set them)?”
      Sure Charlie, go ahead. Or ask yourself why Rahm of all people tried this with spending cuts plus increased taxes? Why not pure Obama policy of more taxes and more spending only? Could it be he knows the Taxed Enough Already situation there will result in more business closing or re-locating if he does not curb spending?

    • “Seriously are posts like this just because Romney is now falling faster than a rock in the polls … or are you reaching again?”

      I don’t think so, but you tell me. Is the ME not on Obama? Has he not instituted his policy and phased out Bush’s? As of today, Romney is president wannabe, not the President. Ten to one, what Obama has to say regarding the ME, or what he does not say, is what has relevance. His words can be life or death to a few or thousands. If he announces (standard policy for many) “our embassies will respond to violent attacks on our sovereign territory with deadly force”, it could be a game changer. Or if he continues requiring them to guard with empty firearms stating, “it is the responsibility of the host nation to ensure the safety of our people”, well, how is that working?

      Romney is falling? Does not match what I see.

      http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/north_carolina/election_2012_north_carolina_president

      Chicago alone is enough to end Obama. His own are extorting him and his right hand while the nation watches. How many approve the unions actions? How many link Obama to the unions? But the Libya attack and general ME uprising on top of that? You said after OBL’s death it was all over. I guess a few people over there have a different perspective. The media were just hitting Romney on his lack of foreign policy experience. How does that compare to Obama’s lack when elected and the results today?

      • charlieopera says:

        I think it is a strange reality that Code Pink protest legal wars started under GWB, but is silent over illegal wars started by Obama

        Excellent point and one I couldn’t agree more with. the liberal media (and it is very liberal vs. the GOP) is letting the wars we’re involved in (legal or otherwise) pass (giving Obama a pass) … he’s a putz, I agree. The bigger issue, it seems to me, is how anxious Romney “appears” to be to get in more of them. That alone is enough to run the other way.

        And I really do hate that the SOB protested agains Vietnam while a Stanford (holding signs for the war) and then conveniently signed up to do some Paris work for his dopey church … the fact his five anit-spermicide sons didn’t join up either is enough to puke every time he mentions “this great land of ours” … and then he adds an Ayn Rander to the mix. I can’t wait to see how badly he loses.

        As for Bush-Obama … I got into a lot of wars on liberal blogs saying the same exact thing … and if anything, Obama is more Bush than Bush (especially as regards labor).

        He’s a putz, like I said … the other guy is a more dangerous putz.

        Nice choice … this great land of ours has dealt us.

      • If he announces (standard policy for many) “our embassies will respond to violent attacks on our sovereign territory with deadly force”, it could be a game changer.

        I personally doubt ANY president would (or has) make such a statement.

    • Charlie,

      Economics is the mother of Politics, so your chicken/egg problem is answered:

      Wealth, then the use of violence to steal it (government).

      Stealing wealth from others you deem insufferable does not solve the problem of theft, Charlie.

  4. Hey Anita,

    Never got an answer to my question the other day re Lily Ledbetter — your thoughts on the Act? Reason for your opposition?

    • I threw that out there that day just because it stuck out at me as I scanned Obama’s achievements. Quite honestly I hadn’t researched the act..just went off the little blurb on that page. So with only further minor scanning on wiki..I still think it is basically just more government noise, wrapped in a discrimination wrapper. I still say women can and are earning their pay on merit, especially in these times where guys are on the unemployment line alot. Don’t forget Buck, I owned a business, and I’ll be damned if I want anyone telling me what to pay an employee. Course I see myself as a fair boss, but bottom line..work somewhere else if you don’t like it. Further, I have 4 sisters, and none of them is making less than 60k alone, two are making 100+…so who needs more laws? I notice LL involves a statute of limitations too. Why? So someone who didn’t like their job..goes elsewhere..finds the grass is not greener..and gets an escape hatch to sue the former employer? I dunno, Buck. Sounds like a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me.

      • Anita,

        Briefly put, prior law established a statute of limitations to bring a claim against one’s employer for pay discrimination, which statute began to run from the time the first pay check was provided. The Lily Ledbetter Act simply modified that statute to begin anew each discriminatory paycheck in order to allow an employee time to discover the discrimination and take legal action if they so chose. I’m a bit baffled by your opposition to this act. Fact is women are still discriminated against in the workplace in terms of salary. That’s great your two sisters are making 100K+, but how do you think they would feel if they found out their male counterparts (doing the exact same job) were making 200K+ and they had no legal recourse? Not quite sure how this can be classified as simply more ‘government noise’ or ‘mumbo jumbo’.

        • Hey Buck-can you explain the seniority clause which is a part of that bill?

        • Welp! They were raise by the same parents and I’m sure they think the same as I think. It all depends if YOU (I) like YOUR (my) pay. Nobody else’s pay should matter to you. Don’t like it..go elsewhere. 🙂

          • Don’t like it…go elsewhere

            There is something to be said for that — if you don’t like being paid less than your male counterpart, too bad, go find yourself another job. And while you are looking for that new job: so what, just keep being discriminated against and making less money because your boss is an ass? Or if you like your job: nope, too bad again, either leave or take less pay because you happen to be a woman? And clearly you shouldn’t be entitled to some legal recourse…

            • So we differ in opinion..no biggie.

              • Not at all — though I am still curious why you listed this in your tirade against Obama’s “achievements” simply because the Act was listed on some website as an achievement when you admittedly did not know enough about the Act to make a decision.

              • Are you the internet police? I just picked it out Buck..it had an easy description..nothing sinister. What does it matter? did you write the law? Juuust joking..I’m in a good mood today.

              • Anita, it just seemed to me that you were listing any and all of Obama’s policies as negatives given the overall nature of your rant. I was curious why you included the Lily Ledbetter Act in this list. Nothing more, nothing less.

              • They were listed in alphabetical order. LL came under the Cs for Civil Rights, and it was a short description..something I could type quickly during my rant. 🙂

    • Hey, Buck…can I get in on this a little.Why I think it is a slippery slope issue?

  5. 🙂

  6. “What has happened is, as you pointed out, beginning with the Cairo speech, Obama changed American policy on the theory that the reason that people hated us was because we were tough. They hated us because of Iraq. They hated us because of Guantanamo. They hated us because of the torture — he used the word, he accuses his own country abroad of torturing.”

    “And he was now apologizing and promising to change course,” he continued. “We would no longer be tough. We would be loved. We would show compassion. And we would get out of Iraq. He set a deadline for Afghanistan. He doesn’t support the Green Revolution in Iran. He shows the Ayatollahs tremendous respect. He essentially protects them when they are under attack. He gets nowhere on the Iran nuclear issue. He is equivocal uncertain during the Arab Spring. He leads from behind in Libya. The theory was if we go soft, if we are very nice, if we say ‘Assalamu alaikum,’ enough times, everything will be all right. And what he decided is, the way to do that, the theory and therefore the practice is going to be, retreat and withdraw. Remember the line he uses? The tide of war is receding.”

    Krauthammer said American interests were threatened because the president’s policies have created a power vacuum that radical Muslims have jumped to fill.

    “That means the tide of American power is receding,” Krauthammer said. “And the reason that American interests, embassies, schools, businesses are aflame throughout the Middle East from Tunis all the way to South Asia is because things don’t happen in a vacuum. And when you withdraw the power and the influence of the strongest country on earth from a region, the vacuum will be filled. What we are seeing now is the Salafists, the Islamists, understanding this is their opening, America is in retreat. The tide of America is retreating in the region. And they are now going to fill the gap.”

    The Egyptian response to the ongoing crisis should determine whether the United States continues giving financial assistance to the country, which is increasingly dominated by religious radicals, according to Krauthammer.

    “Look, I don’t think the issue right now is foreign aid. If [Mohamed] Morsi, the president of Egypt, doesn’t cooperate, doesn’t support our embassies, protect our embassies and doesn’t honor the peace treaty with Israel, there is already trouble in the Sinai [Peninsula] — then I think you withdraw the aid,” Krauthammer said. “You got to be very careful, now. The vacuum is already been created. The trouble is already at hand. American enemies are right on the move, everywhere as we can see. Right now, our hand is very much weakened because of the three years of Obama policy. At this point, you don’t want to make it worse by — you know a move that is reactive and too fast. You withdraw all of our aid today, and we have no leverage. What you do is you portion it out depending on how they act.”

    Krauthammer noted that the U.S. risks irrelevance on the international stage if it continues “leading from behind.”

    “But the problem is this, pro-American elements in the region, look around — there is no America anymore,” Krauthammer said. “I will give you one example. Does anybody care about what we think about Syria — the major country in Mesopotamia? Does anybody act what Obama’s view? No. They want to know what the Russians are doing, the Iranians and Hezbollah. These are the active players. And that’s what happens when America withdraws its power and its influence. We’ve become irrelevant.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/15/krauthammer-says-the-tide-of-american-power-is-receding-blames-obama-for-becoming-irrelevant/#ixzz26khg411Z

    • Just A Citizen says:

      So I am confused.

      I thought most of us agreed the US should just get the hell out of the middle east and stop messing with everyone.

      So why criticize Mr. Obama for following a policy that will lead to this happening???

      We can criticize him for NOT LEADING on such a goal, but not for essentially following the same path many of us have said we support.

      • Sorry, but I think Krauthammer makes some interesting points. That is not to say I agree with everything he says. I also think it’s worthy to post just for discussion. I have no problem with his right-wing “We’ve become irrelevant” being questioned and ridiculed. What we do is important. How we do it is also important. If we are “out” of the ME, fine and dandy. If a nation is hostile to us, lets not open an embassy and place our people there for target practice. If Israel is on their own, tell them and let them decide how they want to deal with Iran and the world instead of pressuring them to bow down….

      • Your gonna have to explain this one too me-Just how is Obama’s policies leading to us getting out of the ME? Is he backing away from the UN? Is he backing away from wars He thinks are justified? Seems to me, all he’s doing is picking new allies.

        • I think Obama’s ME policies are undefined, vague, be nice to them and they will like us. Give money and weapons to anybody that asks. It used to be that the money was tied to them supporting the US and our interests, such as peace with Israel. So I can see Charles K’s point on the vacuum in the ME. That does not mean I agree we should be there meddling in their affairs when the end result is they will still hate and despise us no matter what. I do think there is a way to exit from our past policy that allows allies to plan and adjust to going it alone. A “phased withdraw”, if you will…

          The worst thing about Obama’s ME policy is no one knows what to expect. He attacked Libya when the revolt started, supposedly to “save lives”, a humanitarian action. But more people have died in Syria. Why were Libyan lives worth saving but Syrians were not? Iran had “Arab Spring” riots and he was mute. Egypt had riots and he called for a president friendly to the US that kept the peace with Israel to step down and allow democratic elections. I guess I need someone to explain to me what Obama’s ME policy is, ’cause for the life of me, he seems to just flip a coin!

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    Boy, some of this sure sounds familiar. Wonder where I heard it?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/16/mitt-romney-leadership_n_1888782.html

    • The legs this thing has are amazing. It really is the “Wizard of OZ”. keep your eye on that big scary face on the screen, not the man behind the curtain.

      Hey, OBAMA blew it. he has no foreign policy. Anybody is better than him. Hell, Carter is better than him. At least Carter had the decency to stay in the White House and curtail his fund raising during the hostage crisis.

  8. Today has brought yet more violent protests against diplomatic facilities around the world. In addition to the attacks on U.S. embassies, the German and British embassies in Sudan were also attacked. News reports suggest that the confrontations between security forces and protesters in Tunisia and Egypt have resulted in a number of casualties. Fortunately, it now appears that host nation security forces are increasingly stepping in to protect diplomatic facilities (though far from sufficiently). I have a number of observations.

    1.) These protests are not about respect for Islam. The protesters are concerned with what they perceive as the growing reach of modernity into their societies. Put simply, they hate Western liberalism and they hate the United States. In my opinion, Ari Fleischer was right to argue that the protests illustrate the truth of Mitt Romney’s earlier comments in Israel, where he spoke about the importance of social values. Until a society accepts the value of free and open debate, it will face continual outpourings of violent rage. It is notable that there have been few violent protests in the Islamic democracy of Turkey. I detest anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S., but we must be willing to criticize foreign social currents which tolerate the disgusting behavior that we are currently witnessing around the world. Honest introspection is a critical tool in improving social conditions, and yet in many Islamic societies it is sadly lacking. Where moderate Islam offers comfort and honor, Salafist extremists offer destruction. This should not be a hidden understanding. That the American school in Tunisia was attacked should further illustrate the fact that some very unpleasant individuals and dynamics are engaged in these protests.

    Ultimately, the leaders of these rejectionists are not people who value discussion. As Sayyid Qutb put it, “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.” This is an ideological tyranny which, devoid of moral value, resides on the imposition of fear.

    2.) The Obama administration has handled this crisis badly. I don’t believe that Mitt Romney’s comments on Wednesday were well timed, but they were correct. Faced with violent extremists dedicated to intimidating the most sacred of American values — free speech — we should not be apologizing. Consider the support that our apologies give to regimes that are based on the notion that freedom is evil (like the Iranian regime). Some news reports published today suggest that the Obama administration has been exerting pressure on YouTube to remove the “Innocence of Muslims” film from its website. If this is true, it is a damning indictment of the administration. Even if this film is idiotic, free speech is non-negotiable. Further, if you understand anything about the underpinnings of Sunni Islamist extremism, you also understand that showing weakness to its ideological adherents is a catastrophic error. As I noted yesterday, the U.S. government should be focusing on reinforcing our diplomatic security, educating the Islamic world about our laws regarding free speech and simply affirming that our government had nothing to do with the video’s production or publication. We should also continue to aggressively condemn the violence as absolutely inexcusable and assert that we will take steps to bring the perpetrators to justice. We should not be equivocating or appear to be equivocating.

    3.) We should warn foreign states that their access to American aid is contingent upon their effective protection of U.S. diplomatic interests.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/14/the-middle-east-protesters-their-motivation-and-president-obamas-policy/#ixzz26lFuVYjz

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    Best line I have heard from a TV talking head in awhile.

    Just saw this on The Five. Greg Guttfeld (sp??) talking about the Muslim demonstrations, the attack on the Libyan embassy, the administrations attempt to blame the movie…….. paraphrasing ” If this Administration apologizes for this crazy movie I am going to move to Texas where they grow balls on trees”.

  10. 😐

  11. Todd says:
    “OMG – Rick Santorum actually speaks the truth!!
    Rick Santorum, the former presidential candidate, had a message for attendees of the Values Voter Summit on Saturday.
    “We will never have the media on our side, ever, in this country,” Santorum said. “We will never have the elite, smart people on our side, because they believe they should have the power to tell you what to do.”
    There you have – Rick knows where the smart and the not-so-smart fall on the political spectrum. “

    I looked up and listened to this speech and also read the transcript of it. It is very clear that he was not separating elite people and smart people but was referring to elite smart people, you know the ones that really do believe they should have the power to tell you what to do. Putting a comma in one spot makes a big difference.

    • Never let the truth get in the way of a good lie.

    • So you have a problem with this:

      We will never have the elite, smart people on our side

      But you’re OK with this:

      We will never have the elite smart people on our side

      Is there actually a difference?

      So, Rick is implying “we will have the non-elite smart people on our side”…

      Hey, if that somehow makes you feel better – go for it!

      • Yeah Todd it is plain to see a difference, that is if you want to see a difference, that he was denigrating people who believe they are smart elitist who have the right to tell others what to do.

  12. http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/09/17/obamas-security-breach-in-libya-is-ignored-by-american-media/

    A commentator on CBS actually calling out the media on the Arab fall. Amazing. Read the comments especially the one from redhawk1.

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    I’m sure this is going to come up tomorrow, so before I head to bed I figured I would just past the whole commentary by Eric Erickson at Red State.

    Treat the Press as Enemy Collaborators

    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | September 17th, 2012 at 09:15 PM | 30

    RESIZE: AAA

    “So how do you feel about your new position with Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)?” asked Media Bistro of Jonathan Allen. “Certainly excited. I’m happy to go to work for someone who inspires me and who I admire. I’m hopeful I can advance the Democratic Party’s goals and obviously, the congresswoman’s goals,” Jonathan Allen replied.

    Jonathan Allen is now the Politico’s senior Washington correspondent.

    This is the week when Democrats and the Arab street both erupted in frenzies over otherwise obscure YouTube videos, with our media tripping over itself to provide excuses for both.

    On September 11, 2012, as North Africa blew up and the American Embassy in Cairo started apologizing for everything, the Romney team finally sent out a statement, but embargoed it till midnight because they had promised not to go negative on September 11th.

    I guarantee you a member of the media sent it to Team Obama and I guarantee you it was no coincidence the White House put as much distance as possible between them and the Embassy before the expected release of the Romney statement at midnight. By the time Mitt Romney decided he had to lift the embargo early, the Obama camp had pivoted around him and the media was ready to pounce with “ROMNEY SCREWED UP!!!!”

    The Romney campaign cannot work with the press. They must work around the press. They must be more John Sununu vs. name your interviewer of choice and less anything else. Bluntly, the general rule for Team Romney should be to treat the press as an enemy collaborator with Barack Obama with exceptions only as appropriate.

    That leads me to the latest enemy collaboration. The left wing magazine Mother Jones has undercover video of Mitt Romney talking to donors. He is, on the video circulating now, talking about the 47% of Americans who do not pay income taxes. The press and left are already orgasmic at the find. As an aside, I find it hysterical that the videographer and Mother Jones were apparently connected together by Jimmy Carter IV, who is being described as unemployed — a state of existence common in this Presidency, which has become the second coming of his grandfather.

    Mark Halperin of Time, whose colleague Michael Scherer came from Mother Jones to Time, began setting the narrative quickly. “Many of us have seen pols pander to donors in closed events. I’ve heard my share Rs+Ds. Never anything this damaging however,” he tweeted. Really? Not Barack Obama with the “guns and religion” comment about Pennsylvania Democrats?

    And what of the damage to our national security by Barack Obama’s open mic moment with then President Medvedev of Russia?

    The Romney campaign should double down on what he said. They should own it. The trouble for the left and media (but I repeat myself) is that most Americans agree with Mitt Romney. Most Americans consider themselves part of the 53% and it is not a winning proposition for Barack Obama to convince Americans they are less than they think they are when most Americans already recognize he has made them less than they were.

    Team Romney should force this debate onto the national stage. They should not walk it back. The American people are with him. It is the perfect time to remind people that Barack Obama, who authored Obamacare, wants to now be the arbiter of people’s fair share. To Obama, fair share means you fork over your money so others can have a life of government dependency. Romney’s point about government dependency ties perfectly to the dreadful economic news of late and is a perfect pivot back to that.

    In fact, one of the least appreciated differences between the Republican and Democratic conventions is that the GOP put people on stage who had succeeded in life and the Democrats put a bunch of people on stage portrayed as victims. This all goes perfectly together.

    The media will use this as an opportunity to stop covering North Africa, which continues to have negative implications for Barack Obama. In moving the focus to this, Mitt Romney should embrace it. It’s time to have the discussion everyone has been waiting for and now, with terrible economic data and North Africa Mitt Romney has a very simple message to close the sale: leading from behind is failure.

    When I pointed out that were the election held today Barack Obama would win. And he would win because Mitt Romney has a muddled messaging mess. For pointing that out and suggesting that if he fixes it he could win, I was called a “liberal flack” an “Obama collaborator” and Twitchy called me a hand wringer lumping me in with liberals David Frum and Ezra Klein. It is to be expected. But I stand by the point. Now, Mitt Romney has the perfect opportunity to focus his message like a laser and close the sale.”

    I can’t wait for the media and somebody in the Govt to reveal the identity of the person who posted the video of Romney. Identity is protected to avoid lawsuits, they say. How about prosecution for wire tap laws?????

    • EE was full speed ahead for Rick Perry. Even his die hard followers get on him for Romney bashing. His comments don’t surprise me.

      I like this line though: Most Americans consider themselves part of the 53% and it is not a winning proposition for Barack Obama to convince Americans they are less than they think they are when most Americans already recognize he has made them less than they were.

      Romney has a good chance. I’m in the liberal bowels of SE Mich and I hear a lot of support for Romney. I’m getting my liberal friends to listen and acknowledge Obama’s lack of leadership. We just need to keep talking. Have some gay friends who are going to allow me to state my case for Romney, this ought to be fun. I told them they can be as gay as they want AND vote Romney..they told me to prove it. I intend to try hard this weekend. 🙂

      • charlieopera says:

        I told them they can be as gay as they want AND vote Romney..they told me to prove it. I intend to try hard this weekend.

        Are you going to mention that he considers them 2nd class citizens?

        • Nope. I’m going to tell them that Obama was against them before he was for them. And that the country is not at a point yet to accept gay marriage no matter who is elected so they are going to have to take one for the team right now. Then I’m going to harp on Obama’s failed policies, starting with foreign policy. Then my first item on domestic policy will have to do with energy! How’s that? I told them they’d have to hear me out and give me several hours. She said “several hours of politics? Are you on crack?” 🙂

          • charlieopera says:

            Funny stuff, but you better hope they don’t read the NY Times first.

            Brooks on Thurston Howell Romney: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=opinion&adxnnlx=1347966636-G1JV7L%2FvAJs4N5OAx8KZHg

            • Thurston Howell Romney

              My favorite “Quote of the Day” for today!

              Maybe I should say “My favorite “Quote of the Day” so far”…I have this funny feeling it’s going to be a good day…maybe it’s just me!

          • Have to look at our society as a whole. Use the Chick-Fil-A as an example, the media attacked the man and his company for stating he and his family think the Bible’s definition of marriage is correct. Liberal called for a boycott and the backlash was an overwhelming buycott, supporting him and his right to at least express his opinion. A few years ago, gays wanted civil unions, where they would have the same legal rights. Now they are demanding marriage, where they can demand the same social recognition. The backlash from this has resulted in some states passing protection of marriage laws. Obama, if re-elected, is likely to continue pushing the extreme mandate, and try to overcome the majority opposition. Romney is much more likely to support civil union and equal treatment under the law. Their cause is apt to fair better under the Romster than Obama.

            • Oooo..good points for the weekend, thanks! gimme more..i need more..these girls could spread my message to many!

      • I think Romney is wrong to say he can’t win any of those 47%. Pretty simple, are they better off now than four years ago? How has hope and change turned out for them? Gas and food prices have increased faster than Obamabucks, resulting in worse standard of living for the entitled. Romney’s message should be, “some of you want a better life, one where there are opportunities for you to work and improve you life. What has always worked in America, when the economy is good, we all prosper.” “Under Obama, as the economy has suffered, the poor and middle class have suffered the most”. “This is the reality of Obamanomics, when he punishes the wealthy, he punishes the poor four-fold.”

        • Romney’s comments make no sense — plenty of these 47% who don’t pay federal income tax typically vote Republican…

          • Buck, this is not a Speech to voters or the American people, it was a discussion with donors, who likely understand the point he was trying to make (whether you or the MSM understand that point, is moot, it’s non of your business, you weren’t invited to that party). Now, what I gathered, is that Romney was making a point that people will vote for more free cookies and don’t care about taxes. Obamaloni = free cookies (like the whole Dem platform). But don’t this this fact get in the way of the Liberal media blowing shit out of proportion to enrage their base, which usually ends up with them and the base standing around a big table of crow. 😉

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Buck

            Romney’s comments make perfect sense.

            He may simply not have the accurate number, but nobody knows for sure what that is.

            It is easily understood if you look at the concept and stop trying to nit pick precise wording. The issue of paying taxes is not the main point. It is the combination of “victimhood” and “entitlement”.

            • Romney said 47% don’t pay federal taxes (first off, this is wrong as I noted above) and that these individuals see themselves as victims, will not vote for him, and should just be written off (again, this is wrong). So how exactly do his comments make sense? Oh, only if you assume that what he meant was 47% don’t pay federal income tax and some number of these 47%, though we have no idea what that number may actually be, suffer from an entitlement mentality and will never vote for the GOP. Yup, makes perfect sense!

              • Buck,

                You are 100% wrong. You are falling victim to relying on what someone is telling you Romney said, not what he did say. There is a difference. I do agree if he had said 47% pay not taxes, he would have been wrong. The thing is, he was making a statement on the number of people who take some form of government assistance, also know as entitlements. He did not mention who was paying what in taxes.

                “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what,” Romney could be heard saying. “There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”

                Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/18/romney-sticks-by-victims-comments-but-calls-them-off-cuff/#ixzz26pZxRxsm

                PS, ‘morning Counselor.

              • Fair enough — if he didn’t mention the tax issue, then he didn’t mention the tax issue. But he’s still dead wrong — even assuming the 47% is the correct number of people dependent upon government, not nearly 100% of these people ‘believe they are victims’ or ‘will vote for the president’.

                PS – g’morning right back at ya.

              • Wait LOI! I redact my redaction — perhaps he did not say anything about paying taxes in that clip, but he most certainly did last night in trying to explain his remarks:

                …I point out I recognize that among those that pay no tax, approximately 47 percent of Americans…

              • Yet another fascinating tidbit:

                more than 60% of the 47% pay payroll taxes. At 15.3%, the payroll tax rate represents a higher rate of tax than that paid by Mitt Romney himself

              • Just A Citizen says:

                BUCK

                He said that 47% of those people VOTING FOR OBAMA. That was the original comment. NOT 47% of the American People.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                BUCK

                Retraction: I mis-stated my own point. Need more coffee.

                He was referring to 47% of those who vote, not all Americans. He is talking about the percentages that vote and why they will support Obama no matter who the opposition is.

                Now, I don’t know the actual number but I know it is far closer to the 47% than most of us would like to admit.

            • This is exactly where the conversation needs to be. Why is the left so afraid to talk about this? Instead they try to twist this as a bad thing to bring up?

              • charlieopera says:

                Oy vey … so all those who put into their social security and retired and DEADBEATS … the left is gonna’ love this, Kathy.

                Deadbeats, moochers, victims … really?

                Welcome to the REAL WORLD, Mitt … it’s over.

              • “so all those who put into their social security and retired are DEADBEATS…” Ooh, don’t forget those on Medicare!

              • And let’s not forget the deadbeats receiving Veterans Benefits.

              • More government vs. less government? It’s pretty basic. You can nitpick all you want but that’s what it comes down to.

                http://www.gallup.com/poll/157481/majority-say-government-doing.aspx

              • Good point Todd — dang moochers!

              • “This is exactly where the conversation needs to be.”
                We should discuss 47% of the US population getting some form of government assistance, why? Because we are approaching a point where there will be more people not working, but receiving gov. assistance, than will be working?

                ‘Instead they try to twist this as a bad thing to bring up?”
                “Deadbeats, moochers, victims …”

                “We need to have a conversation DEADBEATS, DEADBEATS”

                I think it’s called silencing the opposition. When you don’t have anything intelligent to say, or are losing the argument, shout them down.
                Twist their words and attack the person.

    • I guess my only complaint is using an exact 47 percent figure. Certainly, based on my experience, the number is high and it does not supposedly include Social Security recipients and yet, in the past, when you touch the lightning rod of Social Security it has exploded in your face.

      So, there is a lot of truth here and yet, Buck is right too. An awful lot of the people out of work and receiving benefits will vote republican as will those who have prematurely left the job market. They still have hope. So, while the comment is valid and historically significant (Falling of the Roman Empire significant) tying oneself to a specific percent (47%)was silly even though it is the very number I hear the media uses over and over and over again.
      \
      This is another huge distraction from the real issues facing the country of a dying economy and a middle east about to implode. But, why am I not surprised?

  14. charlieopera says:

    My man, Romney … 47% of Americans are slackers (somebody say BF/Ayn Rand) …

    Turn out the lights, the party’s over …

    4 more beers!

    • Charlie, clean Obamaloni’s poop out of your ear and listen to what he said. He stated facts only, about voting.

      • charlieopera says:

        But I love the poop, Gman. And I love how the ayn randers are shooting themselves in the feet over and over again. Better start saving for my Chivas, brother …

        • Liberals are running around these days extolling the wonder years of the 1950s. They remember when the workers had good union jobs at good wages. But Michael Barone recently poured cold water on their nostalgia.

          As it happens, I grew up in Detroit and for a time lived next door to factory workers. And I know something that has eluded the liberal nostalgiacs. Which is that people hated those jobs.

          That set me to thinking. Now I know why the private-sector unions did such a good job of destroying the good jobs at good wages in the unionized steel industry and have half way destroyed the jobs in the unionized auto industry. Once you have started what our lefty friends call a “movement of resistance” against some evil oppressor the movement will not rest until it has destroyed the target of its rage. Once you set up a union and teach the rank and file to hate the bosses, then you have created a monster that will not stop until it has won final victory or final defeat — just ask Joe Soptic.

          The factory workers had a perfectly good reason to be angry. The factory system turned them into mechanical robots. They hated that and so they formed labor unions to fight the system that had humiliated them. They fought and they fought, eventually inventing the weekend and the good jobs at good wages of which we have all heard tell. They even got the politicians to lend a hand by writing pro-union labor laws that tied the bosses up in red tape. But they ended up destroying those good jobs and those good wages. Because they hated those jobs and everything associated with them: the bosses, the assembly line, the foremen, Frederick Taylor, and the infernal speed-up.

          The union workers ended up like the woman scorned. Nothing would satisfy them but to destroy the people that had humiliated them, even if they destroyed themselves in the process.

          But, as the Frankfurt School lefties pointed out, the problem is not just the mechanical factory system, the bosses, and the unjust domination of the workers. Every system of “instrumental reason” is a system of domination, a means to dominate nature and other men. That goes for bureaucratic government just as much as the evil robber barons of the factory system. The system dominates government workers just as much as factory workers.

          You and I may sit in front of our computers wondering why the Chicago teachers and the Wisconsin state workers, the California local government workers and the rest of the 20 million government workers just don’t get it. Are they dumb or something? Don’t they understand that there is No. More. Money?

          It doesn’t matter. They hate their jobs.

          Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/two_cheers_for_the_chicago_teachers_union.html#ixzz26pSpOglm

          • Just A Citizen says:

            LOI

            A reminder of things as they actually were. How soon we forget.

            I met many, many people from the “manufacturing” cities of the east and mideast in college and the years following. All had moved to the WEST to find new and different careers. Why? They had all worked in these “manufacturing” plants when teenagers. There Dads had worked in these plants, and sometimes their Moms. They were sent to college to avoid “having to work” in these plants. They moved west to find work that “did not” involve working in a factory all day.

            My business classes in college were filled with studies of the assembly lines and the issues with “robotic type” work. How to motivate employees, etc, etc, etc. doing these mundane tasks. Like screwing the same bolt on a car, thousands of times a week, week after week, for 30 years or more.

            • JAC,

              Great point! We hear about “burnout” in high stress professions, ER Doc & nurses, police, fire, etc.. And then we are expected to change professions/jobs 4-5 times during our lives because of better opportunities or just wanderlust. Could this be most people get bored imitating a machine but don’t want to quit because they cannot find a better job with their skillset? “I hate my job but love the pay and benefits!”

              My wife sometimes needs a break from our kids when they are cranky/fighting. I cannot imagine teaching in a big city school with what they put up with day-by-day, year after year. Which does not change anything, you can’t pay them enough to be happy in their job. There are not enough administration positions open for all to advance past teaching but stay in education.

  15. I have been hearing rumers od an “October Surprise”. Maybe this is the prep work just for that. Zero Hedge
    September 17, 2012

    Up until now, the LHD 7 Iwo Jima Big-Deck Amphibious Warfare ship was all alone in the Arabian Sea, patiently awaiting orders to liberate this or that middle east country of their oil reserves. This is no longer the case: launching today in general direction – Middle East – for a brand new 7 month engagement, is the LHA 1 Peleliu Amphibious Ready Group, consisting of the amphibious assault ship, the USS Peleliu which consists of 4000 marines.

    LHA 1 also comprises of the amphibious transport dock USS Green Bay and the dock landing ship USS Rushmore. Also deploying Monday is the Marine Corps’ 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit and elements of Fleet Surgical Team 1, Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 23, Assault Craft Units 1 and 5, and Beach Master Unit 1. And as we reported previously, the middle east veteran – the CVN 74 Stennis aircraft carrier – was providently already on its way. In other words, in about 2 weeks, the Middle east will be the focal point of 3 aircraft carriers, 2 amphibious assault forces, and who knows how many “developed” world armadas, all hell bent on securing that one extra bit of Middle East oil, under the guise of spreading democracy and liberating the local people who “hate America’s for its freedom.”http://www.prisonplanet.com/4000-marines-headed-to-middle-east-as-part-of-peleliu-amphibious-group-dispatch.html

    • charlieopera says:

      Yep, that “socialist” president we have, sure is acting like one … protecting oil!

      G, what about the 47%? Those slacker MF’ers (veterans included) … your boy Romney, who went to France during Vietnam, is calling you out for being a moocher.

      • Oh my, many of those 47%ers work and pay taxes, until they get a refund for more than they paid in. Some are welfare moochers, who play the system and don’t work. I pay taxes, although I don’t think anyone should pay taxes to the Feds. We could all live a better life if DC and the two crime families, the Dems, and Repubs, did not exist.

        You just keep making up things as you go along, make a fool of yourself in the process. We both know the Feds are thieves and totally corrupt, why bother acknowledging one thief over another? Seems like a waste of time to me 🙂

        • Interesting take from Ezra Klein:

          Part of the reason so many Americans don’t pay federal income taxes is that Republicans have passed a series of very large tax cuts that wiped out the income-tax liability for many Americans. That’s why, when you look at graphs of the percent of Americans who don’t pay income taxes, you see huge jumps after Ronald Reagan’s 1986 tax reform and George W. Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. So whenever you hear that half of Americans don’t pay federal income taxes, remember: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush helped build that.

          • Buck, The Liberal media will always blame someone other than those they support (Liberal Dems). It don’t matter that this latest depression was a result of the housing bubble bursting, a bubble the Dems blew up, it will always be Bush’s fault, or the Repubs fault 🙄 That’s the problem with what is happening today, and why the govt is buying so much ammo, they have set the stage for blame and finger pointing. The DC crime families should be dismantled, let’s start over with a system that can’t bite!

            • I’m just posting one explanation as to why 47% of Americans don’t currently pay any income tax. Part of it does have to do with the Bush tax cuts. Another part of it does have to do with the general economic collapse (regardless of who you choose to blame). These are just facts.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Buck

                Typical Klein diversion. Yes the Republican tax cuts have benefited the lower income groups with “lower taxes”. But the point Romney is making is about the perception and beliefs of that group that consistently show unwavering support for Obama. Even when his negatives go lower, they still say they will vote for him over all other choices.

                But funny how Klein does not mention who it is they think “benefited” from those tax cuts. How the Dems have demonized the R’s for those tax cuts and how the lower income folks don’t remember who helped them. They only BELIEVE that the Rich got the most and it caused them to suffer.

                Who do they think are threatening to take away their benefits? I don’t think that is Mr. Obama do you? So Klein is proving that he is part of the game. Certainly not interested in providing any objective clarity.

                That is why Romney needs to own this and expound further upon it. It is a great OPPORTUNITY in my view.

                I am not sure his managers will agree. It might be to edgy for them.

          • Another interesting point that was left out……that the tax cuts coupled with spending within GDP rise…..tax receipts increased 18%. Which leads one to conclude that tax cuts help the economy. Now, the same graphs and charts show…..when spending increased in proportion to the increased revenues, you create an economic phenomenon called the “Law of Diminishing Returns”.

            Special Note: It does not make a difference which party is in power……the conclusion is very simple to draw…..increased spending in excess of revenues….inflation.

            If Buck invoices $100 per hour and it costs $100 per hour to produce….zero gain. If Buck realizes that a change in billing in that he lowers his price to $75 per hour but that lowered cost produces more revenue because of increased traffic, then there is a gain….but if he spends the gain…..zero effect and nothing gained. Even Buck will not invoice less than cost. ( and, please, no pro bono lectures…your price figures that in already)….

            So. now, apply that to government….except that government does not produce a good or service that manufactures revenues…it can only spend. So, tax cuts designed to increase revenues to sustain current spending……good. Tax cuts increasing revenues and then increasing spending…..bad.

            • Obviously there is much more to it (tax policy). But, simply put, and this is Ezra Klein’s point, any time you raise threshold tax amounts (either directly or indirectly) you will necessarily wind up with more people who fall under that threshold amount and thereby pay no income tax.

              Yet another interesting point is the fact that Romney seems to be trying to conflate taxes and income taxes. Romney: 47% pay no federal taxes. Truth: 47% pay no federal income tax. There’s a difference.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Buck

                He is NOT trying to conflate taxes in totality and “income” taxes. I think you know that as well as I.

                When the subject is “Federal income taxes” and then someone doesn’t use the word “income” in the discussion it doesn’t change the subject of the discussion.

                Again, more nitpicking words for the purpose of diversion. A great political game.

              • I thought words matter, especially to the good people of SUFA…perhaps I was mistaken.

            • PS — Still waiting (patiently, of course) on your input on Lily Ledbetter. Remember: your invoice for my time is quickly rising!

          • Buck, You are absolutely correct, Part of the sales pitch at the time on tax cuts was the elimination of loopholes as well as the removal of large numbers of lower income folks from the rolls. Couple that with Nixon’s Low Income Tax Credits, and you can blame the republicans as much as the democrats.

            There is a caveat though, the first is FICA which all workers pay. Many of the lower income folks who worked for me, took offense when they heard that they were not paying taxes since FICA took such a bite as did local taxes. That $ 400 per week salary always had deductions.

            I know I can start a revolution here when I come down for a flat tax. No deductions other than charitable giving. Certainly in the case of mortgage interest deductions or deductability of local taxers, it would have to be phased in over a long period (20 years?) to allow adjustments to be made there but, if we are supposedly all in this together, we should all be paying taxes. No matter what Charlie and the President say, 10% of a $ 5,000,000 income is significantly more than 10% of a $ 25,000 income. To me that’s the definition of everyone paying their “fair share”. Everybody can point to the highway, dam, or Aircraft carrier and say that they “own” a piece of it.

  16. Tisk, tisk. From Ann Barnhardt:

    The “Arab Spring” was a long-planned operation, guys. Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were in Egypt for months beforehand “organizing” the whole thing.
    http://www.wnd.com/2010/01/120711/
    Remember how shocked everyone was in January and February of 2011 at how the Egyptian uprising was so heavily coordinated via Facebook and Twitter? I promise you, Ayers and Dohrn trained those people how to “organize” using social media while they were over there. The timing of this crap going on in Egypt, Libya, Iran and Syria is NO COINCIDENCE. Everything is being done and has been planned around the so-called November election here in the U.S. with the sole objective of maintaining and solidifying the Marxist overthrow of this nation, with an eye toward a global regime after the U.S. is out of the way.

  17. @ Buck…..the LLA……it is nothing more than a bastardized version of the crap of the 60’s and 70’s. The issue of the slippery slope is this…..if a private company establishes BFOQ’s, it appears that the act can circumvent that.In addition, it appears that the act hamstrings increasing operations….for example….If Buck Enterprises in North Fort Worth has a store that sells purple widgets and those widgets cost $2 each and that store has a captured market, in that, it is the only store in North Fort Worth that sells these widgets and you have a marketing director that makes $10 per hour. Everything is peachy.

    But Buck decides that he is missing a market 25 miles South of Fort Worth but in that market, there is a store that sells purple widgets for $2 per widget. So he decides to compete by lowering his costs…so he competes with a store selling purple widgets by selling his for $1. In order to get to that price, he sets his costs lower…..and he hires a marketing director for $8 per hour….same job responsibilities, same hours of operation. In addition, he has lower costs associated with that store involving benefits…like vacation pay and health than the other store 25 miles to the North….but both stores are owned by the same holding company but treated as separate profit centers. If I am reading the act properly, if the marketing director North decides to move South and does so with a lowered income and receives his or her first check, then they could file a equal pay lawsuit not only for the wages but the lowered benefits as well.

    It appears that this same law does not allow a company to establish different pay scales and benefits to account for a change in demographics. It is a broad brush. Now, if the law allowed separate BFOQ;s to be established depending on the demographics…..it would not be so bad.

    • Colonel,

      I believe you are mistaken. First off, Buck Enterprises wouldn’t open in the Forth Worth area, north or south. But, more importantly, I believe you are mistaken in your reading of the LLA (which must be done in conjunction with other laws pertaining to pay discrimination). Buck Enterprises would be free to establish pay scales which account for regional cost of living — take a law firm for an example: the NYC office routinely pays a higher salary than its Dallas office. If I were to move from the NYC office to the Dallas office, and as a prereq was required to take the lower income, there would be no discrimination under LLA (nor any other law I am aware of). But, what the LLA prevents is Buck Enterprises deciding to pay its male marketing director more than its female marketing director solely because of gender (in other words, there could be a pay differential due to duration of employment (e.g., the male was hired 2 yrs prior to the female and had been subject to raises) or regional cost of living).

      • OK….I read it a little differently but that is why I would hire one of your counterparts…..but it is also a good reason not to have employees and go contract labor.

  18. charlieopera says:

    Says it all. Romney will get 95 electoral votes from “Moocher” states … Obama 5 …
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/18/mitt-romney-will-probably-get-95-electoral-votes-from-moocher-states-obama-will-probably-get-5/

    Smile (SUFA), though your heart is aching …

  19. Sorry if this is a repost…..

  20. Breaking News
    Cranston bans ‘father-daughter’ dances as violation of state law
    Comments 335 | Recommend 0

    September 17, 2012 10:02 pm
    By Richard C. Dujardin

    CRANSTON, R.I. — In a move that has taken some parents by surprise, the school department has announced that it is banning traditional “father-daughter” and “mother-son” activities, saying they violate state law.
    Did the Cranston School Department do the right thing in banning “father-daughter” dances? (4,204 votes)
    Yes
    No
    View results

    Supt. Judith Lundsten said the move was triggered by a letter ifrom the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a single mom who had complained that her daughter had not been able to attend her father-daughter dance.

    Lundsten said school attorneys found while federal Title IX legislation banning gender discrimination gives an exemption for “father-son” and “mother-daughter” events, Rhode Island law doesn’t.

    The new ban was brought to light Monday by Sean Gately, a Republican running for the state Senate, who said if elected he will work to change the state law.

    http://news.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/2012/09/cranston-bans-f.html

    • Just A Citizen says:

      V.H.

      These kinds of “lawsuits” make me angry at a visceral level. Kinda makes me want to just kill the freaking lawyers. So what if a few innocent ones get caught up in the purge. Society would be so much better off. A little For the Greater Good. Bwhahahahahaha.

      My kids high school had these events. Recognizing that many kids don’t have a mom or dad to attend the school recruited “substitutes” for those who wanted to go to the dance. Grandparents of the kids and grandparents of other kids volunteered to stand in. As did some of the parents of younger kids or those who had already graduated.

      So strange how people can find a rational, non-confrontational way to solve what could otherwise be a hurtful social situation. Compassion from a CONSERVATIVE community. Who would ever think such a thing possible.

      Now in the world according to Obama I assume that the “stand ins” would have to be “govt employees” or at least “govt approved”. Minimum wage laws would obviously apply along with membership in SEIU or some other “public employee union”.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck

    Yes sir, words have meaning and importance. As does context and tone.

    So lets look at some words that when viewed ONLY in their individual use appear to not only be true but create Votes for a politician. Then lets look at the underlying truth relative to those words. Gee……………. now they don’t seem to be so “meaningful” do they!!

    http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/17/fact-checking-obama-speech-will-new-wto-case-make-a-difference-for-u-s-auto-parts-industry/

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    So it was Jimmy Carter’s grandson who helped get the Romney video to Mother Jones. And WHY might a reasonable person ask. Well lets see what he has to say:

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13938614-how-the-romney-video-leaked-for-carters-it-was-personal?lite

    Now has anyone heard any discussion of this absolutely PARTISAN person’s deliberate efforts to harm a Presidential Candidate from the OTHER party???

    • JAC, Good Afternoon Sir 🙂 Hope all is well in your part of the world. JC’s Grandson seems to like hearing that Obama is the worst President ever, instead of JC. He’s trying to keep him in office so the JC days will look like a walk in the park and carter will be forgotten. 😆

      • Just A Citizen says:

        gman

        Doing well. Thanks for asking. Getting ready for a one week fly fishing trip to Henry’s Fork and the South Fork Snake.

        It does seem that the younger Carter is a little “sensitive” to Grandpa’s reputation.

    • JAC,

      Now has anyone heard any discussion of this absolutely PARTISAN person’s deliberate efforts to harm a Presidential Candidate from the OTHER party???

      So are you SHOCKED at this?

      How about the Birthers? Or the Tea Party? Or is it only SHOCKING if a Democrat does it?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        Not shocked at all. It simply confirms my belief the media is in the tank with the Dem party, or at least with Mr. Obama.

        Now put shoe on other foot. The person who taped this would be exposed and their life would become a living hell. And the media would gladly take part in the hanging.

        You’ll have to explain what the birthers or the tea party has to do with my comment in your context. They actually reinforce my comment, however. Look at how the media went after the “individuals” rather than just dealing with their message. The accusations were basically ignored while the media fed upon the characters themselves. But here we have someone taping a private meeting without permission, then handing the tape off to a Partisan publisher and not a single person in the media has raised the question or even addressed the double standard.

        This was apparently done in Florida. Does it violate Florida law??? I have no idea but I do know that not a single pundit has even raised the question. But when that creepy guy O’Keefe makes a video what is the first reaction?

        If I were in the Romney campaign I would assume that every meeting I have attended over the past couple of years had a spy and may have been recorded. So start doing some planning to deal with any fall out from those meetings that could be possible.

        I was wondering why the Obama Campaign started frisking people and banning all cameras and cell phone many months ago. Perhaps they were afraid Romney would try what they had already done?

        • JAC,
          Is this your “objective” analysis?

          Sounds more like “sour grapes” to me: Oh boo hoo hoo for us. The big lame stream media is so unfair. We’re such victims…

          Let’s compare this to O’Keefe.

          O’Keefe: dresses in costume, lies to Acorn employee, edits tape to make Acorn look bad. All this to become a darling of the right-wing.

          Romney tape: Straight up recording. The person doing the recording has no interaction with Romney. 2 minutes missing – otherwise entire tape released (and unless Romney says “April Fools” during the 2 minutes, I can’t imagine how that 2 minutes could change anything). Tape posted on u-tube months ago. The person who did the recording wants no attention. Carter’s grandson negotiates it’s release.

          Which of those two “processes” seems more “honest”?

          Be sure to use your “objective” analysis…

        • JAC,
          To answer your other question:

          Now has anyone heard any discussion of this absolutely PARTISAN groups (birthers or the tea party) deliberate efforts to harm a Presidential Candidate from the OTHER party???

          You sure seem to think the “right” is just one big victim here…

  23. Just A Citizen says:

    So lets play the SAME game. After all, games should be played according to the same rules. And under these rules I hereby declare David Brooks a LIAR. Which of course should negate ANY credibility as to his article that Charlie and Todd have so lovingly wrapped their arms around.

    MY proof you ask? Well here is the quote from his article, er editorial.

    “But these are not the sensible arguments that Mitt Romney made at a fund-raiser earlier this year. Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Forty-seven percent of the country, he said, are people “who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.””

    Anyone else notice the little trick? The LIE?

    Well here it is: “Forty-seven percent of the country, he said,”. Really? Is that what Mr. Romney said? Or was he talking about the 47% of the country who was going to vote for Mr. Obama?

    Just to be sure lets look again at Mr. Romney’s actual words: ““There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what,” Romney could be heard saying. “There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”

    Now I see that I could be mistaken. I am sure Buck and Todd will point out that when Mr. Romney said “47 percent of the people who will vote for the president” he forgot to say “47 percent of the THOSE WHO VOTE ……” He was clearly trying to confuse everyone by using the word “people” instead of the more precise phrase “those who vote”.

    • charlieopera says:

      Good Lord, JAC, just listen to Marc Levin tonight and he can tell you what you want to hear … the rest of the world will deal with reality.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        charlie

        About half, maybe more, of the people in this country CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH.

        Hell when you actually present truth to them on a silver platter they still deny it.

        As for Marc Levin, pretty smart fellow especially on the Constitution and “some” history. But an ARROGANT ASS otherwise. So why is it you find him so “humorous”?

        • JAC..don’t talk about Charlie like that! 🙂

        • charlieopera says:

          Levin is the biggest fugazy on the radio (although I haven’t listened to Limbaugh or Hannity enough to hear them lie through their teeth the way Levin does. That said, he’s humorous during commercial breaks from talk radio. I enjoy his nicknames … and when he rants: “That’s right, I said it.” (I think we know what he really wants to say) …

          The truth: capitalism has failed the American people … and it’s becoming more and more obvious every day … that’s a truth YOU can’t handle … but in the meantime, I’ll have a blast watching your party of choice implode … 47% are moochers … that’s a fact, JAC? Only if you discount those who’ve paid into the system their entire life … and that would include, my man, your girl, the ultimate hypocrit, Ayn Rand! 🙂

    • Pretty weak JAC!

      I guess the material you have to work with is pretty weak.

      But it is nice to see the “JAC makes up excuse for Mittens Tour” continue.

      I probably owe you an apology for this comment yesterday:

      Don’t worry, you can go back to your “impartial” Obama bashing now!!

      I didn’t realize Mitt was so hell-bend on dominating another news cycle.

      Don’t you think it shows an incredible bias with now much media coverage Mitt is getting? Yup, they’re all in the bag for the Mittster.

      **** Breaking News **** Breaking News **** Breaking News ****

      I have a new favorite Song:

      Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey-ey, goodbye!

      **** Now, back to your regularly scheduled whining ****

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        Nice to see you are still off your medication.

        Typical leftist ploy but it won’t work on me Todd. You can assign all the negatives against my comments you wish. You can try and place words in my mouth. You can put up all the strawmen on Pluto against me. It will not deter me from speaking the truth as I see it.

        I will address one of your accusations directly. I have NEVER said I was “impartial”.

        I have claimed that I try to be “objective” when offering analysis of some issue or topic. So you can challenge my “objectivity” if you like. But I am absolutely PARTIAL.

        I detest Mr. Obama and the PROGRESSIVES he represents.

        I detest the Progressive Republicans that Mr. Romney represents.

        But the level of my disgust is greater for Mr. O than for Mr. R. Of course I said that already didn’t I. Which of course would have proved I was not claiming “impartiality” wouldn’t it.

        I find it interesting how often you use the phrase “I find it interesting”.

        It is NOT my arguments that are WEAK Todd. It is you and Buck and Mathius who are parsing over individual words in some effort to avoid the larger issues and questions. While it may fit the left wing’s tendency to fall back on the Art of Personal Destruction, it does nothing to make your case to anyone except your own tribe. These “rants” are the epitome of the very thing you rail against here at SUFA, Confirmation Bias.

        Now would you like to address the underlying issue? Is there or is there not a significant voting block in this country that feels they are entitled to more and that it is Govt that should provide it? Do these people NOT vote primarily for Democrats?

        • charlieopera says:

          It is NOT my arguments that are WEAK Todd. It is you and Buck and Mathius who are parsing over individual words in some effort to avoid the larger issues and questions

          You forgot me, Jocko … your point (the significant voting black, bla, bla) is valid … except, you don’t own up to the alternative (to social security, medicare) … how can you without leaving people in the street? Even your girl, Ayn Rand, opted for the government aid she so detested. You have no answers because you defend 1% gaining all the profits (unearned most of them) while the bulk of the 99% take it up the ass (excuse my French) … get fucked in the ass … Romney made it clear that’s how he feels (social darwinism, perhaps?) … 47% can go to hell … they vote Democrat because they have NO alternative (as the two party system has set the rules). There are other options (socialist, communist) but they don’t get a chance to participate in debates … so it’s either vote against their own interests (like most of you lunatics here) or vote for getting social security and medicare (amongst other things) … but according to Ayn (the moocher herself) and BF, they’re evil MF’ers, living like parasites off of all you good people.

          And you ain’t seen nothin’ yet … in 2014, Obama will probably get the house back and will retain the Senate … and with nothing in front of him to be political about, he’ll be doing some shoving up the gazootski of his own …:)

          • Just A Citizen says:

            charlie

            That is because they at least attempt an argument. You simply post the same old drivel.

            I have outlined MY proposal here before Charlie and it does not leave anyone out on the street. That is unless their own ignorance and lack of effort puts them there.

            All “Govt welfare programs” should be eliminated and replaced with PERSONAL ACCOUNTS, as in SAVINGS.

            Romney did not discard the 47%. He stated here and otherwise that the “safety net” deals with the poor and the tax codes/subsidies deals with the upper class. What is not dealt with is the “middle class”. That Charlie was the context of his comment. Twist it all you want because truth means nothing to you.

            As for the Dems getting back the House and Senate and White House, I do not doubt that this will be possible. I have said the R’s are capable of screwing up their chances. I also realize the extent of the moral and ethical rot in this country that drives more and more of my fellow citizens to think the Govt must provide. That “there should be a law” for everything. That more and more Americans forget everyday what it means to be American.

            • charlieopera says:

              All “Govt welfare programs” should be eliminated and replaced with PERSONAL ACCOUNTS, as in SAVINGS.

              That’s a hell of a fantasy, JAC. Do you devine this while sleeping or drunk?

              He stated here and otherwise that the “safety net” deals

              Now I know you were drunk. He “stated” that in another of his genius comments … the video last night doesn’t mention “safety nets” … what he said was, the 47% that will vote for Obama he will ignore because they are essentially victims and dependent on the gov’t anyway. Talk about twisting (in the wind).

              The context of his comment isn’t flying today, JAC, and you know it. It might fly in here to the 10-15 SUFA ites that would vote for the GOP candidate because they’re all dependent on aristocracy anyway (see how that works, my man?) … but it isn’t flying in the “real world” … I know you have trouble with that concept, but try and imagine it.

              That more and more Americans forget everyday what it means to be American.

              Thank God (or whomever) they don’t “think” like you, brother. That’s all I have to say …:) Go Bills! Go Obama! So long, Romney!

        • Nice to see you are still off your medication.

          JAC, You’re starting to sound like Gman…

        • It is you and Buck and Mathius who are parsing over individual words in some effort to avoid the larger issues and questions.

          No JAC,

          You don’t get to claim some sort of “moral high ground” here. You’re the one parsing words. I think we’d all be plenty happy to talk about what Romney’s statements say about him and his view and vision for America.

          You’re the one trying to parse David Brooks word so you can try to divert the conversation to whether Romney meant “people” or “voters”.

          Want to have an adult conversation?

          • charlieopera says:

            Yeah, JAC did seem to “confuse” a couple of Romney’s speeches/gafs there … the one where he spoke of a safety net (why he didn’t need to do anything for the poor) and the one released the other night where he told 47% of the American population they were deadbeats. 🙂

          • “Want to have an adult conversation?” 🙄 from Todd, no less! 🙄

            JAC, more power to you, but why do you bother? Nothing wrong with what Romney said at all. Anyone that is an adult (LOL!) understands what he meant, what he was referring to and how it is a major issue in our country today. These boys that you are trying to work with are just either not interested or capable of understanding this. Leave them be to their miserable little world(s) and put your energy into something worthwhile.

            Just my 2 cents.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Kathy

              Just didn’t feel like “tolerating” it today so I couldn’t help myself. A weakness I am trying to address. 😉

              Your Badgers sure dodged a bullet this weekend. Hate to admit I was pulling for the Aggies. That field goal might have gotten them into the top 25. Would have been pretty cool for a small school.

              Shaping up to be a looooooooooooooong football season.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Ah yes, the sanctimonious retort which amounts to We can do it but you can’t. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!

            Todd, I simply used your own methods on Brooks. Your game, your rules.

            Brooks LIED.

  24. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck

    Another LIE by twisting words.

    From you above:
    “Yet another fascinating tidbit:

    more than 60% of the 47% pay payroll taxes. At 15.3%, the payroll tax rate represents a higher rate of tax than that paid by Mitt Romney himself ”

    Comparing payroll tax to TOTAL TAXES. How much did Romney pay in “payroll tax” plus “State Tax” plus “local tax” plus “property tax” plus “sales tax” etc, etc.??

    Tidbit? Yep………. a tidbit of Bull Dookey!

    Now lets address the “hypocrisy” of anyone Dem using the 15.3% total payroll tax rate in a comparison of tax impacts. Like when the R’s suggested just placing the entire amount on the employee and the Dems screamed TAX INCREASE against the middle class. Or when they suggested eliminating the tax and the Dems screamed TAX CUT for the rich corporations.

    So which is it? Is the full tax rate the burden of the employee entirely or not?

    And for the record, it is a tax on the employee. In all cases and in all discussions. It should be treated as such in the tax code.

    • <blockquote cite="" How much did Romney pay in “payroll tax”

      I’d say NOT MUCH JAC. After all, Romney has claimed to be “unemployed” for the last few years…

      Does that mean the Mittster is receiving unemployment compensation?

      Does that make him one of the MOOCHERS he’s complaining about?

      Is this really just the Mittster’s way of tell us “my ideas are so crazy, even I’m going to vote for Obama”?

      Inquiring minds want to know!

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I hope you didn’t break SUFA with that!

        I would bet good money, if I had any, that Romney DOES NOT vote for Obama. But I wonder if he would vote for Hillary?

  25. What back assward times we are in:

    “And as the US government continues to control a sizable chunk of GM after the $50 billion bailout, the Obama administration on Monday filed a complaint with the WTO alleging China’s government of unfairly… subsidizing its auto industry. What’s next? Accusing Hu Jintao of unfairly using a teleprompter?”

    Remember how just two weeks ago, at the DNC convention the “GM is alive; OBL is dead” thing was all the rage? Well we know how popular that OBL bragging thing has gone over and now the truth of GM is alive is slowly creeping out too.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2012/09/17/invested-gm-billions/

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Kathy

      And lets not forget the deliberate “devaluing” of the dollar by the FED. How is that different?

      By the way, my response to your question about Gary Johnson. I think it was you anyway.

      He was successful as a governor in CUTTING govt spending. He has been truthful about our situation and what is required to deal with the fiscal cliff.

      This makes him a better leader in my view. Honest about the situation, clear on goals to be achieved, and articulates a solution. It happens to involve everyone getting hurt.

      He obviously lacks the “charisma” or “speechifying” abilities of some. But I go back to some of the best Governors I know were similar in their manner.

      But here is a kicker, although I might not like the outcome. If Mr. Johnson were elected you would see the Dems and Reps quickly form an alliance to negate the power of the “LIBERTARIAN”. Although he is more a “l’ libertarian not “L”. So simply by getting elected and then proposing his version of a solution he would break the gridlock.

      Besides, he has a lot more experience that Mr. Obama had when he got elected. 😉

      Yes, I am feeling a little mischievous today.

  26. Just A Citizen says:

    I wonder why this is not the primary discussion from Romney’s tape, instead of his comment about “moochers”?

    From Drudge Report:

    “US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney questioned the feasibility of the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, according to video footage published Tuesday by US magazine Mother Jones.

    “I’m torn by two perspectives in this regard,” Romney said at a $50,000-per-plate fundraising dinner on May 17. “One is the one which I’ve had for some time, which is that the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace, and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish.”

    Romney then launched into a hypothetical scenario in which Israelis allow the Palestinians to establish a state in the West Bank but are then forced to contend with unsolvable security and border issues.

    It is “maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank,” he said, repeating an oft-cited Israeli security concern alleging that an opposing Arab army in the West Bank could cut Israel in half horizontally in a matter of minutes. “And now how about the airport?” he asked.

    Romney said that the Palestinians would demand full control over its own borders, and suggested they could open access to military armaments. “And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did near Gaza. Which is that the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel.”

    Concluding that the Palestinians remain “committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel,” the US presidential candidate endorsed a strategy of maintaining the status quo. “You move things along the best way you can,” he said. “You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem.””

    Sounds like a LEADER to me. And a REALISTIC LEADER to boot. 🙂

    • charlieopera says:

      Sounds like a LEADER to me. And a REALISTIC LEADER to boot

      Yeah, he’s a friggin’ genius. So much so you can run him again in 2016 after he loses in November …:)

  27. Washington Secrets
    80 million hours needed to tackle Obamacare tax rules

    The Washington Examiner

    A week after small businesses warned that Obamacare taxes will eat up to half of their profits, a new government report reveals that simply complying with the new tax rules in the health care act will cost American families and businesses nearly 80 million hours–essentially a whole new tax.

    Based on Internal Revenue Service figures, the House Committee on Ways and Means has compiled an estimate of the total amount of hours it will take to comply with the tax rules. The bottom line: 79,229,503 hours, most of which will fall on small businesses.

    For fun, the committee gave a comparative example.

    “So, what can be done in 79,229,503 hours? The Empire State building, which took 7 million man-hours to build, could be constructed 11 times. The Curiosity Lander could travel from Earth to Mars 13,048 times. Halley’s comet, seen from Earth once every 76 years, could be spotted 119 times.”

    The committee said that Obamacare has resulted in thousands of pages in IRS and Treasury rules including 17 regulations, 5 revenue procedures, 2 revenue rulings, and 14 Treasury decisions.

    “Given the enormous impact the regulations will have on job creators, it is no wonder that a recent survey found that over 70 percent of small businesses cite the health care law as a major obstacle to job creation,” said the panel headed by Rep. David Camp.

    • charlieopera says:

      Very weak, LOI … no way this is going to sidetrack the issue of the day … that your nominee feels he doesn’t need to bother with 47% of the American public because they’re moochers anyway. Ayn Rand couldn’t have put it better her own hypocritical self. Never mind the job creating nonsense. You’d better start working on how to keep a Congressional majority …:)

      • sidetrack the issue of the day …
        sidetrack the issue of the day …
        sidetrack the issue of the day … Wait, who says that’s the issue of the day? Add to that, why are we limited to one issue?
        What about Libya? They are now claiming the US/Obama had two-three days warning. Did team Obama ignore warnings that cost four Americans their lives? What about Chicago? The Obama you voted for promised to march with them. Where is he when they need him to overcome Rahm, the Man? He will get a judge to rule tomorrow! They are out of time! Obama! Obama!

        Obama can’t run on his record so he and the media are attacking Romney for any/everything. And you are just playing along. OK, have fun.
        But it reminds me of a kid farting then blaming his little brother.

        Rodeo clown media frantically distract from Obama’s foreign policy disaster

        Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/rodeo_clown_media_frantically_distract_from_obamas_foreign_policy_disaster.html#ixzz26qa49Qmd

    • Displaced Okie says:

      It’s like it is conversly porportional to the amount of hours Congress spent while getting it implemented.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Okie

        I was thinking of you the other day and hoping you were still safe.

        Keep yer powder dry and yer head down.

        I think your conclusion would fit many things invented by the Govt.

        • Displaced Okie says:

          Howdy JAC, I still try to read here as much as possible, but it’s usually later in the day after all the good discussion has ended….plus, you usually have already said what I was thinking anyway, and far more eloquently. 🙂

          • charlieopera says:

            So, Okie, I take it you’re not part of the 47% …:)

            • Nope, but I was raised around it. The town where I grew up is around 2/3 Indian, due to this fact I got to witness the utter failure of giving people something they didn’t earn and how despicably evil it is to make people willing defendant slaves. I watched most of my friends, kids with brains, talent, etc…fail, mostly due having no drive or ambition because they had been placated by a system that rewarded them for just existing. When things got even moderately tough, they just gave up because they could go back to their comfortable albeit fairly poor, but infinitely easier lifestyle. In my experience, giving people stuff they didn’t earn just serves to neuter them and it has ruined far more lives than it has ever helped. Couple that with stealing from the people who do work and really fleecing the ones who succeed and all you do is pit people against each other. But what do I know, I am white trash kid, who didn’t get any of the free cookies and made it out on my own because I couldn’t give up and had no safety net.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                okie

                This is me standing tall at attention, big brimmed had in left hand with right hand SALUTING one displaced Okie.

                I would have put up the John Wayne pledge for you but it eats up space. 🙂

  28. charlieopera says:
    • Isn’t he the guy that loves LA? Doesn’t speak for anybody I know…

      • charlieopera says:

        I suspect he speaks for the 53% of the 1%’ers Mitt Romney knows … 🙂

        • So what Charlie? So what?
          You suspect we hate Obama because he’s black.
          You suspect we hate Obama because he’s for gay marriage and we hate gays.
          You suspect we hate Obama because he’s tolerant of Muslims, and we hate all Muslims
          You suspect we hate Obama because he’s trying to punish the rich, who we worship and adore.
          You suspect we hate Obama because he’s against guns, and we want our wild, wild west shootouts on every street corner.

          You suspect everything we say or do and ascribe the lowest reasoning for us while rejecting our words of defense.
          We do not like Obama’s policies. Despite his talk, wallstreet has done well under him while the poor are getting desperate.
          Everything costs more, including healthcare.
          Other than OBL being dead, is there a single thing he’s done that has made anything better?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Is this a surprise or something??

      Certainly you aren’t providing this as proof of any “objectivity” in the law. At least I hope not.

      • So….what are your thoughts on the case and holding then?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Buck

          I do not know the details in Pennsylvania. As you know I DO NOT believe voter ID is a disenfranchisement and I believe the “excuses” given by the DNC are a bunch of baloney.

          But I don’t know the particulars of the Penn. law and its implementation. So I can’t really comment on that.

          I will offer this, however. If the State Supreme Court thought there was in fact a serious question/problem then I side with the “liberals” on the court. It should have simply issued the injunction and then ordered the lower court to address the issues. Once addressed the injunction could then be lifted.

          • Generally speaking, a state supreme court will not order an injunction given there remains a question of fact at issue. The state supreme court gave clear guidance as to under what circumstances the injunction must be granted and remanded to the lower court to make the decision.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Buck

              From what I read it sounded like the Supreme Court pretty much concluded they thought a problem existed. They just didn’t want to make the decision.

              I know that technically you may be correct. But it sure sounded like they were telling the lower court what its “findings” should be.

              • Correct — but there still remained a question of fact to be formally decided by the lower court.

              • Don’t bother with it until after the elections….you better have a picture ID in Texas or a voter registration card that requires a picture ID to get one or your vote will not be counted. Texas is still going to check regardless of the Justice Departments interference. In the primary last month, I had to submit a picture ID. Cool.

              • Colonel — in my reading of the PA decision, had this not been tried to been rammed through right before the election, it would probably have been upheld. So you would be correct — “don’t bother with it until after the elections”

              • Agreed and I read it the same way….if I were Pennsylvania, I would do it anyway. I do not think that the Justice Department would have the “cajones” to disavow election results in the 28 states that want id for elections. We shall see….I really think that we are serious on this and will ID people….we did last month.

              • So much for the rule of law….

              • Buck, didn;t you once tell me something to the effect that sometimes it is necessary to rock the boat to correct a perceived wrong?

              • HOwever, if the rule of law is being broken, then the Justice Department would be in its rights to take action, correct? I wonder…..and this is a legit question, do you think that they would?

              • I don’t know Colonel, I just don’t know. While the feds would be within its rights to take action if the rule of law is being broken, doing so could have an adverse political effect, and not just for Obama in particular, but for the fed gov’t in general.

              • Agreed Buck, agreed.

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    charlie

    Why didn’t Mr. Obama VOLUNTEER to serve in the military??? He could have VOLUNTEERED to serve in the Gulf War in fact. Instead of running around on those SCHOLARSHIPS smoking dope and snorting coke.

    • charlieopera says:

      Hey, JAC, I don’t see Obama holding up protest signs for a war. But you’re right … except your guy has 5 sons he made sure avoided “FIGHTING FOR LIBERTY” … liberty this, pal … it’s an aristocracy and you’re defending it. 47% moochers … that mean the other 53% are the 1%?

      You gotta love it … great businessman my ass.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        charlie

        You are a liar among other things. WHEN have I supported or defended the “aristocracy”???

        Just because I see the difference between bad and outright evil? Sorry but Obama = evil and Romney = bad. How does that sound like “support” or “defending”???

        • charlieopera says:

          You are a liar among other things

          What other things, pre tell?

          If you defend a guy who mocks 47% of the population and he happens to b a 1%er, you pretty much support aristocracy in my eyes … but don’t let that blind you, my man. To me, Romney = Evil, Obama = Bad. we cancel each other out. Too bad the vast majority of the voting public will turn your guy out come November … bada-boom, bada-bing.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            charlie

            He is NOT my guy. Another lie.

            I AM MY OWN GUY.

            But the guy I am voting for is Gary Johnson.

            How about you? Got the brass to follow up on your ranting? You going to vote Green or Red or what ever your communist party is?

            • I’m considering a vote for Jill Stein this year…

            • charlieopera says:

              Not this year, JAc. I usually vote socialist party, but this year (as I’ve already stated), I’ll be voting for Obama because of Paul Rand (anyone who publicly acknowledges that witch is poison to me). Romney alone is enough, but adding that little loser did the trick.

    • JAC……does the term fragging mean anything?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13

        Yes Sir it does!!

        Do you have someone in mind? Or are you thinking my efforts amount to a self inflicted version?

        Hope all is well with you this fine day.

        Still hot and dry with no rain in sight. Funny how nature always has a way of making the year come out close to “average”.

        • And, before anyone here gets their panties in a wad, my response as to fraggin was in answer to the question of volunteering for the service. I am not advocating it for a sitting President. That is my OFFICIAL position.

  30. 129 inmates still on the run after escape from Mexican border prison

    Published September 18, 2012

    Associated Press

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/18/132-inmates-escape-from-mexican-border-prison-officials-say/#ixzz26qggaUqu

    Gee….it is only 132 inmates……..why is everybody so upset…..three were shot crossing the border by ranchers (Mexico is mad about that) (What part of stop in English and ALTO in Spanish did they not understand)….the rest, well they have disappeared into the evening mist. Amazing….not just three or four but 132……target practice.

  31. GO JAC!

  32. Interesting, found a Mike Wallace 1959 interview with Ayn Rand. Sorry to bring this back but it’s kind of an interesting opportunity to have a fair but left leaning journalist interview the leading proponent of objectivism.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      S.K.

      I hadn’t listened to this in awhile. Forgot how “snarky” Wallace was.

      But this time I noticed something I missed before. Wallace uses the phrase “trickle down” when questioning her on economics and how she expects certain things to happen.

      I had always assumed the “left” grabbed hold of this phrase with Reagan. But apparently it has a longer history.

      Must do some more reading. I am now curious where this originates. Wonder why I expect I will find it in some Marxian writing someplace.

      • charlieopera says:

        Trickle down … I.e., like crumbs from the cake.

        Enough with the crumbs. We do the work, we want the Cake!

  33. The Democratic Party’s national convention in Charlotte, N.C., may have doubled down on insulting the U.S. military community.

    The Democratic National Committee has already apologized for using a photo of four Soviet-era Russian warships in a giant stage backdrop intended to illustrate the party’s support for military personnel and veterans.

    That huge image, visible in the Time Warner Cable Arena during speeches by Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and retired Admiral John B. Nathman, also depicted a synchronized formation of jet aircraft that convention-goers assumed were American fighter planes.

    But the F-5 fighter planes in the photo are part of the air force of Turkey, a nation whose government is now jailing journalists and establishing Islam as a state religion.

    Brad Woodhouse, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, did not respond when the The Daily Caller asked why the convention planners displayed Turkish-flown aircraft alongside Russian warships while seeking support from the American military community.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/17/fighter-jets-in-democratic-conventions-military-montage-were-turkish-not-american/#ixzz26qvFHqVE

    • charlieopera says:

      And let’s not forget how many times the GOP candidate mentioned the war in Afghanistan … ZERO, right. Talk about insulting the military. Oh, right, maybe because he and his boys dodged it on their way to the kingdom … 🙂

      • Depends on your expectations Charlie. None of us are among the “elite, intelligent” crowd. But you want to change the subject when they screw the pooch. Just compare their convention to the RNC’s for major mistakes. Russian ships and Turkish fighters to honor US military, God and Israel omitted from platform, added by a sham vote to boo’s and catcalls.

        • charlieopera says:

          Russian ships and Turkish fighters to honor US military

          Please tell me you’re not SERIOUS!

          • Only to the point that if you can’t get the simple stuff right what about the complicated?

            I believe it was Larry bell, founder of Bell Aircraft who said:

            “Show me a man who can’t be bothered to do little things and I’ll show you a man who can’t be trusted to do big things”.

            Nuff said!

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Damn, he didn’t mention Mars or Pluto either. I sure hope they aren’t all insulted as well.

        Do you honestly think the military personnel are going to feel insulted because Romney gave a speech on Afghanistan on Wed but did not mention it one week later at the Convention?

        Really??

        • charlieopera says:

          Considering the fact he seems so anxious to go to war with Iran, yeah, I sure do. They (the military) must be less relevant than the 47% he did bother to mention …:)

          • Charlie…..my friend….you have not been paying attention…..Romney does not want to go to war with Iran…..

            And the military has always been less relevant when civilians are in charge.

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    I just heard the ACTUAL audio of Romney’s comments at the fundraiser. The COMPLETE audio. I must say I did make one mistake in responding to Charlie’s ridiculous claim: “Very weak, LOI … no way this is going to sidetrack the issue of the day … that your nominee feels he doesn’t need to bother with 47% of the American public because they’re moochers anyway.”

    I misunderstood the comment to be similar to his other comments about not worrying about the poor right now because they have the net in place.

    But that is NOT what he was talking about in this tape. Nor is he dismissing the 47% of Americans, blah, blah blah.

    What he is saying to the donors is that his job in running is to not worry about those he knows he cannot win regardless. That he must focus on the 53% that can be convinced to vote for him.

    So the media response is even more egregious now than what I thought before.

    Something is very, very, very wrong this election cycle. Things are not behaving normally and I cannot figure out what is going on, why it is going on, or who is behind it.

    The narratives immediately following the conventions rapidly accelerated in a strange direction. Especially this narrative that Romney’s campaign is in trouble. Premature panic??? Premeditated sabotage????

    Polling data showing a huge Obama gain, before any real effect of the campaign or conventions should have hit home. Now new polling showing the gap closing again. Why?? Nothing but bad news for Romney and Gallup Poll shows closer today than last week???

    Something is amiss.

    • JAC,

      I don’t see any change. As I’ve been watching all these events, it’s been pretty much what I expected except for how far FOX has gone to support Romney. They cannot claim “fair and balanced” anymore. We are at a tipping point, if Obama wins, come the next election there will be more than 51% dependent on the government for some form of assistance. You understand how hard it would be to ever reverse that once that point is reached. The media are simply doing what it takes to achieve their agenda.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        LOI

        Oh there is a definite change. There is a much more “organized” feel to the media reactions. Perhaps it is because they are letting the “new media” dictate the news cycle and commentary. The tail is wagging the dog.

    • September 18, 2012
      The Cloward-Piven way
      Bruce Johnson

      If the Cloward and Piven agenda were being implemented, would it look any different?

      In all likelihood, they would be delighted with the massive deficits and the “spillage” that is the lax implementation of government entitlements.

      A 1966 Article by Columbia Professors Cloward and Piven was a hot topic for awhile, but has since fell from attention. But isn’t now the time to reconsider exactly how this administration is steering people into record government program participation?

      Some quotes from the 1966 article that reveal the mission. Increase the entitlement roles, redistribute wealth, guarantee income, and reduce qualifications for participating in these programs. Use organizing, demonstrating and a “climate of militancy”.

      “…a political crisis would result that could lead to legislation for a guaranteed annual income”

      “Advocacy must be supplemented by organized demonstrations to create a climate of militancy that will overcome the invidious and immobilizing attitudes which many potential recipients hold toward being “on welfare.”” — Occupy and ACORN

      “The ultimate aim of this strategy is a new program for direct income distribution.”

      “We tend to overlook the force of crisis in precipitating legislative reform, partly because we lack a theoretical framework by which to understand the impact of major disruptions.”

      “By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.”

      This explains the Occupy Movement, and the tacit approval of the Obama Administration.

      This explains the gutting of the Clinton era Welfare requirements by the Obama administration.

      This explains the lack of diligence by administrators in determining who exactly qualifies for Disability. Encouraging people to get on unemployment, then when your 99 weeks are up, go to disability. We won’t check if you meet the requirements.

      This explains why there is a concerted effort to get as many people as possible on Food Stamps, and the lack of oversight diligence here as well.

      “The Social Security Administration improperly awarded disability benefits in more than 25 percent of cases examined between 2006 and 2010, according to a new Senate report — potentially costing taxpayers millions of dollars.” Article

      “The 136-page report focuses on questionable benefits rulings made by administrative law judges, including one in Oklahoma who was found to have awarded more than $1.6 billion in lifetime benefits in just three years. Judge Howard O’Bryan, in Oklahoma City, approved roughly 90 percent of more than 5,400 cases from 2007 to 2009 — most of them held “on-the-record” without hearings, according to the minority report.”

      The “Grand Assumption” that administrators are against waste is disproven by the lax implementation of these programs. Spillage seems to be the intent here.

      Cloward and Piven would be delighted with this Community Organizer. Forward.

      Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/the_cloward-piven_way.html#ixzz26r2RvB00

    • Yep. and expect little videos like this and little hit attacks like Politicos to come out on a consistent basis between now and November. And then the MSM and kids like those on SUFA will jump on them and call them the “issue of the day”. Repeat the lies, repeat the lies, repeat the lies. Reality be damned.

      Obama is losing and everyone knows it. The left is getting desperate and it is ugly and will get worse. They’ve invested EVERYTHING in this progressive movement. It’s beyond despicable and would just be laughable if the ramifications weren’t so serious. Rice’s appearances on TV this weekend were shameful. Now the line from the WH mouth is no more questions on Libya as it’s an ongoing investigation. The message is to bury it, along with the four bodies, and the press does as its told.

      Heard one “journalist” BLAME Romney for preventing the press from reporting adequately on the ME uprisings, as his statement demanded their attention. Reminded me of my kids acting out about something and then blaming me for their behavior, as I had first made them mad about something.

      Something is definitely amiss. The spin is happening so fast it almost does make one dizzy, but now more than ever, it is important to keep the faith and keep on track and just don’t go down all these rabbit holes that the left is digging. I would give this same advice to Romney. Let all those “smart elite” types keep each other company in their dirt and muck.

    • charlieopera says:

      What he is saying to the donors is that his job in running is to not worry about those he knows he cannot win regardless. That he must focus on the 53% that can be convinced to vote for him.

      Too bad you’re not on his campaign … then you could tell more than 20 people just what the fuck Mr. Romney meant … 🙂

    • charlieopera says:

      What makes one crazy is voting for a/the candidate representing the 1% when you’re part of the other 99% …:)
      What makes you batshit crazy, is thinking an Ayn Rand philosophy could work anywhere but on Mars.

  35. charlieopera says:

    Imagine what the 47% will sound like come election day …

  36. charlieopera says:

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    D13

    Colonel, I think I have gotten those Black Helicopters turned around for ya.

    Just sent the chair of the DNC an email calling him out as a LIAR over this Romney tape fiasco. Of course they are sending out spam mail asking for donations from this.

    Anyway, I expect DOJ will have the those ships headed back to Oregon soon.

    Best I could do on short notice. Stay tuned, I may be calling for Raptor reinforcements.

  38. Just A Citizen says:

    Does the Dems crying about Romney not mentioning Afghanistan strike anyone besides me as IRONIC or perhaps a little HYPOCRITICAL.

    You know, those same people screaming about bringing the troops home ASAP.

  39. It their fault:.

    1. George Washington (1732-1799) None, Federalist 1789-1797 John Adams
    2. John Adams (1735-1826) Federalist 1797-1801 Thomas Jefferson
    3. Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) Democratic-Republican 1801-1809 Aaron Burr, George Clinton
    4. James Madison (1751-1836) Democratic-Republican 1809-1817 George Clinton, Elbridge Gerry
    5. James Monroe (1758-1831) Democratic-Republican 1817-1825 Daniel Tompkins
    6. John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) Democratic-Republican 1825-1829 John Calhoun
    7. Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) Democrat 1829-1837 John Calhoun, Martin van Buren
    8. Martin van Buren (1782-1862) Democrat 1837-1841 Richard Johnson
    9. William H. Harrison (1773-1841) Whig 1841 John Tyler
    10. John Tyler (1790-1862) Whig 1841-1845 .
    11. James K. Polk (1795-1849) Democrat 1845-1849 George Dallas
    12. Zachary Taylor (1784-1850) Whig 1849-1850 Millard Fillmore
    13. Millard Fillmore (1800-1874) Whig 1850-1853 .
    14. Franklin Pierce (1804-1869) Democrat 1853-1857 William King
    15. James Buchanan (1791-1868) Democrat 1857-1861 John Breckinridge
    16. Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) Republican 1861-1865 Hannibal Hamlin, Andrew Johnson
    17. Andrew Johnson (1808-1875) National Union 1865-1869 .
    18. Ulysses S. Grant (1822-1885) Republican 1869-1877 Schuyler Colfax
    19. Rutherford Hayes (1822-1893) Republican 1877-1881 William Wheeler
    20. James Garfield (1831-1881) Republican 1881 Chester Arthur
    21. Chester Arthur (1829-1886) Republican 1881-1885 .
    22. Grover Cleveland (1837-1908) Democrat 1885-1889 Thomas Hendriks
    23. Benjamin Harrison (1833-1901) Republican 1889-1893 Levi Morton
    24. Grover Cleveland (1837-1908) Democrat 1893-1897 Adlai Stevenson
    25. William McKinley (1843-1901) Republican 1897-1901 Garret Hobart, Theodore Roosevelt
    26. Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) Republican 1901-1909 Charles Fairbanks
    27. William Taft (1857-1930) Republican 1909-1913 James Sherman
    28. Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) Democrat 1913-1921 Thomas Marshall
    29. Warren Harding (1865-1923) Republican 1921-1923 Calvin Coolidge
    30. Calvin Coolidge (1872-1933) Republican 1923-1929 Charles Dawes
    31. Herbert C. Hoover (1874-1964) Republican 1929-1933 Charles Curtis
    32. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) Democrat 1933-1945 John Garner, Henry Wallace, Harry S. Truman
    33. Harry S Truman (1884-1972) Democrat 1945-1953 Alben Barkley
    34. Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969) Republican 1953-1961 Richard Milhous Nixon
    35. John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1917-1963) Democrat 1961-1963 Lyndon Johnson
    36. Lyndon Baines Johnson (1908-1973) Democrat 1963-1969 Hubert Humphrey
    37. Richard Milhous Nixon (1913-1994) Republican 1969-1974 Spiro Agnew, Gerald R. Ford
    38. Gerald R. Ford (1913- 2006) Republican 1974-1977 Nelson Rockefeller
    39. James (Jimmy) Earl Carter, Jr. (1924- ) Democrat 1977-1981 Walter Mondale
    40. Ronald Wilson Reagan (1911- 2004) Republican 1981-1989 George H. W. Bush
    41. George H. W. Bush (1924- ) Republican 1989-1993 James Danforth (Dan) Quayle
    42. William (Bill) Jefferson Clinton (1946- ) Democrat 1993-2001 Al Gore
    43. George W. Bush (1946- ) Republican 2001-2009 Richard Cheney
    44. Barack Obama (1961- ) Democrat 2009- Joseph Biden

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    V.H.

    Did you watch the Wallace/Rand interview above?? I know you have had some questions in the past so was wondering if you got anything more from the interview.

    I have always wondered about her constant eye motions in that tape. I’m sure we will get a reasonable explanation from Charlie as to the cause. 🙂

    If you have other questions just ask. I will try to answer as best I can.

    • No, I haven’t watched it yet, although I think I’ve seen it before-been sick the last few days-nothing serious-just feel like crap-only reason I’m up at all, is because it is easier to breathe sitting up.

  41. Y’all are funny today. Each side vociferously arguing to the other side when y’all know your not going to change the thinking/beliefs of the other one iota.

    No need to ever watch or listen to all the talking heads when it’s happening right here on SUFA.

    • At least it isn’t face to face! Can you imagine?….We’d still be on no violence on non violent men! 😉

    • Just A Citizen says:

      plainly

      But you are wrong.

      There have been several people who visited here that have “changed their minds”. Many have actually started thinking. Unfortunately some have reached what I would consider bad conclusions, like voting is a waste, but at least those views are now supported by some rational thinking. As opposed to “because”.

      I do find it funny how most of them come from the self described “conservative” side and how few come from the “intellectually elite liberal side”. Those espousing policies and principles that are unsustainable, and most likely to destroy this country in the long term, are the most convinced their position is absolutely correct.

      • JAC,

        But you are wrong.

        There have been several people who visited here that have “changed their minds”.

        Of course I am wrong if I were talking about those who have visited here, which I was not (as i think you may well know). I was speaking of the “regulars” here at SUFA (the core group).

        Unfortunately some have reached what I would consider bad conclusions, like voting is a waste

        That may well be your belief (bad conclusions) but it by no means is the absolute truth in their thinking. To those (like me) who have decided voting for federal office is a waste may just as strongly believe they have reached the “right” conclusion. Wonderful thing personal choice, no?

        but at least those views are now supported by some rational thinking. As opposed to “because”.

        Supposition on your part to my thinking. We can’t know what they think is rational or not if not spoken of clearly. Also I think it interesting you think they made bad conclusions but did so thinking rationally. Dunno, but that sounds cross wired to me.

        • Voting is a waste of time and there has been nothing to refute that other than myths, fantasy, make-believe and wishful hope and prayer.

          I suppose that means voting is like religion, with the same goals: the rise of a Messiah.

          • Regardless, the world will still turn and humans will still be in conflict trying to impose their ideals on those who are against them. And they’ll do so regardless of truth, logic, reason, compassion, or understanding.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          plainly

          I would say the same holds for the regulars of SUFA. When I first came here there were many self proclaimed “conservatives” whose arguments usually amounted to reciting the rhetoric they had heard for decades.

          After many long and difficult discussions there have been many opinions changed. At least they are expressed that way. Now some of those turned Libertarian, a few turned anarchist, although I suspect they were actually libertarian and not conservative when they started. Others have moved from the died in the wool “conservative” to what I would call the Libertarian Conservative or even as far as the VDLG of the Radical Right Wing Liberals.

          Hell, I’ve even moved a tad. Much more accepting of the Anarchist theories than I was before. Although I see them as unworkable in the world today and tomorrow. At the same time, I am more accepting of some Federal controls than before. Not because they are needed in the long run, but because we are so dependent on them, as in “addicted to them”, that immediate change is not possible.

          I suppose nothing about your thinking. I can only comment on what I know from your own comments. From that I know you have some conflicting ideas remaining. Whether you work them out or not is you to decide.

          As for the voting conclusion I stated “some rational thinking”. But the application of “some rational” and thus “some irrational” can get you results that have “conflicts” or the “wrong” answer.

          Yes, it is MY OPINION that it is the wrong conclusion. That is that it is wrong as a statement of absolute truth in a world where we have and will continue to have Government of some kind. In a world where people still accept the notion of “voting” and thus “agreeing with the vote of the majority”. You see, whether your vote, or anyone’s votes, matter totally depends on the nature of the election and the choices available. And it depends on YOUR goals and purpose.

          For BF it is Anarchy. So it follows that VOTING must be denigrated as a “waste of time”. Because once voting occurs you might get some type of Government.

          • No, it is because voting is utterly meaningless.

            You do not pick the candidates – they are provided. You have no choice.

            You do not pick the issues – they are provided. You have no input.

            The promises are not promises – they are lies at worse and idiocy at best. You have no recourse, except to repeat the above process.

            In this process, you think you make a difference or provide change.

            It is utterly a debilitating type of escapism as an attempt to avoid reality of the depravity of one’s political situation.

            • charlieopera says:

              I have to agree with BF on this one. It is an absolute joke (our entire political process). The fault, of course, is where we disagree. I say capitalism requires this ownership of government for the rich, by the rich. BF believes if left alone (no government), things would sort themselves out over time. I don’t see how … and he doesn’t see how capitalism has anything to do with the mess we’re in. So it goes.

              But the actual voting process and what kind of input we as citizens have … nada, nothing … but it is fun to stir the pot from time to time 🙂

              • Ah, old foe!
                This time you are right whilst remaining in error over the ‘who’.

                Capitalism requires no such ownership of government. Government is an abstraction, not property.

                But you say that about mercantilists, and we’ll share a keg of beer in agreement. Ownership of government is a basic necessity of mercantilism- where else would they get the jack-boot troops to enforce their trade and cartels?

                Things do sort themselves out most of the time if you leave them alone – as Twain quipped: “I have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened.”

                But as I’ve said before, you are a keen observer, and I expected that the voting charade would not fool you (and others) for a second.

          • I have certainly changed over the last few years, thats for sure. I’m not sure yet if it’s for the better or worse, but one thing that hasn’t changed is my love of comedy and helping people laugh 🙂 Despite all the bad in our world, I can still find humor and good things and people. You know who you are 🙂 I just wish the evil out there wasn’t so prevelant and so invisible to so many. Sad, really, that voting has come down to which crime family you want in charge. With our debt and unfunded govt promises totaling some, what 200 trillion, or some insane number, so many are brainwashed into voting again for more of the same, because you believe things can change. Things will not change one ioda, regardless of who wins. Noone in politics can fix the mess we are in, and we will all suffer at some point soon. Please vote, if the election happens, tell them that corruption and theft is OK, which is what your vote is doing. In 2016, if we survive that long, it will be a repeat. I am bored with lies and theft. THey, in our Fed govt, are nothing more than psychopaths (sp?) . Vote! Because you are only voting for your grandchildrens slavery to the State!

            • charlieopera says:

              Because you are only voting for your grandchildrens slavery to the State!

              That or serfdom …:)

          • Maybe so JAC,

            But what I read here in the “now” period is two entrenched groups expressing themselves with no real chance, in my opinion, of changing their stands on the current political ideologies. At times there are portions of an argument that the opposite states some agreement with, yet seldom will that agreement be met with any real change of thinking.

            Maybe because it is an election year the rhetoric gets more heated and the debate comes down to a political figures character and not to debate over positive change. This “who shows leadership” fight that has brewed up has, or likely will, not change the fundamental beliefs of anyone.

            I liked Buck’s (I believe it was him) challenge for the right to articulate what they believe was a positive accomplishment by Obama and why, as well as the biggest negative accomplishment and why. Yet, it seemed no one really wanted to give reply to the challenge. Instead there was a lot of “oh no, you first” kind of thing going back and forth. Now, I would like to see the left take up the challenge of doing the same where Romney is concerned. To my thinking that would be substantive debate.

            And I guess that’s where I see many have decided not to go and instead stick to the minutia of argument over what one meant or “really” said. There are times where I see each side trying to make a valid debate occur, yet that attempt meets with ridicule or name calling or some such nonsense that does nothing worthwhile.

            I can agree with the right at times, the left others, and even BF at times. I wish more would take off their shirt color and switch to the color shirt of the “opposition” and try to find common ground by looking at the topic from the other side. Get away from the constant rehashing of your (not your as you, but your as a political view) theories and go try to promote the other instead. Seems to me that would really bring about real thought to whatever the overall argument is at the moment.

            Come November the people will choose and really it makes no difference to me who gets the Big Chair (as BF calls it). Whoever it is will have no more impact on the nation’s future as any President ever really has (yes, there are some exceptions – but their impact wasn’t necessarily good). Stop fighting over an ideology and fight for society. The right is no more assured of being correct as the left is (nor do those of us who choose to be independent are any more likely to be correct). Scorning the values of the opposition will not foster any positive change, it will just assure a continued see-saw ride for all of society.

            Well, I guess that’s all I can say on this. Hell, maybe it doesn’t even make sense? I fail to see why humanity continues to hate themselves so much, for surely we are capable of better.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              plainly

              Actually you made a lot of sense and I agree with much.

              My point about change at SUFA is on the fundamental thinking and principles that support our political beliefs. Some here will vote Republican just as they always have. But where it used to be “because” I always vote Republican it is now “its better than the alternative” because we need time to build more Radical Right Wing Liberals. There are some who hung and some who still hang here who are still going Republican but are working to CHANGE that Party more towards liberty and away from Progressive philosophy.

              I think much of the petty debates lately have all been over CANDIDATES. And I agree that at this point in time, everyone who has expressed an opinion on SUFA has made up their mind. Although Buck says he is still considering going GREEN.

              I was with you pretty good until you got to your last points. I should wait until my brain is more awake to take that on but let me just mention one.

              To abandon and ideology is to abandon a man’s principles. To abandon ideology for the sake of a non entity, society, is a very dangerous position to take. Unless you really do not care about Freedom or Liberty or even Justice for that matter. We all to often complain about ideology getting in the way without thinking about what that really means. It has become a cliche which when used improperly becomes a rationalization for “there is no good or there is no such thing as truth and thus reality is unknowable”.

              Am I to give up my ideology just to get along with a Communist for example? Am I to compromise with evil, just because Society demands I compromise? For the good of what? I think you get the idea.

              I actually think much of the grid lock in DC is really not ideological. Unfortunately. It is more just plain political.

              • Political stances may be better what I meant than ideology. Maybe I have just lost faith in the politics of divisiveness, which in the current political atmosphere rears it’s ugly head. I doubt this is the first time it has been so in our history, and likely will not be the last.

                I just have the feeling that the fight is over too many inconsequential things in some areas and downright selfish in others. Politics has been twisted into an argument of one side depriving the other it seems (to me at least), making the rallying cry of “give no quarter.” It brings forth a lot of hate – I do not mean individuals either (though that can be the case at times too) – but of concepts for society to follow. I find our political system extremely dysfunctional and wonder if there will ever be change for the better. I suspect if this continues the time will come when that dysfunction will be the destruction of the nation.

                I am really tired and should stop trying to express myself as I think maybe I am doing a poor job of it.

              • charlieopera says:

                Am I to give up my ideology just to get along with a Communist for example? Am I to compromise with evil, just because Society demands I compromise? For the good of what? I think you get the idea.

                compromise with “evil” … well, JAC, although I don’t consider you personally evil (that would be dumb), your philosophy is something I avoid at all costs. Fortunately, as times goes by, there will be more and more of us evils (as the gap widens and widens) … reality is what I suspect you hard liners on the right need to deal with … you won’t be able to dictate policy through money forever. At some point, it’ll bite you in the ass … hard. It always has (see revolutions over time) and always will. The shame is it’ll be a lot messier than it needs to be. But you keep clinging to that liberty and freedom bullshit you’re trying to sell, that’ll be your rollercoaster to the abyss some day. Liberty and freedom for the wealthy, slaves and serfs for the rest of the Moochers … 🙂

              • Meanwhile,D13, sitting under a mesquite tree, sips the cold beverage of this choice, clean weapon at his side………

      • charlieopera says:

        Many have actually started thinking

        They were brainwashed …

  42. Johnstown, PA (GlossyNews) – Local and state police scoured the hills outside rural Johnstown, Pennsylvania, after reports of three animal rights activists going missing after attempting to protest the wearing of leather at a large motorcycle gang rally this weekend. Two others, previously reported missing, were discovered by fast food workers “duct taped inside fast food restaurant dumpsters,” according to police officials.

    “Something just went wrong,” said a still visibly shaken organizer of the protest. “Something just went horribly, horribly, wrong.” The organizer said a group of concerned animal rights activist groups, “growing tired of throwing fake blood and shouting profanities at older women wearing leather or fur coats,” decided to protest the annual motorcycle club event “in a hope to show them our outrage at their wanting to use leather in their clothing and motor bike seats.” “In fact,” said the organizer, “motorcycle gangs are one of the biggest abusers of wearing leather, and we decided it was high time that we let them know that we disagree with them using it, ergo, they should stop.”

    According to witnesses, protesters arrived at the event in a vintage 1960’s era Volkswagen Van and began to pelt the gang members with balloons filled with red colored water, simulating blood, and shouting “you’re murderers” to passers by. This, evidently, is when the brouhaha began.

    “They peed on me!!!” charged one activist. “They grabbed me, said I looked like I was French, started calling me ‘La Trene’, and duct taped me to a tree so they could pee on me all day!”

    Still others claimed they were forced to eat hamburgers and hot dogs under duress. Those who resisted were allegedly held down while several bikers “farted on their heads.”

    Police officials declined comments on any leads or arrests due to the ongoing nature of the investigation; however, organizers for the motorcycle club rally expressed “surprise” at the allegations.

    “That’s preposterous,”said one high-ranking member of the biker organizing committee. “We were having a party, and these people showed up and were very rude to us. They threw things at us, called us names, and tried to ruin the entire event. So, what did we do? We invited them to the party! What could be more friendly than that? You know, just because we are all members of motorcycle clubs does not mean we do not care about inclusiveness. Personally, I think it shows a lack of character for them to be saying such nasty things about us after we bent over backwards to make them feel welcome.”

    When confronted with the allegations of force-feeding the activists meat, using them as ad hoc latrines, leaving them incapacitated in fast food restaurant dumpsters, and ‘farting on their heads,’ the organizer declined to comment in detail.
    “That’s just our secret handshake,” assured the organizer.

    • charlieopera says:

      Those who resisted were allegedly held down while several bikers “farted on their heads.”

      This can be great fun. Me and my sons used to play this game when they lived with me on Long Island. Headshots … if one of us was passing the other(s) while they were seated, a headshot was worth 2 points. Of course this can only be played without women in the area (they ruin everything) …

      • Were you with Mitt Romney for that haircutting thing?

        • charlieopera says:

          Unfortunate incident, but I wouldn’t condemn him for being a young asshole. We’re all been (and continue to be) assholes. It happens. I have a MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM WITH HIM HOLDING THE PRO VIETNAM WAR SIGNS AT STANFORD, then using his Church to avoid the same war. He’s an over privileged f***face, plain and simple. And his disdain for those who aren’t like him is obvious. I’m taking great pleasure in watching this imbecile not being able to buy what he wants so dearly.

          • Didja ever stop to think that just about every American is an overprivliged asshole compared to the rest of the world. Ever see how Obama’s brother lives in Kenya? We have the richest poor in the world. What we need is an equitable distribution of wealth world wide. What’s that the President says? We represent 2% of the world’s population yet use 25% of the resources? We, the good old US of A. are the 1% from the folks in the projects to the folks in Beverly Hills, we are the 1%. How ya like dat?

            As I said before, I was in the service with a bunch of Mormons, almost all of whom did the same as George. He was luckier than most in that when he returned, the draft had gone pouf! Married with a kid also bought him a get home free card back in those days. Having three sons involved in the military myself, two still in the reserve, I have more of an issue with his offspring but, what else is new? Nobody feels obligated anymore which is why this place is doomed.

            The election of Bill Clinton gave every draft dodger in the country a pass on that war.

    • “A word to the wise ain’t necessary, it’s the stupid ones who need the advice.”

      Bill Cosby quotes

      • Let’s have a freedom club party, do this to every politician and lobbyist in DC and have them laying down so the ladies can give them their proper due 🙂 THe Czars can do trash duty and Mooshell can carry the pooper scooper and clean up!

        • Now G-I think you know that I would not agree with or participate in something so cruel and crude.

          I am only commenting on the stupidity of going there in the first place. But I do, however think that people who believe that they Just have the right to attack other people, deserve some type of come -uppance. But I have to admit that I couldn’t help but laugh while reading most of it. 🙂

          • All in jest 🙂 I would prefer to just hang the bastards in DC, it’s faster. But it is funny thinking about havin them strung up for that reason, although impractical. Just for fun 😆

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    Time for a little change of pace. OK, I said “little”, not complete. 🙂

    Economic Blinders
    By Peter G. Klein
    Tuesday, September 18th, 2012

    Paul Krugman isn’t the only Princeton economist producing sloppy and ill-informed newspaper columns. Alan Blinder weighs in with a September 6 Wall Street Journal column on the “stark” [sic] differences between the economic programs of Obama and Romney-Ryan. Blinder starts out well enough:

    The Rooseveltian consensus embodied three main elements: a modest social safety net to protect vulnerable Americans from some of the downsides of unfettered markets, Keynesian-style policies to shorten recessions, and a progressive tax-transfer system to mitigate income inequality (albeit only slightly).

    The two political parties certainly had their differences between the 1930s and the 2000s, but the broad consensus often had bipartisan support. Thus Eisenhower built public infrastructure; Nixon declared himself a Keynesian and established the Environmental Protection Agency; both Reagan and Bush II acted like Keynesians; Bush I promised a “kinder, gentler nation” and Bush II expanded Medicare—unfortunately, without a way to pay for it.

    One can quibble with his characterization of the modern welfare state as a “modest social safety net,” and sensible people understand that Keynesian-style policies create and prolong, not shorten, recessions. But it’s true that all establishment political figures since the 1930s, Democrat or Republican, embrace FDR and Keynes. Unfortunately, Blinder then goes off the rails: “But with Messrs. Romney and Ryan, it’s out with Franklin Roosevelt and in with Ayn Rand.”

    This attempted bon mot illustrates the vapidity of American political and economic discourse. Paul Ryan says a few nice things about Ayn Rand, F. A. Hayek, and even Mises, and this makes him a devotee of “unfettered markets”! Blinder offers few specifics to illustrate Romney and Ryan’s deviations from the Rooseveltian consensus. He mentions the Ryan budget — that radical document proposing to slash federal spending from 22% of GDP to 20% of GDP, some $5 trillion of annual largesse, by 2040, which is practically tomorrow! A veritable John Galt, that Paul Ryan. And Blinder reminds us that Romney and Ryan have pledged to repeal Dodd-Frank, without which we would have a completely unfettered, unregulated, free-market banking sector. Get ready for dog-eat-dog! The list goes on — Romney and Ryan want the government to provide medicare vouchers, rather than pay medicare bills directly, which certainly sounds like a total free market in medicine to me.

    Blinder ends on this unfortunate note: “President Obama stands with President Eisenhower’s emphasis on building infrastructure, with President Reagan’s willingness to raise taxes to reduce the deficit, and with President George H.W. Bush’s call for a kinder, gentler economic policy. Mitt Romney stands with Barry Goldwater and Herbert Hoover.” As Murray Rothbard famously pointed out (1, 2), and most serious historians now acknowledge, Hoover was Roosevelt before Roosevelt was cool. So indeed, Romney stands with Hoover — as does Obama — but not in the sense that Blinder means it.

  44. VH,

    Was listening earlier to the news when they brought up the abandonment of Father/daughter dances and Mother/son events. Governor Chafee came on briefly and said. “These are different times”, “We have to be sensitive to the feelings of our children”.

    When I told this to the bride, she got up on that high horse of hers and said “Yes, but what about the other children? What about the 99%? (or some close number).”

    My comment is more like, I now know why I am happy Governor Chafee is no longer affiliated with the Republican Party and Just how in the hell are our “sensitive” little darlings going to stand up to the rigors of defending Western civilization against militant Islam, let alone life in the the everyday real world?

    Seems to me that with Bobby having two mommies and Barbie having two dads, it is fundamentally unfair to have “Mothers” or “Fathers” day inflicted on them. Might make ’em feel bad. I have this cartoon in my head for years where one receptionist at the sperm bank says to the other , “Where do we put all these Father’s Day cards?” Yeah, I know it’s sick.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      S.K.

      I wonder who will get their tails in a knot next over the Sadie Hawkins Dance? Or perhaps the Ball, or the 50’s or 60’s or 70’s or 80’s or the Disco or …..????????

      Hell, might as well just stop Dancing. I guess the left has accomplished with its Political Correctness what the hard core bible thumpers could not get accomplished……………… Here is where I would insert the theme song from Foot Loose, but I’m trying to not gum up the site with youtube clips like I did last week.

  45. Emails show Justice working with Media Matters on stories that target critics

    Published September 18, 2012

    FoxNews.com

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/18/emails-show-justice-working-with-media-matters-to-target-critics/?test=latestnews#ixzz26uwsR0II

    Isn’t this supposed to be illegal? Or is this more “selective” enforcement?

  46. Wearing a Viet Nam vet hat to Wal-Mart
    >
    > A few days ago my best friend from high school sent me a ‘Viet Nam
    > Veteran’
    > cap. I never had one of these before, and I was pretty hyped about it,
    > especially because my friend was considerate enough to take the time to
    > send
    > it to me.
    > Yesterday, I wore it when I went to Wal-Mart. There was nothing in
    > particular that I needed at the world’s largest retailer; but, since I
    > retired, trips to Wally World to look at the Walmartians is always good
    > for
    > some comic relief. Besides, I always feel pretty normal after seeing some
    > of
    > the people that frequent the establishment. But, I digress… enough of
    > my
    > psychological fixations.
    > While standing in line to check out, the guy in front of me, probably in
    > his
    > early thirties, asked, “Are you a Viet Nam Vet?”
    > “No,” I replied.
    > “Then why are you wearing that cap?”
    > “Because I couldn’t find the one from the War of 1812.” I thought it was a
    > snappy retort.
    > “The War of 1812, huh?” the Walmartian queried, “When was that?”
    > God forgive me, but I couldn’t pass up such an opportunity. “1936,” I
    > answered as straight-faced as possible.
    > He pondered my response for a moment and responded, “Why do they call it
    > the
    > War of 1812 if it was in 1936?”
    > “It was a Black Op. No one is supposed to know about it.” This was
    > beginning
    > to be way fun!
    > “Dude! Really?” he exclaimed. “How did you get to do something that
    > COOOOL?”
    > I glanced furtively around me for effect, leaned toward the guy and in a
    > low
    > voice said, “I’m not sure. I was the only Caucasian on the mission.”
    > “Dude,” he was really getting excited about what he was hearing, “that is
    > seriously awesome! But, didn’t you kind of stand out?”
    > “Not really. The other guys were wearing white camouflage.”
    > The moron nodded knowingly.
    > “Listen man,” I said in a very serious tone, “You can’t tell anyone about
    > this. It’s still ‘top secret’ and I shouldn’t have said anything.”
    > “Oh yeah?” he gave me the ‘don’t threaten me look.’ “Like, what’s gonna
    > happen if I do?”
    > With a really hard look I said, “You have a family don’t you? We wouldn’t
    > want anything to happen to them, would we?”
    > The guy gulped, left his basket where it was and fled through the door. By
    > this time the lady behind me was about to have a heart attack she was
    > laughing so hard. I just grinned at her.
    > After checking out and going to the parking lot I saw Dimwit leaning in a
    > car window talking to a young woman. Upon catching sight of me he started
    > pointing excitedly in my direction. Giving him another ‘deadly’ serious
    > look
    > I made the ‘I see you’ gesture. He turned kind of pale, jumped in the car
    > and sped out of the parking lot.
    > What a great time! Tomorrow I’m going back with my Homeland Security cap.
    > Whoever said retirement is boring just needs the right kind of cap!
    >
    >
    > I think that guy had a zerO sticker on his car! ! ! !
    >

  47. HOW DID YOU LIVE ALL THESE YEARS WITHOUT KNOWING THIS?

    THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND

    In the original native culture of Thailand, when males reached the age
    of 18 they had to participate in the following community ceremony:-

    They lay themselves stark naked in a large circle, feet facing inward.
    A beautiful young naked girl kneels over the ankles of each the men.

    She places a blob of honey and various crushed sweet fruits around
    his navel to attract flies and insects.

    (This keeps them off his face during the ceremony)

    A specially chosen nubile and very beautiful naked girl then does a
    sexy and sensuous dance in the center of the circle.

    As soon as all the men become fully aroused and develop erections, the
    kneeling girls then reach over the knees, pull the fully erected penises
    downwards as much as they can and then on a given signal from the
    center dancer release them.

    The men’s penises would then spring back up and go “WHAP!” against
    their belly buttons.

    This exercise was a measurement of the strength of their masculinity . . .
    the man who killed the most flies was elected to the court of the King.

    And that, my friends, is why the current capital of Thailand came to be named Bangkok.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      gman

      Totally not cool so early in the morning. Coffee is now dripping from my nose and I need a rag to wipe it off the screen.

      Fuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnny.

  48. Selective Edit? Mother Jones Admits Romney Tape Missing ‘One to Two Minutes’

    Email Article
    Print Article Send a Tip
    by Joel B. Pollak 19 Sep 2012, 12:04 AM PDT 168 post a comment
    Mother Jones, the left-wing magazine that released a controversial video of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s remarks to a fundraiser in May, now admits that it has no full tape of what Romney said, and that its video is missing “one to two minutes” at the most important moment.

    The Legal Insurrection blog’s William Jacobson and The Blaze both raised questions on Tuesday about whether Mother Jones had, as promised, revealed the full video, given an apparent jump cut in the critical section of Romney’s remarks.

    “Something is missing. Romney’s 47% answer was cut off before completed, and is not picked up on the Part 2 audio video,” Jacobson noted.

    Late Tuesday evening, Jacobson obtained the following comment from David Corn of Mother Jones:

    According to the source, the recording device inadvertently turned off. The source noticed this quickly and turned it back one [sic]. The source estimates that one to two minutes, maybe less, of recording was missed.

    Corn was forced to update his original post, which promised the “full” video, to reflect the fact that a key portion of the video is, in fact, missing.

    There is no way to know, without the missing footage, exactly what Romney said. On Monday evening, Romney called for a complete video of his remarks to be released.

    That now turns out to be impossible, either because Romney’s remarks were never recorded in full (as Mother Jones now claims), or because some of his remarks–perhaps mitigating some of the controversial effect of his statements–were selectively edited out of the tape by Mother Jones or its chain of sources (including former President Jimmy Carter’s grandson).

    Earlier on Tuesday, new media pioneer James O’Keefe pointed out the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in accepting, without question, a snippet of a video recording that aimed to portray a Republican in a bad light, while conservatives are still doubted even after providing full video or audio, as O’Keefe did with his famous ACORN tapes.

    Whether Romney is right or wrong about the “47 percent” of Americans he says have become dependent on government–he stood by his May remarks on Monday evening–he may have been taken out of context.

    Mother Jones has failed a basic test and broken its promise to its readers and the public. There is now reason to doubt that it provided Romney’s full remarks–not just the context, but the remarks themselves. And there is new reason to suspect manipulation.

    Corn promised the complete version of Romney’s remarks. Instead, he provided a version that is missing a large portion of video at the critical moment.

    Mother Jones’s entire story now deserves to be treated with suspicion, if not contempt.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/19/Mother-Jones-Admits-Romney-Tape-Missing-One-or-Two-Minutes

  49. charlieopera says:

    Your “kick the can” leader … wanna revist that leadership debate?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/opinion/dowd-let-them-eat-crab-cake.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

    • Nope-I figure Mitt still has thousands of stupid things he can say, before he even gets close to the devisiveness of Obama. Signed by me- the racist, clinging to my guns and religion, patriotic American. Besides, haven’t you heard, the tape isn’t complete-per the dems. that means everything in it is null and void-actually per the dems. even when they get the whole tape they are still null and void. So I guess the dems. should consider any discussion of this tape Over-per their own rules.

      .

      • Anything to divert attention away from Obama. There is not a single problem in this country that lies at Romney’s feet, not the economy, not the Arab Spring, not healthcare, not the debt, not bailouts, not immigration, not oil, not unemployment, not credit downgrades, not a lack of a space program…nothing. Not one of these problems does Romney own. But we have to concentrate on Romney? 🙄

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Anita

          You should be relieved, if not just for a short spell. First time in three years I haven’t seen POTUS on the TV each night “Wanting to talk about me, mine, I……….”

          Be happy my dear. They will get their just deserts. Unfortunately we will get some of theirs in the spill over. But they will get theirs.

          • If Obama wins this election..it will confirm my suspicion of foul play. And if he wins..I’m hiking to the Colonel’s property and hang out behind him under that tree, watch him practice on snakes at 50 yards, and listen to the steaks sizzzle on the wood fire beside us. Wanna com?. I’m throwing a party in Ft. Worth, but we’re not leaving. With the Colonel’s blessing or not! 🙂

            • If Obama wins this election..it will confirm my suspicion of foul play.

              Why? I guess if the results are not what you would have liked to have happened, the only explanation is that Obama cheated?? Now, if Romney wins, that’s a sure indication of foul play! (What’s good for the goose…)

              • You can say that if you want. We still have somewhat free speech. I haven’t heard of any problems during Romney’s primaries though. Nothing about Acorn helping him, nothing about voter disenfranchisement, nothing about fixed voting machines, no Project Veritas following him, no Black Panthers shaking billy clubs at precincts, nope. Nothing. First you’re the internet police, now the thought police? Just kidding Buck, smile!

              • True, haven’t heard anything of the sort with Romney. But then again, when it comes to Obama, I haven’t heard anything about voter ID laws and disenfranchisement…

                🙂

              • Good..cause all that stuff just rolled off the keys..SUFA is too much work sometimes!

  50. Beltway Confidential
    CRS report: number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended work requirement

    The Washington Examiner

    Obama administration officials have insisted that their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare recipients would not “gut” the landmark 1996 welfare reform law. But a new report from the Congressional Research Service obtained by the Washington Examiner suggests that the administration’s suspension of a separate welfare work requirement has already helped explode the number of able-bodied Americans on food stamps.

    In addition to the broader work requirement that has become a contentious issue in the presidential race, the 1996 welfare reform law included a separate rule encouraging able-bodied adults without dependents to work by limiting the amount of time they could receive food stamps. President Obama suspended that rule when he signed his economic stimulus legislation into law, and the number of these adults on food stamps doubled, from 1.9 million in 2008 to 3.9 million in 2010, according to the CRS report, issued in the form of a memo to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.

    “This report once again confirms that President Obama has severely gutted the welfare work requirements that Americans have overwhelmingly supported since President Clinton signed them into law,” Cantor said in an emailed statement. “It’s time to reinstate these common-sense measures, and focus on creating job growth for those in need.”

    Under the rule adopted in 1996, food stamps for able-bodied adults without dependents were limited to three months in a 36-month period unless the participant in the program “works at least 20 hours a week; participates in an employment and training program for at least 20 hours per week; or participates in a (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) ‘workfare’ program for at least 20 hours per week.”

    Obama’s economic stimulus legislation suspended the rule for all states starting April 2009. Delaware continued to enforce the rule anyway, along with New York City and parts of Colorado, South Dakota, and Texas. This suspension expired at the end of the 2010 fiscal year (Sept. 30, 2010) and Congress rebuffed Obama’s requests to extend it in his fiscal years 2011 and 2012 budgets. However, Obama used his regulatory authority to effectively extend the waivers to nearly all states over the past two years. (The law grants the executive the authority to do this in states where the unemployment rate is above 10 percent or there’s a “lack of sufficient jobs.”)

    Though the weakening of the economy would have led to an increase in food stamp usage with or without a waiver, the doubling of the use of food stamps by the able-bodied population without dependents exceeded the 43 percent increase in food stamp usage among the broader population over the same 2008 to 2010 time frame. This gives more weight to the idea that the waiver fueled the food stamp growth among the population it affected, beyond where it would have been even in a weak economy.

    The CRS report does not have data for the 2011 and 2012 fiscal years.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      The world of politics provides us with great examples of ignorance, hubris, etc, etc., and chances to chuckle.

      Now we have seen Dems bragging about the Clinton Welfare Reforms. Look how it drove down “poverty” they claim. As do the Progressive Republicans.

      OK, lets pursue that a second. If requiring SOME work drove down poverty SOME………. Then what the hell do you think ELIMINATING WELFARE might do?????

      Wouldn’t it ELIMINATE poverty?

    • No, no no no no. This has got to be wrong. O says he did not change welfare program and Romney was wrong in saying that. So there certainly couldn’t be a negative reaction to his no change, could there?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Kathy

        Don’t worry. They will explain it all to us today or tomorrow. Any bets it involves somebody taking something out of context??? Bwahhahaha.

        Thanks for the Gallup poll data yesterday. I’m having fun with it. Right about now I should be getting a dozen hate mail notes at Huffington Post.

        😉

    • Entitlements:

      According to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. (The total population at the time was 305 million).

      That’s up from 30% in the 1980s and 44.4% in the third quarter of 2008, a recent growth in part attributable to the bad economy of President Obama’s first term.

      The Census Bureau broke the data down like this:

      26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid (the health-care program for low-income Americans)
      16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
      15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
      14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
      4.5% of households received assistance with their rent
      1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits.

      http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/18/the-data-behind-romneys-47-comments/

      Taking Romney’s numbers and these and assuming they are close enough for discussion, I think his point is sound and I at least agree with him. America is on the fast-track to being a European model socialist society. We are not far from having a majority that can vote to reward itself from taxes imposed on a minority. I think there are flaws in Romney’s perspective or framing of these numbers, but a lot is up for grabs. I would break it down like this instead.

      First, lets reject the simple assumption of adding 26+15+4, Medicaid and foodstamps are likely to be in the same household, so the 26, round up to 30% might be a close number.

      26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid
      15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
      4.5% of households received assistance with their rent

      But to Romney’s point, I agree it’s not likely he will get much support from this group that we believe are entrenched in their entitlement. The other numbers will come down to who wins the debate on issues. Romney/Ryan have touched one of the third rails, Medicare, and said they would implement reforms. Everyone agrees it has to be reformed or it will bankrupt the nation. Obama has avoided any reform, instead touting reforms to come under ObamaCare. He then attacks Romney, warning of granny being thrown off the cliff. Many think that is the case mandated under ObamaCare with it’s “death panels” and Medicare cuts. I cannot understand how anyone can argue the math of taking 700 billion allocated for seniors healthcare and spreading it out for all age groups and say it will not reduce seniors quality of care. At the very least, you are forcing them to share where for years, they did not have to. And so, I see these segments being in contention and should not be written off.

      16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
      14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
      1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits

      And as above, the SS & Medicare should not be added and I would call 20%. Unemployed, who knows? I see almost daily people saying they want a job, but so many quit without even a word that I have become jaded thinking most of them do not want a job. But as I look at this, I see at least 20% that Romney should be able to win if he can present his message. Nor would I write-off all of the 30% in the entitled group. The same question hits them, are you better off now than before Obama? has he made their quality of life better or worse? A simple look at food and gas prices tells that story, Obama promised “mana”, he delivered “merde”.

  51. Just A Citizen says:

    Well I was going to avoid the Romney debacle discussion but since Charlie started it up again I figured I should share at least one thought.

    ROMNEY PROBABLY UNDERESTIMATED THE NUMBER OF AMERICANS WITH AN ENTITLEMENT MENTALITY!!!!!!!!!!

    Lets dissect his 47% statement, shall we.

    He said “47% of the people will vote for Obama……”. Now lets take that verbatim. This of course CANNOT mean 47% of Americans, because we all know that NOT ALL Americans Vote. So lets take the last Presidential election, when we had a new RECORD for turnout. That was 61.6% for those who don’t know.

    So if we then apply 47% of the voting public will vote for Obama, then we get 61.6 x 0.47 = 28.95% of Americans, who are eligible to vote. Not ALL Americans but those who could vote.

    Now look around you and listen to those who speak out. Does not 29% seem a reasonable number relative to those who feel they are “entitled” to more Free Cookies?

    Now lets look at the Gallup data provided by Kathy yesterday. In that poll we find that 39% of Americans (not eligible voters) feel that Govt NEEDS TO DO MORE. Now we do not know how many of these feel like victims, or that they are entitled to “stuff” but I am guessing it is pretty high.

    Is it little surprise that among Democrats that opinion comprises 67%. That is right, 67% of Democrats believe Govt NEEDS TO DO MORE.

    • charlieopera says:

      that 67% should have you duking in your pants, JAC.. I can’t wait until it hits 99% … then the 1% will have to leave the country … how cool is that? Any stragglers will be put to work in the fields … how’s picking cotton sound?

    • JAC,
      If you had actually listen to the entire videos, you should have heard this line, right near the end of part 1:

      These are people who pay no income tax. 47% of Americans pay no income taxes.

      The 47% Romney is referring to is Americans who do not pay taxes. Not voters. Time to start “walking back” this defense of Romney too?

      So this is Romney’s mistake – misrepresenting/mixing up facts. And who cares – we all know what he meant, right?

      But exactly what “47%” Romney is referring to is irrelevant. The more important issue is his attitude towards “a large percentage of American”.

      Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right? There are 47% who are with him. Who are dependent upon government, who believe that– that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it. But that’s– it’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what.

      Just because they pay no federal income taxes, that doesn’t mean they’re “dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing.”

      Half these people are retirees. Many are just low income. Many are middle-age white males with a high school education. The heart of Romney’s base. And Romney doesn’t care about them…

      “My job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,”

      I know he’s talking about the election, but he sounds pretty condescending of the 47%. As President, it would be his job to worry about all Americans. Do you think if he’s elected President, he’ll suddenly change his mind and worry about the 47%?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        I am not walking back anything and I stick with my conclusion.

        He was clearly referring to the 47% who will vote for Obama not matter what. He then goes onto another line which is about the 47%, er 49%, who do not pay income taxes.

        You say it doesn’t matter that it is all about his attitude, yet your attempt to display this “attitude” is dependent on your own claim that he is declaring those as not paying taxes as the same group as those who are dependent or entitled.

        Romney NEVER said he did not care about these people. What he said is that he is wasting his time trying to get the votes of those people who will vote for Obama because of their entitlement mentality. And YES, that could include rich and poor, retired and working, etc, etc. What they do does not matter. It is THEIR ATTITUDE towards govt that is the issue. Well actually it is THEIR attitude towards their fellow citizens that is the issue.

        He also said it was a waste to make Tax Cuts a selling point to those 49% who do not pay taxes. I think he was wrong on this point. Many who do not pay taxes do in fact support cutting taxes for others. Some of them do believe that govt has gotten to big and would like to see REDUCTIONS in spending.

        By the way, some of the tape is missing……….. Is it perhaps right here where the transition occurs between the two groups?

        Yes, it does sound a little condescending. However, I do not think nearly as much as the “reactions” created in the media. There was a day when we could expect the opposition party to have a hay day with it, BUT the media to try and explain it in more objective terms. Instead, what I witnessed yesterday and last night was the media simply repeating the narrative created by the party operatives. Quite maddening actually. Even the “right wing” media and talking heads were falling for it. It was as though NOBODY could just stop for a minute and look objectively at what was said and how it fits the situation we find ourselves in today.

        Nope, instead everyone was off and running with lots of strange facts, many unrelated, all designed to ridicule. I even watched Anderson Cooper last night hoping to see some calm and rationality. It lasted about 3 minutes, which was as long as it took for him to nod during his Dem guest talk and then attack the Rep guest as soon as she responded. His meme???? Romney was dividing the country into classes! It is ROMNEY who is playing class warfare. I will not waste my time in the future looking for any objective coverage from the MSM or the New Media for that matter.

        This was a bad statement by Romney, even in front of donors. Not the message but the run on way he described it. And using numbers where no hard numbers are known or needed. For example, we do not know how many feel “victimized or entitled”. However, it is obvious that both parties play on this in their attempts to purchase votes with Free Cookies.

        Furthermore, is he not correct in stating that neither he nor the President should consider it their responsibility to convince others to take responsibility for their own lives? Would it not be the most compassionate thing to cut these people off and force them to deal with their own reality?

        Lets also consider that he was responding to a question that was about how to address those voters among us who felt entitled. This is why Romney discusses the topic.

        Romney has a great opportunity here, and he will almost certainly miss it. And that is to lump the Crony Capitalist Welfare seekers in the group of 47%. Which group doesn’t matter, as long as he includes them.

        The Romney camp got caught flat footed on this one. But they reacted pretty fast and I think did a pretty good job in moving the discussion. Not GREAT but pretty good. The long term impact of this will largely depend on what they do from here on out. It will be interesting to see how they deal with the realization that there is NO OBJECTIVE press while trying to reposition the debate.

        Meanwhile, the Obama campaign is blessed with a chance to do good by saying nothing. But despite the diversion, that they helped orchestrate, they will eventually have to address the Libyan embassy issue. I think, maybe……………..????

  52. Happy Talk Like a Pirate Day!!!

    Where’s DPM when you need him?

    • Oh, how convenient, I been holding back on this…

      What do pimps and pirates have in common?
      They both walk with a limp and say, “Yo Hoe!”

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Freedom costs absolutely nothing. It is a condition of our birth and is provided free of charge by our creator.

      From that point on we pay a price for every action we take that erodes it. Every compromise against it comes at a price to be paid in either blood or treasure. That cost comes in the form of the value lost with its erosion or the price paid to restore it, or BOTH.

      Arrrrrgh!

      • charlieopera says:

        Freedom costs absolutely nothing. It is a condition of our birth and is provided free of charge by our creator.

        Mom & Dad, nice of them not to charge.

        From that point on we pay a price for every action we take that erodes it. Every compromise against it comes at a price to be paid in either blood or treasure. That cost comes in the form of the value lost with its erosion or the price paid to restore it, or BOTH.

        So when you’re forced to go to school, shoot your parents. Great way to go through life. No wonder you’re a miserable S.O.B. 🙂

      • Freedom has a flavor the protected will never know………arrrggghhhh!!!!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      American Politics………………….. OR

      The Men Who Would be KING and the Fools Who Support Them!

  53. Captain Canolli, our resident pinko commie has finally come clean on his real feelings about slavery 🙂 Per The miserable SOB “Any stragglers will be put to work in the fields … how’s picking cotton sound? So now we all know the truth 😆

    • charlieopera says:

      Yes, Gman … all yous wingnuts get to do some real work for a change! You can be the water boyo …

  54. Just A Citizen says:

    BUCK

    We have something new to kick around. The 9th Circuit has overturned Montana’s long held ban on partisan campaigning for judges.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/montanas-ban-political-endorsements-judicial_n_1895318.html

    This time I seek your thoughts!

    • Sorry JAC, but I really don’t know anything about this. Let me guess — Citizens United had a role to play in the decision?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Buck

        Of course. But it goes further in the argument presented by one of the justices. I also think that it could have been overturned prior to Citizens United, but that ruling clarified the issue of whether “organizations” were entitled to “free speech” protection.

        • Citizens United – the gift that keeps on giving!

          Personally I have no problem with a state permitting partisan campaigning (or even mandating party affiliation/nomination) for its judges. Here there has been a long standing state ban on the practice which I believe should have been respected. This is just my initial thought on the matter, admittedly not knowing much about the specifics of the case, arguments, etc.

          Your thoughts?

          • Actually, my counselor friend, you surprise me with ” even mandating party affiliation/nomination”…..it would seem to me, that, as an officer of the court, you would want the best applicant/appointee regardless of race, creed, age, etc etc……….you champion all this discrimination stuff….why would you change your mind on this? ( I am keeping in mind where you live and work and the polluted air you breathe).

            • States and municipalities all have their own rules for becoming a candidate for elected office, as you are well aware. Some localities mandate party nomination (I believe there would be exceptions to run as an ‘Independent’, so ‘mandating party affiliation’ may not be the best term to use in this scenario, but you get what I’m saying here).

            • Let me reiterate though that I’m not all that familiar with these issues; just giving my very brief first impression thoughts on the matter.

  55. If you cant boog-a-loo after this…….it can’t be done.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=mz3CPzdCDws

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      Good morning Colonel.

      Thanks for the walk, er should I say dance, down memory lane. So many familiar faces faded from mind, but now reawakened.

      My feet are still moving.

    • I just can’t be done from where I sit!. I’ll hit 50 shortly but I don’t recognize anyone…except maybe Bing Crosby? Running for cover.

    • Nice,

      A few years ago I was talking with a young woman I worked with aged (30) she’s a movie buff and asked whom I thought the most beautiful woman was ever. I leaned over her computer and punched in “Gilda”, Rita Hayworth. Up came that shot of her in the black dress doing the song “Put the Blame on Mame”. She agreed. I’m surprised they were able to film her and she didn’t set the celluloid on fire. After that song, who needs naked?

  56. JAC…….forgot to tell you…….in our most safe border ever(Napolitano)……in Reynosa, Mx..across the border from McAllen, Tx, there was a cach of weapons found over the weekend. 1,942 weapons and over 10,000 rounds of ammunition were found in a warehouse. Not a single one of them was an American made weapon. I wonder why this is not reported in the MSM since according to Homeland Defense, all of the weapons in Mexico are American made.

  57. How embarrassing to have this lying schmuck be the “leader” of this country. How badly we have fallen.

    • I dare you to be as judgmental upon Bush or Romney as you are here upon Obama.

      But you will not – you will instead defend the former with the same enthusiasm as you condemn the latter.

      Hence, the reason the nation slowly crumbles.

      • Whatever.

        • Exactly my point.

          You muddle around in partisan politics – believing your guy is better then their guy when indeed your guy is not different then theirs.

          It would be a great comedy except of the tragedy of such affairs.

          • And your utopia of not voting isn’t any better. So where does that leave us?

            • Leaves us hoping for the best with our vote.

            • You have not paid attention at all over these years.

              You believe that if you do not pretend your illusions of Federal Government “voting”, there is nothing else.

              I have posted and commented in great verbosity about where such activism is effective.

              You do not want to act there because there is no great lime light, so you pretend that it does not exist and that I have not given you such alternatives.

              • Oh Great One of Verbosity!

                Imagine, on a side message to Anita recently, I mentioned that I missed you here at SUFA. Whatever in gawd’s (!) name was I thinking???

                You have pointed out alternatives and I will in fact, give you much of the credit for my being involved in several local races, including a school board and village board race. Also, as I lived through the disgusting behavior here in WI that was a result of a simple, yet necessary law called Act 10, I also am involved in two separate state level races. Never really got involved in these things before. Thank you for your “gentle” push.

                But the federal level also affects us greatly. Take for instance, the taxes of that great and wonderful OCare law that will be coming down shortly (yes, PLEASE take them). My fight, if you will, is to play a tiny role in the effort to bring about a reduced federal government. Thus also, my involvement with the Tea Party (which is alive and well, to all you know-it-alls that continually try to minimize it), and with a few other groups that have, much like me, come to learn much about our government over the last several years. I have no grand illusions that R&R will solve much. In fact, by all indications, the collapse will probably happen on their watch and it will be their end. I hope I am wrong on this and that if they are able to even put a tiny bit of pressure on the brake, some positive change can come about. And then maybe even a little more positive change and then even a little more.

                There are still a lot of people asleep, and I realize you would put me in that category as well. I don’t believe I am. But until we have a “none of the above” on the ballot, I don’t see not voting as anything more than complacency and apathy. I’m not that.

                Not sure I even want to go down that lime light path, but I’m sure you can enlighten me!

              • Oh Great One of Verbosity!

                Don’t give Charlie more ammo.
                “GoV” is not a nickname I wish to have! Too close to….. well, you know…. 🙂

                Thank you for your “gentle” push.

                The most powerful thing you can do is effectively block funding bills locally. Talk about invoking sudden change! And it is well within an individual’s activism to accomplish such things.

                But the federal level also affects us greatly.

                No question.

                The question, though, is:
                “What can you do about it?”

                Answer:
                Nothing.

                You will -literally- waste precious energy best spent elsewhere that would be infinitely more effective.

                The FedGov will collapse when its checks bounce.
                Then, politics will become very local.

                If one invests the necessary years and decades of building a local grassroots base, then this will become a very powerful force that can be multiplied into a national force.

                But not the other way around.

      • Ahem, I think most of us are moving from the R/D status quo, because we realize it’s both/all of them. You’re just lashing out because most of us still think we should vote. “I dare you to be as judgmental upon Bush or Romney as you are here upon Obama.” Kinda hard to do, Bush is like bulldookey, Romney is like dogchit, but Obama is like a whole sewer treatment pond, overflowing…..
        Sure, it’s all chit, but the amounts involved…..(PS, think you’ll like this)

        http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/49626

  58. charlieopera says:

    Because I miss her … so much 🙂

    • Aaagh – my eyes are burning – aaagh!

      Thanks a lot Charlie!!

      • C’mon Todd. Your ears may bleed from listening to her. You brain might implode with trying to understand what she is talking about. But Sarah Palin has never, ever been hard on the eyes. She is a very pretty woman. 😉

        • **** Abort **** Abort **** Abort ****

          Well, it was a LAME joke to start with – but even more LAME than I intended!!

          PS – How come as soon as I saw your name, I knew you’d be JUMPING ALL OVER one of my comments!! 😉

          PSS – As soon as I posted that I thought “Oh crap, that should have been EARS!” Where’s that “edit” button when you need it! You know your jokes are bad when even you realize how LAME they are! 🙂

  59. charlieopera says:

    Hoy! I’m gonna be a gampa! Another pinko cannoli man/woman (and no doubt a Bills fan) is around the corner … Go Bills!

  60. Just A Citizen says:

    TODD

    Re: The Romney tape and MY interpretation.

    Well I guess I must be wrong. I don’t mind having virtually nobody else agree with me. That happens when your a Maverick.

    But now I find out that Sean Hannity has taken on my interpretation in what appears to be its entirety.

    Therefore either I am wrong or Hannity had a lucid and independent thought. That leaves me with being WRONG.

    🙂 🙂

    Or………………………………

    Could it be that I am wrong to think I am wrong. Making me Right even when I am wrong!!

    Bwahahahahahaaa

    • No surprise there JAC – you’ve always been just another right-wing shrill! 🙂

      Could it be that I am wrong to think I am wrong. Making me Right even when I am wrong!!

      That seems to be the logic you’ve been using here lately! 🙂

      So, to continue…

      He was clearly referring to the 47% who will vote for Obama not matter what.

      If so JAC, where did he get the stat that “47% will vote for Obama no matter what?”

      The only logical source for that is the common “47% do not pay federal income taxes.” To argue otherwise is crazy.

      You say it doesn’t matter that it is all about his attitude

      Yes. The more important issue is his attitude towards “a large percentage of Americans”. Whatever the baseline for the “47%”, it is a lot of Americans that Romney doesn’t care about. And I know he meant “I can’t get their votes,” but his attitude towards those people is pretty obvious.

      Well actually it is THEIR attitude towards their fellow citizens that is the issue.

      What about Romney’s attitude towards his fellow citizens? Does that matter? Or does he get a free pass?

      By the way, some of the tape is missing……….. Is it perhaps right here where the transition occurs between the two groups?

      Only in your dreams!

      You’re making assumptions and excuses for Romney…again…gee, I see a pattern…

      Even the “right wing” media and talking heads were falling for it.

      So now you’re a victim of the left and right media?

      Romney was dividing the country into classes! It is ROMNEY who is playing class warfare.

      Yes he is. I know you have a hard time accepting that. It destroys your Ayn Rand worship & ideology about all the wonderful “job creators”. I think this demonstrates Romney’s interpretation of “self-interest”. Whatever is good for him, and screw the rest of the country!

      To paraphrase a (semi)-wise man ( 🙂 ):

      I dare you to defend Obama as you have Romney here. But you will not – you will instead condemn the former with the same enthusiasm as you defend the latter. Hence, the reason the right-wing is becoming irrelevant.

      🙂 🙂

      (I never thought a Black Flag quote would come in handy!!)

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        Lets deal with the base question first. Because it supports your others.

        “If so JAC, where did he get the stat that “47% will vote for Obama no matter what?”

        The only logical source for that is the common “47% do not pay federal income taxes.” To argue otherwise is crazy.”

        Actually that is not the “only” logical source. There has been consistent polling data showing Obama around the 47% mark. I think the worst he has done in the past year was about 43% and that was after a big downside surprise on employment. During the primaries there were discussions about Obama having about 47% locked up and that the Republican could count on 45 to 47%. This entire time the discussions have been about which candidate could reach the 6 to 10% of undecided in the middle. And whether Romney could get enough of these votes in the “swing” states.

        Remember the etch-a-sketch comment? That was when the Romney campaign signaled its need to pivot to the middle to go after that small number of independent and “moderate” voters.

        So this has been out there for months. I am surprised you don’t remember the talking heads kicking this around.

        At this meeting Romney begins his response with this figure and the reference to the hard core Obama support. This is when he is discussing the “entitlement mentality”. Which if you remember, was the topic of the question asked of him.

        It is as he goes on to explain the details of his strategy that he mentions the large number Obama has and then throws out the 47% that don’t pay taxes. Now why does he bring this up? Because as he then explains, he won’t win any votes over his tax cut proposals among those who don’t pay. By the way I believe the number is actually 49% and he later mentioned that number. This would also support my belief that the 47% he first mentioned was NOT the same as the group not paying taxes. If it were, then why discuss how he can’t win them on tax cuts but he will approach them with the economy and the divisiveness of the President.

        I am not making excuses here. This was how I viewed the context of the comments when I heard the entire thing.

        I have been at enough of these types of events to have seen just such a mangling of facts and figures by a politician trying to respond to questions or “advice”. So maybe that gives me insight or perhaps I am giving credit where none is due. But nothing else I have heard from Romney in the past or since leads me to believe I am way off base.

        With that said, he did a TERRIBLE job, in my view, of discussing the subject matter with his potential supporters. He sounded to me like he was winging it too much and not prepared enough. But at these types of events you really can’t prepare for everything. In those cases it is best to make short comments and admit you are “working on it” rather than ramble on. Because rambling will eventually cause you to step on your tongue.

        Now lets deal with the accuracy of the numbers used and the effectiveness of the narrative. While I think the 47% has a basis, his characterization of the full 47% being those who are hooked on Govt is clearly wrong. It includes those who simply believe in the fascist style or the socialist style of govt. but who may be financially sound. It should also include those from business that are hooked on the govt teat. Although this group is more easily swayed depending on who is offering what cookie. It includes a very large number of Govt employees. All of whom depend on Govt for their income. So you see the number may actually be higher than the 29% I proposed earlier, that being of all Americans rather than just the Obama voters.

        His comments make it sound like he believes or is telling these folks that the hard core loyal Dem Voters are ALL dependent on Govt. We simply don’t know how many those are. But this group would NOT include those who vote Republican and who need Govt help. Because the group he is describing is the HARD CORE LOYAL Dem voter.

        Now lets talk about his attitude, or at least the attitude you think he portrays. I am not sure where you think he shows disdain or simply dismisses people. That has been the narrative from the left these last two days. You admit he was talking about those votes he can’t get and those he will try to get. So where is the “attitude” towards a large group of Americans? Is stating a fact that a huge number of Americans are dependent on Govt support and therefore vote for the Dem party because they want that support protected somehow showing disdain? Is it because he said there was nothing he could do to convince people to take responsibility for their own lives? But all of that is simply the truth.

        As an added note I heard a statistic tonight that is connected to this issue. I don’t remember the exact number but I think it was 60 million. That was the number of people VOTING in 2008 that EXCEEDED the number of people working in the PRIVATE sector. That is 60 million voters that were either not working or working for Govt. And that was 2008, not 2010.

        By the way, the missing tape segment has been confirmed by Mother Jones. But it appears it was not during the transition in the discussion from Obama voter group to the Tax group. But it did occur at the end of the Tax Group and could have provided more information on how he was using this number. We will never know, but I don’t think it matters anyway.

        The LEFT has put their spin on this and the media has carried their water quite well. So the damage done will totally depend on how Romney handles it from here on. He better damn well be prepared to answer the lefts narrative during the debates. I would be floored if he is not asked several questions on this.

        Romney is not playing class warfare Todd. He is describing the dependent class that was created by PROGRESSIVE philosophy and politics.

        The P’s create these groups and then if you mention them it is you who is waging class warfare. Has Romney proposed harming these people in some way? Has he proposed a “targeted tax increase” against ONLY this group while making fun of them in speeches?

        • JAC,

          Actually that is not the “only” logical source. There has been consistent polling data showing Obama around the 47% mark. I think the worst he has done in the past year was about 43% and that was after a big downside surprise on employment. During the primaries there were discussions about Obama having about 47% locked up and that the Republican could count on 45 to 47%. This entire time the discussions have been about which candidate could reach the 6 to 10% of undecided in the middle. And whether Romney could get enough of these votes in the “swing” states.

          Bullshit. Your giving Romney way too much credit when he’s “winging it” and “not prepared.” You shouldn’t contradict yourself in the same post. I’m not wasting more time on your excuses.

          I am not sure where you think he shows disdain or simply dismisses people.

          Do you understand English? What part of this isn’t disdain:

          Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right? There are 47% who are with him. Who are dependent upon government, who believe that– that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it. But that’s– it’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what.

          Is stating a fact that a huge number of Americans are dependent on Govt support and therefore vote for the Dem party because they want that support protected somehow showing disdain?

          Yes, because it’s not a fact.

          Is it because he said there was nothing he could do to convince people to take responsibility for their own lives?

          Yes, because this is not true. Show me one piece of evidence that shows all of the 47% do not “take personal responsibility and care for for their lives.”

          That is 60 million voters that were either not working or working for Govt. And that was 2008, not 2010.

          60 million is almost half of those voting in 2008. Try again. And provide a source for your “facts”.

          Yeah, because the recession had already started – you know – one year before the election. We were losing more than half a million jobs a month – before Obama took office.

          And you know what, my parents would fall in that 60 million – because they’re RETIRED you MORON. And in case you haven’t noticed, with all your political savvy, RETIRE people tend to have one of the highest rates of voter turnout. And I believe 2008 had record numbers of students voting. More of the MOOCHERS, huh?

          So this little “fact”, whatever the actual number, is meaningless unless you understand the underlying numbers, which you clearly have no desire to do.

          By the way, the missing tape segment has been confirmed by Mother Jones. But it appears it was not during the transition in the discussion from Obama voter group to the Tax group. But it did occur at the end of the Tax Group and could have provided more information on how he was using this number. We will never know, but I don’t think it matters anyway.

          Then why do you make up more possible assumptions? To give everyone possible excuses for Romney? It seems no one else here is supporting your pathetic arguments.

          The LEFT has put their spin on this and the media has carried their water quite well.

          Yes, because you and Romney are just poor little victims – again. Quite the whining JAC.

          Romney is not playing class warfare Todd.

          Bullshit JAC. He’s pandering to his wealthy supporters about all the “moochers.” It’s disguising class warfare, pure and simple.

          He is describing the dependent class that was created by PROGRESSIVE philosophy and politics.

          No, he’s describing the working poor created by Republicans starting with Reagan.

          Has Romney proposed harming these people in some way?

          Yes, his 20% tax cut that will benefit wealthy by leaps and bounds while the loopholes he closes will hurt the middle and lower class.

  61. Another brilliant prediction comes true. Caught Senator Casey (D-PA) on the news tonight calling for expedited visas for our Iraqi friends who worked with us. Seems that they are “in great danger”. Seems to me they should stay and fight for their country. Seems to me I hear the helo’s gearing up and about to head to the embassy roof. Seems to me I have seen this all before somewhere in a bad dream I think.

  62. This explains how I feel about Romney’s business experience transferring to politics:

    this much appears to be true: Romney has a businessman’s approach to politics. Which means: He sizes up a situation (or an audience). He figures out what he needs to do to cut the deal. Then he does it, and expects it to work.

    Ergo, Romney speaks to a group of conservative GOP fat cats, and tells them what he thinks they want to hear so they will cough up the dough. Belief is almost beside the point. He was closing the deal.

    They’re two different worlds, and Romney can’t figure out the difference.

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/opinion/borger-romney-weakness/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Todd

      So you put up a left bent criticism of Romney as “evidence” about your view of how business experience translates to govt?

      I responded to this editorial the other day and will share it with you. Borger IGNORED his time as Governor in making this stupid comment.

      This is projection on her part, nothing less than projection of her opinion and then selling it as some objective fact.

      • Yeah, cause we all know you’re the only one with objective facts.

        Do you every read things before you comment on them??

        While he couldn’t defeat Ted Kennedy, he did become the governor of the liberal state of Massachusetts in 2002, running as a pro-choice moderate.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Todd

          Whether I always have the “objective” facts or not is irrelevant. The point is that BERGER IS NOT USING FACTS. She is presenting a stereotype that exists in her mind and then trying to present it as some objective analysis.

          It shows ignorance and DISDAIN for people in Business. Because it is NOT TRUE. The premise is BULL SHIT, to use your own words.

          Anyone who tries to run a business by “telling people what you think they want to hear” just to close a deal will not last long in business. Unless of course their business is simply stealing from people. So is that her goal here? To portray Romney as a thief???

          Todd, if I mention in an article that you have shown to be intelligent and then draw a picture of you as a blithering idiot, have I used your evidence of intelligence in making my conclusion?

  63. Good Mornin SUFA, Today looks like another fine sunny fall day, but before I venture outside, I have some questions/thoughts to share. Why is the DHS (1.4 billion rounds) buying more ammo than the DOD this year? Why is the Libyan attack a terrorist act when the war on terror is over? Why haven’t the MSM covered the QE3 decision by the Fed and report that it will lead to much higher inflation? Why does the US Army have a manual on “Re-Education Camps”? Things that make one go HMMM!

    • OH, I almost forgot. Congrats to Charlie on his new Grandfatherhood! I hope your influence is minimal, LOL. To Buck, I hope when the day comes for your newborn, everyone comes home healthy and happy! I hope you plan on attending the birth, it is quite an experience.

      Peace and Good Luck to both of you!

    • Why is everyone all up in arms about the recent purchase by Homeland security of 1.4 Billion rounds of ammunition?

      Our undeclared Foreign War in Iraq Consumes about 70,000,000 (70 Million) Rounds of Ammunition Each Year, which would take about 20 years to consume 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition ordered by the Department of Homeland Security alone, not including all the ammunition ordered by the weather service, Social Security, etc! 20 Years To Use All 1.4 Billion Rounds Of This Ammo?

      Is the Department of Homeland security to protect us from foreign terrorists, or to protect the central government from the American people?

      Read the entire chilling article. Avoid any political discussions about Obama’s infamous 2008 quote, lest your blood pressure dangerously rise.

      We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

      Let’s put these DHS numbers in perspective. An Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer displaces (weighs) 9,300 tons. 1.4 billion rounds weigh around 28,000 tons, three destroyers’ worth, so to speak. It takes over 1,200 18-wheel trucks to move that much ammunition. That’s the equivalent to a line of single trailer trucks, parked end to end, almost 14 miles long.

      There are 314 million Americans, men, women and children living in the United States this morning. This year alone, DHS has purchased four rounds for each and every American.

      Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/why_does_homeland_security_need_14_billion_rounds_of_ammunition.html#ixzz2711Bg25U

      • This should be a huge question in the minds of Americans, but yet silence? More questions, who is going to shoot all this ammo and at who? Hollow points are meant for killing, period. They are not practice stuff.

        OK, some conspiracy theory stuff. When the economy implodes, civil disobedience will be everywhere, especially the big cities full of armed gangs. A UN Peace keeping army will be asked to come and settle things down, but in reality they are here (foreigners) to cull the population of about 75 million people. I will not speculate beyond that point. They now have plenty of ammo to do this.

        • I’m worried about this but I just don’t know what to think. I’ve read all the articles about these purchases and took in all the scary comments. One reason that wasn’t scary stuck out at me.. Maybe the govt is buying all the ammo to drive the price up..making it hard for us slaves to purchase it ourselves.

          What’s your timeline on civil unrest and martial law, Mr conspiracy man? A friend of mine thinks that if Obama gets reelected he’ll be picked off shortly after the election. There’s a reason for civil unrest.

        • G, G, G,

          There’s nothing to be worried about. We have a peace-loving, respect our rights, liberal president in office. It’s not like when we had that war-monger Republican. In Nam’, they fired thousands of rounds for every enemy killed, so four rounds for every citizen is not a high number. And remember, it’s only the other half of the 47% they expect to be a problem. And why not target practice with hollow-points? Why not use the “good stuff”? After all, it’s free (to them). And on top of that, they are stimulating the economy!

  64. Just A Citizen says:

    I can’t wait to see how the pundits portray this “number” as false or “disdainful” of the group included.

    “”My campaign is about the 100 percent of America, and I’m concerned about them,” he told Univision anchors Jorge Ramos and Maria Elena Salinas at Univision’s “Meet the Candidate” forum, co-hosted by Facebook at the University of Miami.

    “I know I’m not going to get 100 percent of the vote, and my campaign will focus on those people we can think we can bring in to support me,” he continued. “But this is a campaign about helping people that need help.” ‘

  65. Just A Citizen says:

    On Letterman the other night the POTUS would not or could not identify the debt when he came into office or what it is today.

    He also declared that he does not call “people who disagree with me” UNPATRIOTIC.

    • Yeah, I posted this up above earlier. I’ve been waiting for Todd’s response. Remember, he was so dismayed by Ryan shorting his marathon time by 1 hour (from a race 22 years ago) and felt it reflected on his character.

      O not knowing and/or shorting the debt by $6T? Where does that fit in your character comparison, Todd?

      • But what are you expecting Romney to do about the debt?

        Look – if you ended all the discretionary services of government – which is all the military, all the courts, all the depts. like energy, education, CIA, NSA, …. all of it …..

        The nation’s debt would STILL increase

        The non-discretionary spending – Social Services, welfare, medicaid, old age, etc. exceeds the revenue gained by taxes.

        Imagine – end everything of government except the entitlements, and the nation debts continue to grow.

        This is called “unsustainable”.

        And no one – no one – in government will dare cut entitlements.

        It is not a “maybe” the US will default.

        It is a matter of when … and that when is coming sooner, every day.

  66. Guess who’s trashing Obama campaign signs in Austin, Texas?
    David Paulin

    Texas may be a red state but the capital of Austin is Obama country. It’s thus not unusual to see myriad Obama campaign signs in nice neighborhoods — displayed on one manicured front lawn after another.

    How, then, to account in a pro-Obama neighborhood for a shocking act of vandalism occurring on the front lawn of Tom and Beth Priem — their Obama sign destroyed, torn to shreds. They put a new sign up, and it happened again. Four times in all.

    Was it the act of a violent and deranged Romney supporter? The Priems wanted to know. As reporter Pamela Cosel explained on the website of KXAN, a local television news channel:

    They decried the destruction. They didn’t know how to deter the defamation — a direct assault on their property. Was it the devil? Or simply a devious degenerate?

    So Tom Priem’s wife, Beth, did some detective work, determined to discover the despicable destroyer.

    At daybreak Wednesday, with camera in hand and trusty dog, Charlie, by her side, she made a date to watch the drama unfold.

    Undaunted, she was dazzled to catch the thief dead-on, daring as dawn broke.

    Demur in his approach, the young deer danced on the lawn, the Obama sign caught in its antlers. Delicate creature, the sign dangled for a time, as the buck deftly flung it, dented, to the ground.

    Beth snapped the photo just as it landed, destroyed — proof that it wasn’t a dream.

    “Apparently, we have a Republican deer in our neighborhood!” said Tom. “The funny thing is, I haven’t seen any other signs damaged. The people directly across the street have four signs, the person across the street and to the left has two, and the next house to the left h as one. We can’t figure out why the deer is attacking our signs.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/guess_whos_trashing_obama_campaign_signs_in_austin_texas.html#ixzz271PRXigd

    No doubt it’s a racist, Republican deer!

  67. Read an article last night-it pointed out that Bill Maher-regularly says very degrading things about religion-including Islam. Wonder what the administrations opinion would be if the ME had chosen to complain about his remarks. Didn’t watch religiousity-did it mention Islam in a negative light?

    Wonder whether HE would have been dragged off to jail-wonder if the rhetoric would have be different? Wonder if Hollywood would have supported the actual real definition of an abuse of free speech rights -if it involved one of their own?

  68. Just A Citizen says:

    I do believe that I warned everyone to watch for this……………..impeccable timing!

    Economy has bottomed out, census data suggests

    By Hope Yen, The Associated Press

    The U.S. economy is showing signs of finally bottoming out: Americans are on the move again after record numbers had stayed put, more young adults are leaving their parents’ homes to take a chance with college or the job market, once-sharp declines in births are leveling off and poverty is slowing.

    New 2011 census data being released Thursday offer glimmers of hope in an economic recovery that technically began in mid-2009. The annual survey, supplemented with unpublished government figures as of March 2012, covers a year in which unemployment fell modestly from 9.6 percent to 8.9 percent.

    Not all is well. The jobless rate remains high at 8.1 percent. Home ownership dropped for a fifth straight year to 64.6 percent, the lowest in more than a decade, hurt by more stringent financing rules and a shift to renting. More Americans than ever are turning to food stamps, while residents in housing that is considered “crowded” held steady at 1 percent, tied for the highest since 2003.

    Taken as a whole, however, analysts say the latest census data provide wide-ranging evidence of a stabilizing U.S. economy. Coming five years after the housing bust, such a leveling off would mark an end to the longest and most pernicious economic decline since World War II.

    “We may be seeing the beginning of the American family’s recovery from the Great Recession,” said Andrew Cherlin, a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns Hopkins University. He pointed in particular to the upswing in mobility and to young men moving out of their parents’ homes, both signs that more young adults were testing out job prospects.

    “It could be the modest number of new jobs or simply the belief that the worst is over,” Cherlin said.

    Richard Freeman, an economist at Harvard University, said the data point to a “fragile recovery,” with the economy still at risk of falling back into recession, depending in part on who is president and whether Congress averts a “fiscal cliff” of deep government spending cuts and higher taxes in January. “Given the situation in the world economy, we are doing better than many other countries,” he said. “Government policies remain critical.”

    The census figures also show slowing growth in the foreign-born population, which increased to 40.4 million, or 13 percent of the U.S. population. Last year’s immigration increase of 400,000 people was the lowest in a decade, reflecting a minimal gain of Latinos after many Mexicans already in the U.S. opted to return home. Some 11 million people are estimated to be in the U.S. illegally.

    The bulk of new immigrants are now higher-skilled workers from Asian countries such as China and India, contributing to increases in the foreign-born population in California, New York, Illinois and New Jersey.

    Income inequality varied widely by region. The gap between rich and poor was most evident in the District of Columbia, New York, Connecticut, Louisiana and New Mexico, where immigrant or minority groups were more numerous. By county, Berkeley in West Virginia had the biggest jump in household income inequality over the past year, a result of fast suburban growth just outside the Washington-Baltimore region, where pockets of poor residents and newly arrived, affluent commuters live side by side.

    As a whole, Americans were slowly finding ways to get back on the move. About 12 percent of the nation’s population, or 36.5 million, moved to a new home, up from a record low of 11.6 percent in 2011.

    Among young adults 25 to 29, the most mobile age group, moves also increased to 24.6 percent from a low of 24.1 percent in the previous year. Longer-distance moves, typically for those seeking new careers in other regions of the country, rose modestly from 3.4 percent to 3.8 percent.

    Mobility is up
    Less willing to rely on parents, roughly 5.6 million Americans ages 25-34, or 13.6 percent, lived with Mom and Dad, a decrease from 14.2 percent in the previous year. Young men were less likely than before to live with parents, down from 18.6 percent to 16.9 percent; young women living with parents edged higher to 10.4 percent, up from 9.7percent.

    The increases in mobility coincide with modest improvements in the job market as well as increased school enrollment, especially in college and at advanced-degree levels.

    Marriages dipped to a low of just 50.8 percent among adults 18 and over, compared with 57 percent in 2000. Among young adults 25-34, marriage was at 43.1 percent, also a new low, part of a longer-term cultural trend in which people are opting to marry at later ages and often cohabitate with a partner first.

    Births, on the other hand, appeared to be coming back after years of steep declines. In 2011, the number of births dipped by 55,000, or 1 percent, to 4.1 million, the smallest drop since the pre-recession peak in 2008, according to Kenneth Johnson, a sociology professor and senior demographer at the University of New Hampshire. More recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also show that once-precipitous drops in births are slowing.

    “There are signs that young adults have turned a corner,” said Mark Mather, associate vice president at the Population Reference Bureau. “More young adults are staying in school, which will increase their potential earnings when the job market bounces back. It’s going to take some time, but we should see more young adults entering the labor force, buying homes and starting families as economic conditions improve.”

    While poverty slowed, food stamp use continued to climb. Roughly 14.9 million, or 13 percent of U.S. households, received food stamps, the highest level on record, meaning that 1 in 8 families was receiving the government aid. Oregon led the nation at 18.9 percent, or nearly 1 in 5, due in part to generous state provisions that expand food stamp eligibility to families making 185 percent of the poverty level — roughly $3,400 a month for a family of four. Oregon was followed by more rural or more economically hard-hit states, including Michigan, Tennessee, Maine, Kentucky and Mississippi. Wyoming had the fewest households on food stamps, at 5.9 percent.

    Government programs did much to stave off higher rates of poverty. While the official poverty rate for 2011 remained stuck at 15 percent, or a record 46.2 million people, the government formula did not take into account noncash aid such as food stamps, which the Census Bureau estimates would have lifted 3.9 million people above the poverty line. If counted, that safety net would have lowered the poverty rate to 13.7 percent. And without expanded unemployment benefits, which began expiring in 2011, roughly 2.3 million people would have fallen into poverty.

    Some 17 states showed statistically significant increases in the poverty rate, led by Louisiana, Oregon, Arizona, Georgia and Hawaii. Among large metropolitan areas, McAllen, Texas, led the nation in poverty, at 38 percent, followed by Fresno, Calif., El Paso, Texas, and Bakersfield, Calif. In contrast, the Washington, D.C., metro area had the lowest level of poverty, about 8 percent, followed by Bridgeport, Conn., and Ogden, Utah.

    “There are signs among all these measures that the multiple downsides of the Great Recession have bottomed out, which is good news especially for young people who have seen their lives put on hold,” said William H. Frey, a demographer at Brookings Institution. “There is some light at the end of the tunnel.”

  69. I know that there are small things that people complain about which aren’t really a big deal-but somehow, The currant administration’s habit of making all this new Art which represents Obama INSTEAD of The United States of America-just speaks volumes-and it is a big deal!

    Did Obama Violate U.S. Code Mutilating the Flag With His Own Ego?

    Email Article
    Print Article Send a Tip
    by John Nolte 20 Sep 2012, 6:53 AM PDT 221 post a comment
    For thirty-five dollars you can own this print. The Barack Obama Store advertises the print as “Our Stripes: Flag Print,” and in place of the stars representing our fifty states we have the Obama logo — which, I guess, is supposed to represent the United States of President FailureTeleprompter.

    By now, we’re pretty much used to this creepy, narcissistic, cult of personality merchandise from Team Obama. But does this print violate the United States Flag Code, which clearly states in part:

    The United States Flag Code establishes advisory rules for display and care of the flag of the United States. It is Chapter 1 of Title 4 of the United States Code (4 U.S.C. § 1 et seq). This is a U.S. federal law, but there is no penalty for failure to comply with it. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that punitive enforcement would conflict with the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.[1]

    This etiquette is as applied within U.S. jurisdiction. In other countries and places, local etiquette applies.

    The flag must not be marked with any insignia, letter, word, signature, picture or drawing.

    The obvious response from the Obama campaign (not that the media will demand one) will be that this is art, not the flag,.

    But the Obama campaign is advertising this as “Our Stripes: Flag Print,” so by their own description they are admitting this is “our” “flag,” and it most certainly has been marked with an “insignia, picture or drawing” — however you want to describe that noxious O.

    And if the argument is “since we made it, it’s not THE flag,” I guess that means that every flag manufacturer is exempt from the rules surrounding flag etiquette.

    If this were Mitt Romney putting his “R” logo in place of our stripes, the media would be in Armageddon mode right now over how egotistical the move is and how incompetent any campaign must be to sell something that so clearly violates the flag code of the United States.

    Whatever.

    The media won’t hold Obama accountable for Fast and Furious, the deficit, the faltering economy, or lying about a lack of security that cost four Americans their lives in Libya — so this isn’t about to earn any kind of narrative.

    On a personal note, to see a sitting president replace the stars of our stars and stripes with his own campaign logo is simply depressing. At the very least, couldn’t our president be the kind of man who would shudder at the sight of such a thing?

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/20/Did%20Obama-Violate-US-Flag-Code

    • This may come back to bite them VH. Have you seen this comparison? I’ve seen it in a few places around the web this morning. The red? Represents the bloody fingers of the Americans who died in Libya.

      http://www.therightscoop.com/the-new-obama-flag-on-sale-at-barackobama-com-will-make-you-sick-to-your-stomach/

      • I would certainly like something to come back and bite them. I find it almost unbelievable when I am listening to the media talk about how Bad a week this has been for Romney! Are you kidding me-Romney-the ME is exploding -Americans are dead-and Romney’s having a bad week. Just the realization that Romney is the one having a bad week-shows the undeniable bias and complete uselessness of our media.

        Keep reading about how much of a flip flopper Romney is-yet we have tapes of Obama doing exactly what he criticized Bush for doing-but those are for the most part just ignored-and they can be ignored because of the media.

        I wonder can the American people sue the Media for damages??????????????
        Can we sue Obama for defiling our flag and claiming to be KING?

        • Can we sue Obama for defiling our flag and claiming to be KING?

          Hyperbole much?

          • Much-Yes
            Too much-No
            I purposely used hyperbole to show my very rational Anger. You see, someone doesn’t have to literally crap on the flag and it’s meaning, to defile the flag. The honestly of actually crapping on the flag, would be preferred-at least then one couldn’t deny, deny, deny-that that isn’t what they are doing.

          • “Hyperbole much?”

            Probably so. Two questions for you though, Buck, as I consider you to be articulate and intelligent. What is your honest take on this flag, and what would you say if Romney did the same thing on his website, only with his logo where Obama’s is?

            Murf

            • Buck….in addition…. what do you think the MSM would say/do if Romney did this?

              Murf

              • 1) I could care less
                2) I could care less
                3) I’d hope they could also care less; though lets see how much of an issue Fox News makes of this one first.

                Sorry to be a bit short with you today – I’m behind a pile of work at the moment!

              • Unlearning liberty: Auburn’s censorship of Ron Paul poster is part of larger problem
                Published: 3:33 PM 09/20/2012
                By Greg Lukianoff

                While election season may seem especially surreal this time around — or maybe it just seems that way every four years — nowhere is it stranger than in the weird parallel dimension known as our college campuses.

                Every presidential election that I’ve experienced since I’ve been president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has without exception been marred by some ridiculous attempt by university lawyers and administrators to limit political debate and discussion. While some of the censorship clearly arises from a stunning lack of understanding of basic principles of law, others seem to come down to “I believe in free speech … but not when you support the other guy.”

                A case arising out of Auburn University in Alabama during the Republican primary season typifies the type of insanity we get to see on a quadrennial basis:

                Auburn student Eric Philips made the mistake of hanging a Ron Paul poster in his window, just as he’d seen students do in support of President Obama and other causes throughout his time at Auburn. Within three hours he was told he needed to take it down. Auburn, recycling a claim that FIRE has gotten so used to seeing that we considered putting it on a company T-shirt, argued that the University was simply enforcing a “safety” policy that it had always had against window hangings.

                Here’s a free tip to universities: If you’re going to claim a safety rationale for censorship, you’d better not leave evidence lying around that shows that you don’t really think safety is an issue. All Philips had to do to disprove Auburn’s safety claims was walk around campus taking pictures of window hangings left up after he received his speech-code surprise. It wasn’t hard to demonstrate that he had been singled out.

                Thankfully, there is good news in the story. According to Philips, the media really understood that a college campus should be a “marketplace of ideas,” encouraging political engagement and disagreement, and getting out of the way of students wishing to advocate for whichever candidate they so choose. The case was covered by local media, John Stossel (who is almost alone among TV journalists in taking issues of campus free speech seriously), and, of course, The Daily Caller. As Philips points out, Auburn learned one of the great truths about censorship: If you try to suppress an idea in a free society, you often actually end up magnifying the message you seek to suppress.

                The bad news, however, and as I discuss at some length in my new book Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship in the End of American Debate, is that the entire Auburn University community should have been even more outraged than the media. Here was a student being told he couldn’t support the candidate he wanted in a way that students have supported their candidates on that campus and campuses around the country for decades.

                Continued on Page 2 >>

                Even if this rule was enforced fairly (and to be clear, it wasn’t), students of a previous generation would have organized protests, marches, and maybe even held a candlelight vigil or two to reject the muzzling of their basic political speech in an environment that should be doing everything in its power to encourage the open exchange of ideas.

                The problem is that students, educated on campuses that over-regulate and apply double standards to speech, have simply gotten used to it. The process of “unlearning liberty,” which the title of my book refers to, has many stages, but the first is simply misinforming students about the rights they have and the importance of those rights. The most dangerous stages, however, come later, when some students come to believe that not only should they not have those rights, but that censorship is what good and noble people do.

                While this case is just a typical example of censorship on campus, the fact that repression of speech has become the new normal in higher education is going to have negative repercussions for all of our freedoms down the road. After all, as FIRE co-founder Alan Charles Kors says, “a nation that does not educate in liberty will not long endure liberty and will not even know when it is lost.”

                Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/20/auburns-censorship-ron-paul-poster-part-of-larger-problem/#ixzz2738S3q8t

                Unlearning liberty: Auburn’s censorship of Ron Paul poster is part of larger problem
                Published: 3:33 PM 09/20/2012
                By Greg Lukianoff
                President, FIRE
                Bio | Archive
                Get Greg Lukianoff Feed
                inShare
                Email This Article
                Print This Article
                Ads by Google

                2012 Economics DegreeFind 2012 Local & Online Colleges. Enter Your Zip & Find Schools Now! Colleges.CampusCorner.com
                M.Ed. University—OnlineConcordia University Online offers two M.Ed. Degrees—Get info now! Discover.ConcordiaOnline.net

                While election season may seem especially surreal this time around — or maybe it just seems that way every four years — nowhere is it stranger than in the weird parallel dimension known as our college campuses.

                Every presidential election that I’ve experienced since I’ve been president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has without exception been marred by some ridiculous attempt by university lawyers and administrators to limit political debate and discussion. While some of the censorship clearly arises from a stunning lack of understanding of basic principles of law, others seem to come down to “I believe in free speech … but not when you support the other guy.”

                A case arising out of Auburn University in Alabama during the Republican primary season typifies the type of insanity we get to see on a quadrennial basis:

                Auburn student Eric Philips made the mistake of hanging a Ron Paul poster in his window, just as he’d seen students do in support of President Obama and other causes throughout his time at Auburn. Within three hours he was told he needed to take it down. Auburn, recycling a claim that FIRE has gotten so used to seeing that we considered putting it on a company T-shirt, argued that the University was simply enforcing a “safety” policy that it had always had against window hangings.

                Here’s a free tip to universities: If you’re going to claim a safety rationale for censorship, you’d better not leave evidence lying around that shows that you don’t really think safety is an issue. All Philips had to do to disprove Auburn’s safety claims was walk around campus taking pictures of window hangings left up after he received his speech-code surprise. It wasn’t hard to demonstrate that he had been singled out.

                Thankfully, there is good news in the story. According to Philips, the media really understood that a college campus should be a “marketplace of ideas,” encouraging political engagement and disagreement, and getting out of the way of students wishing to advocate for whichever candidate they so choose. The case was covered by local media, John Stossel (who is almost alone among TV journalists in taking issues of campus free speech seriously), and, of course, The Daily Caller. As Philips points out, Auburn learned one of the great truths about censorship: If you try to suppress an idea in a free society, you often actually end up magnifying the message you seek to suppress.

                The bad news, however, and as I discuss at some length in my new book Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship in the End of American Debate, is that the entire Auburn University community should have been even more outraged than the media. Here was a student being told he couldn’t support the candidate he wanted in a way that students have supported their candidates on that campus and campuses around the country for decades.

                Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/20/auburns-censorship-ron-paul-poster-part-of-larger-problem/#ixzz2737Z3mhp

      • 😯 👿 👿 👿 👿 👿 There’s 5 for him!

  70. 🙂 LOL

  71. Let’s break it down. Somebody needs to do it. The R’s are the biggest bunch of wimps! But why? WHY DANGIT! This is getting out of hand and no one will do shit. At this point I believe every word of this:

    Fast & Furious and Egypt & Libya:
    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/09/20/white-house-insider-barack-obama-the-butcher-of-benghazi/

  72. Hmmm! let’s try this again. Disappeared the first time.

    Fast and Furious and Egypt & Libya..At this point I believe every word of this:
    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/09/20/white-house-insider-barack-obama-the-butcher-of-benghazi/

  73. Well this is interesting. The Benghazi Libya and Fast & Furious connection – who supplied the weapons for both?

    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/09/20/white-house-insider-barack-obama-the-butcher-of-benghazi/

  74. Even Obama agrees with me;

    ‘You Can’t Change Washington from the Inside’
    Major gaffe overshadows appearance at Univison forum

    BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
    September 20, 2012 3:31 pm

    President Obama has learned something during his presidency: You can’t change Washington from the inside.

    “The most important lesson I’ve learned is that you can’t change Washington from the inside,” he told a Univision forum Thursday. “You can only change it from the outside.”

    • ROMNEY: We’ll give Obama chance to change Washington FROM THE OUTSIDE in November! Hee Heee Heee 🙂

    • WTF?????? Is this BIZARRO SUFA????

      Black Flag is PROUD that Obama agrees with him??

      I think that upgrade you got while you’ve been off-line has a few BUGS! 🙂 🙂

      • Not proud – iconic.

        Obama now has a sound bite equal to Bush

        Bush:
        “Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”

        It’s always nice to see that once in awhile politicians accidentally tell the truth.

  75. @ Anita, to your question as to when, any day now! The world is a mess, Sept 21, will be worth watching, as will all of October.. The FED has said our currency will be worthless, QE3, be ready.

  76. Is Libya attack Obama’s ‘Mission Accomplished’ moment?

    By K.T. McFarland

    Published September 20, 2012

    FoxNews.com

    091912_sr_libyaalert_640.jpg

    Is the Libyan terrorist attack Obama’s “Mission Accomplished moment”? Or his Jimmy Carter moment?

    Why did the White House persist so long in sticking to the fairytale that the terrorist attack and assassination of American diplomats in Libya was a “spontaneous” demonstration that got out of hand, and caused solely by the Muslim world’s reaction to a heinous YouTube video? It was only on Thursday that Press Secretary Jay Carney conceded that it was a terrorist attack in Libya following the congressional testimony of the country’s counterterrorism director.

    Even early public intelligence sources indicated the attacks were planned in advance, timed to coincide with September 11th, and orchestrated by Al Qaeda and violent jihadist groups. Subsequent reports indicated that despite warnings that our ambassador was in danger around the September 11th anniversary, no extra security was provided. Fox News’ Bret Baier also learned the attack was likely carried out by longtime Al Qaeda operative, Sufyan ben Qumu, a Gitmo detainee we transferred to Libya in 2007 and one of our rebel “allies” in the Libyan war. In order words, did we help arm a once-and-future Al Qaeda kingpin, who within a year turned those arms on the very Americans who helped him?.

    If it didn’t have such deadly consequences, it would be farcical.

    So why did the administration continue for so long to stick by a story no one believed? Because the political stakes are so high. At all costs, they have to avoid being held accountable for a failed Middle East policy before the election. They can’t let this be President Obama’s Jimmy Carter moment.

    Politically, the Obama administration is in full damage-control mode, and must avoid all responsibility for the anti-American flames now burning throughout the Middle East.

    The Obama administration is haunted by the 1980 election, when Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan because of a hostage crisis in the Middle East.

    Thirty-two years ago Jimmy Carter’s reelection seemed guaranteed – despite a horrible economy, mounting unemployment, and high oil prices. Carter had orchestrated a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt in early 1979 and planned to run for reelection on his foreign policy record. But in late 1979 Iranian students stormed the American embassy in Tehran and took 52 American diplomats hostage. Carter tried and failed to rescue them, and by election time 1980 he became the personification of an America in retreat.

    Look at the photo of the White House situation room during last year’s attack on the Bin Laden compound. You can read the tension in their faces – if the Bin Laden raid had failed, Obama’s goose was cooked. But the raid did succeed, spectacularly, and Obama rightly deserves credit. The Obama campaign has touted the president’s foreign policy record: he’s not Jimmy Carter. He’s Obama-the-Usama-Slayer.’ The War on Terror is over. We won the Libyan War. The Arab Spring is a success. Al Qaeda is finished.

    They were almost home free….until last week.

    But now, just when they thought they were out of danger from an “October surprise” that could jeopardize Obama’s reelection, another Mideast crisis is reaching up from the grave to pull them down.

    If the Libyan and Egyptian attacks are shown to be the work of Al Qaeda, Obama looks like President Bush with “Mission Accomplished.” The Arab Spring which President Obama was instrumental in shaping, now looks like the Winter of our Discontent. What if the entire Muslim world, from Algeria to Pakistan, erupts in anti-American demonstrations, many violent?

    Politically, the Obama administration is in full damage-control mode, and must avoid all responsibility for the anti-American flames now burning throughout the Middle East.

    By getting out in front of the story now, and spinning their own narrative of events, the administration ensures that no matter what happens next in the Middle East, it’s not their fault. They can’t be held accountable for demonstrations against a YouTube video they had nothing do to with.

    But it might not work.

    What happens if there are more attacks on Americans in the Middle East? What happens when the administration-supported Hollywood film about the killing of Bin Laden comes out? What if the next attack doesn’t result in assassinations but hostages? Can you imagine the national conversation we’d be having in response to a hostage video with Al Qaeda terrorists in black ski masks in front of their black flag wielding a scimitar at the neck a blindfolded, kneeling American citizen? Then it’s not Bush’s “Mission Accomplished,” or Jimmy Carter’s Tehran hostages, it’s Nixon’s “What did the president know and when did he know it?” That’s a story even the mainstream media might decide they can’t suppress.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/20/is-libya-attack-obama-mission-accomplished-moment/#ixzz275HERJ5n

  77. TGIF 🙂 Good mornin All. Didn’t get many answers to some questions yesterday, so maybe I asked questions that were a little to tough. How about some simpler ones. I heard Obamaloni tell how Obamacare got passed because of the people. Is he a blithering idiot or what? Does this jerk not look at the polls? And, of course he says his biggest failure is not passing immigration reform! Really! Forget about the 20+ million unemployed! Of course this may explain it: During our conversation, D’Souza told me that both liberals and conservatives make a big mistake when they think Barack Obama has failed to achieve his goals. High unemployment, crippling debt, a weak foreign policy and fading military power are not accidents, according to D’Souza. They are actually the results of the bigger objectives that Obama seeks: the decline of American prosperity and power in the world. http://personalliberty.com/2012/09/21/the-movie-that-could-defeat-obama/

    A warning for Buck, Mathius, Todd and Charlie, This article may offend you. It may make you look in the mirror and say to yourself “self, your a fool” But that’s between the two of you so I won’t comment any further 🙂

    • G-man,

      You assume that this is not what they want too?

      I would posit that there has been an increase, since the 1960’s in the number of Americans who want to see this country humbled. Being from NY, there is a parallel which consists of extraordinary liberal Jews who want to see Israel humbled too. My more moderate Jewish friends refer to them as “self hating Jews”. I remember attending the National Student Association Convention in the summer of 1967, after the six day war and meeting a bunch who were doing all they could to support the Egyptian/Syrian/Jordanian side. Remember, this was before there was such a pronounced Palestinian issue.

      Part of this is guilt, guilt for things that they should have no guilt for since they didn’t earn it. But they have it anyway. I pointed out the other day that in the scheme of things all residents of the United States are, in the eyes of the rest of the world, the 1%. We, even our poorest poor are doing a damn sight better than Obama’s half brother.

      It is a shame that we turned the teaching of history into the teaching of Social Science (whatever that is) and the dropped teaching even that. People today have no clue of who we are or how we got here or why we are what we are. I am reading several books and biographies now on Teddy Roosevelt and the times in which he lived and the US became a world power. I am reminded of names I forgot years ago, Mahan and Turner and their contemporary (1890-1910) take on what was happening and the effects of previous history on those times. It is interesting to see just how well they were predictors of the future.

      Without learning the thought processes of men like McKinley, TR and Taft, we really cannot understand anything about current times. There was certainly no unanimous core of support for the US joining the ranks of an “imperial power’ no matter how beneficent we thought we were. The point was and still is that we assumed the responsibilities we did after fierce debate and it was not ever forced down the throat of the majority.

      Reading about this period is also instructive in seeing backward. This was, as Turner said, the closing of the West. Still very fresh in everyone’s mind, (only 24 years after Custer) and contemporary with Wounded Knee. These incredibly gifted, intellectual men of action, do an excellent job of answering Charlies questions, not from some 125 years out but, in their case, from yesterday. .

  78. Just A Citizen says:

    GONE FISHING

    🙂

%d bloggers like this: