engineer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 09:57 am
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:

Bobby Jindal is doing his darndest to be the anti-Romney

He's doing a pretty good job too. I wonder how much of it he really believes or maybe he's always been more of the compassionate conservative and now he can show his true colors.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 10:36 am
@engineer,
Hes of the devolved idiot fringe of the GOP. Hes got an MS in biological sciences and hes a CREATIONIST .
Even the main of the GOP doesnt buy that crap anymore
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 10:44 am
Best description of McConnell that I've heard.
Quote:
Chris Matthews calls Sen. Mitch McConnell ‘a tree stump on the lawn you want to cut’
By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo News

Chris Matthews thinks House Speaker John Boehner needs to be respected by Democrats and President Barack Obama. But Sen. Mitch McConnell does not deserve such respect.

"I don't think you need to respect McConnell," Matthews, the host of MSNBC's "Hardball," said at the Atlantic's Washington Ideas Forum on Thursday. "McConnell is a tree stump on the lawn you want to cut—you really just want to haul it out of there."

McConnell, the longest-serving senator in Kentucky history, has consistently refused to compromise with those across the aisle, Matthews said, spending the bulk of the past four years trying to get Obama out of office.

"Opposition has to mean we don't disagree on everything," Matthews said. "You look for areas of agreement. Don't you want to agree?"

Matthews, assessing what Obama's re-election means for both parties, was critical of the divisive comments reportedly made by Mitt Romney on Wednesday during a conference call with donors. The former Republican presidential nominee said Obama won the 2012 election because of "gifts" the Obama campaign had given to blacks, Hispanics and young voters during his first term.

"It's tribalist," Matthews said. "I thought it was going to end at the campaign."

Matthews said presidential elections are "national mandates," and the GOP needs to respect the electorate. "Don't go back and pretend the election didn't happen," he said.

But the progressive talker admitted he's glad we're discussing Obama's second term—and not Romney's first.

"We'd be talking about John Bolton heading to the State Department, God help us," Matthews said. "John Sununu heading to the Vatican ... and 'self-deportation' would be the name of our immigration reform."
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/matthews-mcconnell-tree-stump-152428518--election.html

Unfortunately, because he's so worried about a Tea Party challenge to his own re-election bid, McConnell is not likely to change his tune.

But there are more moderate, and conciliatory, Republican voices starting to speak up, and they can signal a greater willingness to compromise while still providing cover for someone like McConnell, and other Republicans, who are fearful of retaliation by teabaggers in primary elections.

And Matthews is right-- "Don't go back and pretend the election didn't happen"--it's over, and the President won because of votes and not "gifts". It's ridiculous, and insulting, to claim those votes were based on anything other than an appraisal of both candidates and their positions on a variety of issues.
Romney should shut up about it, or, given his business background, focus on how he might contribute in a positive way to the success of this administration and the future economic health of the country. Obama's held out an olive branch to him, and he should take it.



0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 10:51 am
Quote:
White House press secretary Jay Carney took issue on Thursday with Mitt Romney's assertion that President Obama won because he gave "gifts" to voters, such as free health care and lower college loan costs.

"Let me just say that I think that view of the American people …is at odds with the truth of what happened last week," Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One.

He did not go after Romney as vociferously as the Obama camp did for months before the election, but rather offered a defense of the president's policies.

Carney said "making it easier for Americans to go to college, that’s good for America," and allowing young people to stay on their parents health insurance longer so they aren't bankrupted in their 20s by illness, is "good for the economy and it's good for all of us." Overall, he said, the president's policies are focused on strengthening the middle class, which will help America.


source
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 10:53 am
@revelette,
The only "gift" I got out of my Obama vote is relief that I don't have to worry about who a President Romney might have appointed to the Supreme Court.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 11:39 am
@firefly,
Yea, it's bad enough the current SC members play politics like in Florida with GW Bush, and not do anything during our recent election and voter suppression.

Additionally, a republican heavy SC would overturn Roe v Wade, and other screwy stuff that will lean our laws towards less "freedoms." They're suppose to be the party of less government intrusion into private lives - since when?
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 02:26 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
The only "gift" I got out of my Obama vote is relief that I don't have to worry about who a President Romney might have appointed to the Supreme Court.


There are six Catholics on the USSC now. The last one appointed by Mr Obama.

I can't imagine what you're worried about.
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 02:35 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
They're suppose to be the party of less government intrusion into private lives - since when?


That remark is posited on the idea that life does not begin at conception. If life does begin at conception, which a very large number of people think is the case, then intrusion to save unborn babies is as justified as any other law intended to save lives and the unborn have private lives as well.

And nearly 50 million of those unborn private lives have been intruded into since Roe/Wade.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 03:48 pm
@spendius,
Dearie me. I write a post stating a couple of well known facts about the USSC , which had just been mentioned in rel;ation to its constitution, and I get thumbed down.

I write a post going into bat for the unborn baby, who seems to be pretty friendless around here, stating more obvious facts and that is thumbed down as well.

Both posts were couched in reasonable language.

I think A2K is being abused by people who do that sort of thing. The feature was not intended for unreasoning booing.

In neither post did I pass an opinion. I assume ground control knows who is abusing A2K like that and I think the mods should occasionally ask the down-thumbers to justify their actions and especially in cases where there is no justification.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 03:57 pm
@spendius,
You,
Quote:
I write a post going into bat for the unborn baby, who seems to be pretty friendless around here, stating more obvious facts and that is thumbed down as well.


What makes you think your opinion about any unborn baby is good for the mother or the baby?

If you truly believe that any "unborn baby" needs your support for life, go to India or Vietnam where infanticide and abortions are common.

Or, are you just speaking out of your arse again?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 04:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
What makes you think your opinion about any unborn baby is good for the mother or the baby?


It is, without question, good for the baby. Mothers are what their socialisation makes them. Not a one of them was aborted.

Quote:
If you truly believe that any "unborn baby" needs your support for life, go to India or Vietnam where infanticide and abortions are common.


I'm as much against that too. I can't go to those countries. My posts might get there.

And you labelled all of them babies.

You need to get clear in your head when human life starts and defend the point you choose. And not legally because it's a moral issue transcending local and transient jurisdictions.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 04:56 pm
@spendius,
In other words, you're nothing but blather. You can't be bothered to save "any" fetus or newborn baby.
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 05:51 pm
@spendius,
This thread is about a U.S. Presidential election.

The issue of Roe vs Wade, and abortion, is relevant in this particular thread only because one of the candidates supported current law on the matter, and the other was likely to threaten it.

The winning candidate supports current law, and is more likely to appoint Supreme Court justices who will uphold it. That is about the beginning and end of the relevance of the issue in this particular thread.

If you are posting your more general views regarding abortion simply in the hope that others will read them, please put them in another thread more appropriate for that topic.

spendius
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 06:10 pm
@firefly,
You expressed your concern about who Mr Romney might have appointed for no other reason than your need to have women at the mercy of the judges and superior do-gooders such as yourself.

You really are a slippery customer ff.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 06:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
In other words, you're nothing but blather. You can't be bothered to save "any" fetus or newborn baby.


And you are an empty vessel. I'm beginning to think that you have been involved in an abortion.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 11:10 pm
Quote:
Republicans to Mitt Romney: Exit stage left
Posted by Chris Cillizza on November 15, 2012

Republicans don’t want Mitt Romney to go away mad but they do, it seems, want him to go away.

That sentiment was in full bloom following Romney’s first post-election comments — made on a phone call with donors earlier this week. On the call, Romney attributed his loss to the “gifts” President Obama’s campaign doled out to young people and minorities. For many, the comments had an eerie echo of the secretly taped “47 percent” remarks Romney made at a May fundraiser.

“There is no Romney wing in the party that he needs to address,” said Ed Rogers, a longtime Republican strategist. “He never developed an emotional foothold within the GOP so he can exit the stage anytime and no one will mourn.”

Added Chris LaCivita, a senior party operative: “The comment just reinforced a perception — fairly or not – that Romney, and by default, the GOP are the party of the ‘exclusives’. It’s time for us to move on and focus on the future leaders within the GOP.”

Speaking of those future leaders, several of the candidates talked about as 2016 presidential possibilities quickly condemned Romney’s comments as well.

“We have got to stop dividing American voters,” said Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. “I absolutely reject that notion, that description … We’re fighting for 100 percent of the vote.” Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker added that the Republican party isn’t “just for people who are currently not dependent on the government.”

The strong intraparty reaction — just nine days after Romney loss the presidential race — speaks to the desire within the professional political ranks of the Republican party to move on as quickly as possible from an election that badly exposed their weaknesses.

The prevailing opinion among that group is that there is much work to be done and that Romney will have a hand in almost none of it. Put more simply: Thanks for playing. Now go away.

Here’s how conservative columnist Matt Lewis put it in a tweet:

Matt K. Lewis @mattklewis
I'd like to see Romney and his team go out gracefully. (Yes, that requires actually... going away.)

Romney, of course, likely doesn’t share that opinion — still reeling from an election that he quite clearly expected to win but, well, didn’t. (And didn’t even really come close to winning.)

What Romney seems most interested in doing at this point is rehashing why he didn’t win — with an emphasis (at least in his comments to donors) on what was wrong with voters, not what was wrong with his campaign.

That MO, while understandable for someone who has spent the last six-plus years of his life running for president, is tremendously problematic for a party that needs to get away from the stereotype that it is of, by and for white, affluent men even at a time of growing diversity in the country and the electorate.

“The recent comments about what happened in the election are 100 percent wrong,” said Steve Schmidt, who managed John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “The 47 percent comments represent both a fundamental misunderstanding of the country, they offer a constricted vision of the Republican party and the potency of a big tent conservative message. “

Former Virginia Rep. Tom Davis was even more blunt: “It shows a huge misreading of the electoral landscape. A rather elitist misread. Where does he think his votes came from in rural America?”

Also worth noting: The White House was quick to jump on Romney’s remarks. “That view of the American people of the electorate and of the election is at odds with the truth of what happened last week,” Carney said Thursday morning.

Here’s the two-pronged problem for Republicans at the moment: 1) Romney has no motivation to toe the party line now, and refrain from making such comments, given that he will never again be a candidate, and 2) even if Romney quietly steps aside now, the party is left without any sort of elder statesman to help broker future policy and political fights.

To the latter point: While Democrats have Bill Clinton as their triager-in-chief, using his gravitas to help extend and articulate the Democratic brand, George W. Bush seems perfectly content to spend the rest of his days outside of the public spotlight in Texas. And, while John McCain remains an active force in the Senate, he was never someone that Republicans truly saw as one of their own. Now, in Republicans’ best case scenario, Romney is headed to that same path of obscurity.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/15/republicans-to-mitt-romney-exit-stage-left/
cicerone imposter
 
  5  
Reply Thu 15 Nov, 2012 11:20 pm
@firefly,
Isn't that something! They support Romney with voter suppression, millions/billions of dollars, and after he loses, they're ready to trash him again.

Who's confused? The republican party, conservatives, Tea Party, or "all of the above?"

They trashed him during the primaries, supported him when he won the primary, supported him during the campaign, then trashed him when he lost.

I wonder who amongst the republican party would dare to run? LOL


hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Nov, 2012 12:33 am
the lesson of this cycle is "stand your ground and stay true to yourself". almost everyone thought that Romney was the wrong guy, and they were right, but many supported him anyway.

big. mistake.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Nov, 2012 07:43 am
@hawkeye10,
While I would enjoy it if politicians would stay true to themselves, this election cycle makes it clear that standing your ground is likely to get you trampled into the dirt.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Nov, 2012 08:03 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Who's confused? The republican party, conservatives, Tea Party, or "all of the above?"

They trashed him during the primaries, supported him when he won the primary, supported him during the campaign, then trashed him when he lost.

I wonder who amongst the republican party would dare to run? LOL

There was that bipolar manic formulaic mindset during the whole Republican primary process:
Candidate A wins Primary B. Republicans: Candidate A is the greatest presidential candidate of all time. Romney can go to hell!

Then Candidate B wins Primary C. Republicans: Candidate B is the greatest presidential candidate of all time. Romney is a monstrous liar!

Then Candidate C does great in Primary D. Republicans: Candidate C is the greatest presidential candidate of all time. Romney is the worst Republican ever!

When Romney finally wins the presidential nominee for the Rep party. Republicans: Romney's the chewy chocolate moral center of the Republican Party. Romney invented truth and never has spoken a lie in his life. Romney is the greatest Republican candidate EVER!

If they only listened (and remembered) exactly what they were preaching all along then they would have been in a completely different mess. One where Romney wouldn't have been the Republican scapegoat.
0 Replies
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 03:33:54