States of Disapproval
[Posted by Karl]
Jim Geraghty (among others) , relying on Gallup, notes Pres. Obama’s job approval rating for 2011 is anemic in most swing states. Just as notable are Obama’s disapproval numbers in swing states, as they show an incumbent underwater, often with majority disapproval: IA (45.6/45.9); PA (45/47.8); VA (44.5/49); NC (43.7/48.5); FL (43.6/47.8); OH (42.1/50.2); NM (41.7/51.2); NV (41.3/50.6); CO (40.4/52.2); and NH (38.7/54.4).
Geraghty adds that this does not necessary translate to votes which is true, but probably not good for Obama. In 2004 — a polarized, close election — Bush lost states where he had net positive job approval, but did not win one state where he had a net negative job approval. As Jay Cost notes, the only two years where we see a substantial amount of support for the incumbent president among disapprovers — 1972 and 1980 – are also not good news for Obama.
National Journal’s Josh Kraushaar correctly reminds us the Gallup data is from “throughout 2011, reflecting as much the past year as the present,” while noting Obama’s national job approval hasn’t moved much this year. Where recent polls are available, they generally confirm Kraushaar’s hypothesis. I covered IA and NH earlier this month; those states are marginally better than Gallup, but they’re also less economically distressed than most (and Obama is still underwater in NH). In PA, recent polls have Obama at 45/50 and 40/49. In VA, it 48/47 and 42/51. In NC, it’s 47/49 or 50. In FL, it’s 44/49. In OH, it’s 44/51. In NV and NM, GS Strategies has Obama at 41/57.3 and 43.3/56.8 (the firm did not provide a complete breakdown of the sample, but the firm’s polls for FL, OH and VA are close to other public polls). In CO, Ciruli Associates (a local firm) had Obama at 39/53 in December 2011.
The news is marginally better for Obama in January’s Purple Poll (.pdf), even though it spotlights FL (40/56). Obama is underwater in the Southern Swing states (FL, NC & VA) at 42/53 and the Rust Belt (NH, OH & PA) at 41/51. However, he’s above water in the Heartland (WI, MN & IA) at 48/47, and only marginally underwater in the Wild West (CO, NV & NM) at 47/49. That showing in the West is improved from the September poll; his numbers have not moved significantly in any of the other regions. I might trust that uptick, as I doubt it’s coincidence that Obama spent last week in Iowa, Colorado and Nevada. Time is the candidate’s most valuable resource. Obama needs to spend his in states where he has the best odds of goosing his job approval rating to a net positive.
–Karl
Ding!
Karl (8cdbad) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:16 am44% of people in Florida think Obama is doing a good job?
It’s also alarming how well he’s doing in VA, given the geniuses running the GOP there appear to have a problem with both the voters and the constitution.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:22 amI think in the end it’s very plausible now that both party’s voters will be uninspired by their dippy candidates and turnout will be low.
Organization and gotv will carry the day.
Advantage: Obama.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:23 amDustin,
Gotta remember how many in NoVa make a living off the feds. Their economy probably hasn’t suffered much.
Karl (8cdbad) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:27 amfeets!
Historically, lower turnout favors the GOP. Bush’s win in 2004 is exceptional for its high GOP turnout relative to Dems, but I would attribute that to panic that Kerry would abandon the war. I doubt that even Gingrich (let alone Romney) would have the same effect on turnout for Obama.
Karl (8cdbad) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:30 amSemi-related: the GOP is competitive w/ Team O in fundraising:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/01/obama-money-advantage-disappearing/
Karl (8cdbad) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:36 amthat’s a good point – and it’s logical to think that disillusionment with Obama could easily outweigh Team R disappointment in being presented yet another lackluster and uninspiring candidate
Obama has yet to pay a price for the egregious over-hyping what swept him into office. There’s certainly no danger of Wall Street Romney ever paying a price for being over-hyped.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:37 amI have a hard time buying that the GOP will be competitive financially against Obama. There’s been way too much graft or near-graft in the past three years. GM, TARP 2, GE, Goldman Sachs, even Bain… these guys will continue coming out heavily for Obama, financially. The unions haven’t had a better friend in a long time (I know they claim it’s not enough, but that’s how liberals respond to friends).
That only works if we offer an adult choice… an ideological alternative to squishy vague goody good centrism. I wish folks shared my vision for a bona fide conservative laying out how things really work, not compromising with panders, and gave America the chance to make a choice. I know a lot of folks say that is a sure loser, but if so, what’s the point of all of this? Is it just who gets the spoils? I don’t want there to be any spoils.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:48 amhere are some interesting turnout numbers Mr. geoff found
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:02 am44% of florida is idiotic.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:10 amI need a better word than whore for Jennifer Rubin
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:22 amit’s all very disturbingly single white female with her
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:23 amYes, you definitely do.
I suggest “self contradicting hack”.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:26 amI’m thinking deranged condescending twat will do
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:29 amI have a better one Happy call her Colonel Haiku in a dress.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:31 ammaybe Matt Drudge in a dress is more apt
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:38 amI see this as a bad omen for your “post racial” President …
[note: released from moderation. Pick a name and stick with it please, unless it’s a sockpuppet thread. Using two different names in the same thread is definitely against the rules. Thanks. –Stashiu]
Rick James (d1c681) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:49 amTrue dat.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:00 amNot to worry. Obama will simply skunk Romney. May even be another historic win for The One.
cedarhill (ddb52b) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:42 am🙄 The romneybots will blame True America and threaten to pitchfork them even though they voted for him.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:45 amhim meaning Romney.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:45 amPalin would never make it as a VP………..says those who think Joe Biden is a prodigy.
The reason why the left and the paulnut far-right despise her so is because she is an unabashed israel supporter and didn’t abort her baby.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:58 amWhen Palin runs in 2016 and we aren’t hit by a terrorist attack may the far-left eff off.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:01 amCall Rubin all the names you want but remember she gets paid good money to post… how much are you (and I) getting for throwing our commentary out there?
Karl: it’s critical to look at party identification of those expressing disapproval as unhappy Democrats will nonetheless be voting for him in November.
From what I’ve seen, Obama is underwater with moderates and independents in a bunch of places which bodes well for Romney.
steve (369bc6) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:07 amRubin has disdain for anyone that isn’t Romney.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:08 am11. Jenny-female mule, cross between genera almost universally barren, extraordinarily obstinate, dull witted, slow of foot, suffers beating obdurately, ass.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:14 amIt would be a fight for exactly those voters, which would be settled not by policy, but by platitudes and attacks. In other words, quantity of ads.
Obama has more government executive experience (President trumps governor) and any degree of recovery is a better result than 47th out of 50 in boom years.
This was how the Obama Mccain contest worked. Both sought the same middle voters.
It’s counterintuitive, but seeking the center is not the best way to win votes no matter that the poli sci chart shows most of the votes are there. The best way is to provide a clear noncentrist or mushy leadership agenda that is up to the great task that our next president will have (since his job will be to balance the budget and reform entitlements, whether he thinks that’s his job or not).
Otherwise, the election is just not that important. They always say each election is the most important we’ve ever had, but it may mean very little to the long term.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:16 amGreek diplomacy at gunpoint:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXWhTU7PqZo
Happy wanderer (2b2aa4) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:21 am23. Can’t speak to other regions of the Purple Poll but Ogabe’s disapproval numbers are generally less bad than Romney or Gingrich.
GOP in WI young vibrant strong probably falls into line regardless but Perry was preferred. Lost to Ogabe.
MN GOP flaccid, atrophied, bankrupt is more liberal than the base, all bets off on nominee.
Dear Leader anchor state.
Iowa, stoic insanity, too close to call.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:24 amDustin: given the rough split between conservative and liberal votes out there, neither side can win getting just ‘their’ votes, they have to win a majority of the roughly 40% or so of self-identified middle voters. That’s basic math.
As for how to attract those voters, why would you think pushing a conservative agenda would attract voters who are in the middle precisely because they don’t accept conservative principles? Face it, most people in this target group don’t think like you do, they don’t have the same positions you do and they’re not going to vote the way you do. Thus, a campaign that appeals to you is by definition a campaign that will fail to reach these voters.
Pushing a strong anti-abortion message is going to attract people who are wishy washy on the issue? Pushing a flat tax is going to appeal to people who sort of like the idea that high earners pay a higher rate? It doesn’t work that way. A hard line on illegal immigration? Not going to fly with voters who think we shouldn’t be splitting up families.
That’s why I have long thought Romney is more electable than Gingrich. Even if Gingrich were truly more conservative (which I don’t think he is), he scares people in the middle… and with about the only thing Obama has to work with is trying to make middle voters fear the GOP nominee more than they fear another four years of Obama, Gingrich would write the script for Obama.
steve (369bc6) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:32 am27. Nigel is my hero. Kill all the lawyers, but save your swinging arm for the bankers.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:33 amModerates hate Maobama?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:33 amOf course.
But my point is that the low info “center” responds to Reagan conservatism and clear leadership better than it responds to centrism like Bob Dole and Mccain have attempted.
These low info independents want their president to have a spine.
Wow.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:39 amThe only polls that really count are the ones after Labor Day. If the economy continues to suck as it does now or worsens (there is talk of a double dip recession) why would anyone seriously believe Obama has a probable shot at getting reelected? On what? His record? All the republicans have to say is “who do you believe? The democrats or your lying eyes?”
cubanbob (ad2274) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:40 amComing from a Romneytard that is rich.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:40 amthis is, of course, 100% correct.
But how to answer… how to answer…
With Romneycare, very poor job growth, a Jimmy Carter voter, preserving entitlements with vague talk about hope and change?
Records matter, I don’t think that’s a winner.
I think 30 years of fighting for balanced budgets, the contract with america, even a government shutdown, with real ideas rather than just flip flops for political expediency… that matters.
Newt is not the ideal bringer of such a message. He has been inconsistent and looks good in comparison to someone with a very liberal record.
Both Romney and Newt have serious presentation problems, too. Romney is quite a bit more gaffe prone than his supporters might realize. I think that aspect is a wash between those two, but I also think Newt can convincingly run as a conservative choice in the general election. Romney won’t… never mind he can’t (he can’t).
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:43 amDon’t underestimate the ability of this government to try all manner of panders and benefit programs to buy votes. It’s also possible to get the economy to churn a little better closer to the election, even if it’s short lived.
Also possible is a recovery or a war.
The thing is, Obama shouldn’t have won the first time, either.
But you’re right that the economy matters more than the election does. However, I think there’s something much more important than which party the president belongs to. We either get spending on track, or things are going to get out of hand.
Whether we can actually elect such a nominee is pretty damn important, but as you’re showing, that’s not even in our hands.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:48 amRomney and Gingrich are faux conservatives.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:49 amBut if either one wins I will hold my nose.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:53 amand vote for them.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:54 am“With Romneycare, very poor job growth, a Jimmy Carter voter, preserving entitlements with vague talk about hope and change?
Records matter, I don’t think that’s a winner.
I think 30 years of fighting for balanced budgets, the contract with america, even a government shutdown, with real ideas rather than just flip flops for political expediency… that matters.”
Dustin – Cutting government spending in the face of reduced revenues to produce a balanced budget, fighting for tax cuts every year, proposing the types of reforms now being implemented by Scott Walker in Wisconsin, producing four balanced budgets with a hostile tax and spend legislature, maintaining a state near full employment with stagnant population growth rather than being on all sides of every issue over time like Newt Gingrich, bless his baggage and anger, presents a better option to some folks who are willing to actually look at the record objectively.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:56 amScenario play:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/five-paths-forward-for-g-o-p-nomination/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
I really like #4 Mondale/Hart-‘Win Ugly’.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:57 amPlus you have private sector experience, which Newt seems not to understand, and support for Paul Ryan type reforms of entitlements and better positions on immigration.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:59 amI mean, Newt’s the guy Romney has been hammering for weeks for criticizing Reagan from the right… for asking for more spending austerity and more cold warrior mentality. Someone who shut the government down and got welfare reform and lower spending.
That guy is as liberal as Romney? Sure, they both have said stupid stuff about the ind. mandate and both have had some hysterics about the environment (even here, the father of Romneycare < the guy who discussed the ind. mandate and the screaming about the coal plant < the awful Pelosi couch ad) but what of their conservative achievements?
Romney took a very liberal healthcare system and made it more liberal. He took gun control and made it far stronger (signing into law $100 gun registration, and leading the way for the $75 prototype). He took high fees and made them $ hundreds of millions higher, high taxes and cut off "loopholes" to the tune of $350 million, and grew government despite the state having a dreadfully high debt. He increased regulations (Romneycare alone is bad, but that's hardly the whole story) on employers, and if we grade governors on a curve, he's one of the Fs.
I guess if lip service in the last five years is all that matters, both Newt and Romney are approximately the same. It's interesting seeing folks come to that conclusion, and I guess that's why Romney has overcome his record.
If he's the nominee, hopefully he can live up to steve's hopes, but I think he's quite liberal and would govern that way, and the GOP would wind up fighting him quite a bit.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:59 amIt just occurred to me (again) that the model GOP candidates need to emulate is Bob McDonnell, the VA Governor. He won by pushing conservative-ish economic themes, keeping the focus on jobs (#1 issue), downplaying the social conservative issues (without disassociating himself from them) and was able to deflect Democratic attempts to paint him as a lunatic rightwinger.
Dole and McCain didn’t lose because they weren’t conservative enough, they lost because they ran incompetent campaigns. Reagan would have lost doing the things the two of them did.
steve (369bc6) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:02 amI’m glad you pluralized that.
Romney supports, in his words, “an amnesty program”
And he signed into law a program with free healthcare for illegals.
But indeed, he has changed his tune sharply. It really depends on what the polls say.
Newt has private sector experience too, which is something Romney has attacked quite harshly for some reason. But they both have done this, and it’s counterproductive. Particularly for Newt.
If this is going to be settled by attacks, Newt has no chance, so it’s been stupid that he’s resorted to that and he needs to get back on track on conservative ideology.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:04 am6. And why should we believe public numbers, when we have zillions in laundered Green shoots?
Ogabe has the free publicity of the bully pulpit and the MSM has already given notice that the Republican Primary watch is over budget and of no socially redeeming merit.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:05 am#44
Dole lost because the economy was strong. An incumbent has never been turned out in a strong economy.
McCain did run an incompetent campaign. He didn’t try hard enough to paint Obama as a left winger. He didn’t need to be any further to the right to do that.
Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:05 amWe’ll have to agree to disagree. I think we see that candidates who are relatively moderate in the GOP tend to fare poorly in general elections. George W Bush was somewhat moderate, but relative to Mccain he wasn’t, and he definitely appeared to stick to his guns and have a spine on issues.
Same for Reagan. Same for Nixon his first campaign (granted, he also won the second, which I believe is the last time what I view has a RINO has won a presidential election).
If you just see this as picking a point on a spectrum, perhaps this won’t make sense, but what Americans want is a leader who has a spine and is trustworthy when he makes some kind of policy statement. Newt is far from perfect on this, but he’s been conservative on spending for 30 years, and Romney hasn’t been.
It’s actually kinda shocking to see someone with no conservative successes to speak of seen as comparable to someone with a lot of impressive conservative successes. Romney’s main success as MA governor was getting their enormous debt rating improved (not lowered, though… in fact, he’s made their debt situation far worse with Romneycare). Romney’s argument for this debt improvement is liberal through and through, based on tax increases. At least, that’s what the WSJ thought.
What has Romney done that’s conservative? Making money is great, but democrats do that (in fact, Bain employees gave more to Obama than Mccain). Making money and leaving a trail of bailouts is not really super conservative. I know some have said the ind. mandate is conservative, but that just doesn’t ring true so much as it seems provocative.
There’s a reason Meghan Mccain and Donald Frum and the like think we should nominate one guy over the other.
there are good arguments for Romney, but that he’s the same as Newt ideologically doesn’t seem correct to me.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:11 am44. I agree McDonnell is a potential rockstar, more senior than Walker.
If we can jury rig the process to force a brokered convention I’d favor Walker hands down but could vote for McDonnell, has the military cachet.
Not the best man for the task, reminds one of H.W., but ABR|O.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:13 amNo, this is incorrect. Dole lost largely because there was a third party insurgency which was much like a proto tea party. This all goes back to Sununu’s mistake with George HW Bush.
What did I say? What is my argument?
My argument is that these so-called “middle” voters are actually more impressed by clear leaders than they are by ideology. That’s why Reagan and W do better than Mccain and Dole.
Yeah, the economy has a lot to do with it, but if you concede that, shouldn’t we put electability aside and just pick the guy who is most likely to actually balance budgets and reform entitlements?
Either the economy settles it, or it doesn’t. Can’t have it both ways.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:15 am42. ” support for Paul Ryan type reforms of entitlements ”
Thought you’d sneak a Romneyism(lie) by, ‘eh.
Romney has his own plan for SS, fudge the CPI some more, delay retirement, increase taxes, i.e., continue the cash flow entirely in government hands.
Ryan’s plan cuts that plan off at the ankles, for those in view of the finish line.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:18 amThat does sound great, steve, though it’s not just about fear of how democrats paint people as lunatics. It’s about being brave about what needs to be done, as T Paw, Daniels, and Perry have been on spending.
When they put social issues on the backburner, they are saying we have an urgent issue, and they say that in ways that show they aren’t just paying lip service to whatever the polls tell them to say at that moment.
Authenticity is tough to fake. Romney has long since abandoned that effort. For example, he can’t put social issues on the back burner after so outspokenly supporting both pro choice and pro life. Those ads are already made. If you have an opinion on it, you’ll hear Romney disagree with it in the general. Newt has gone a long ways towards abandoning it too, which is why I don’t get upset when people trash him. If he wanted that kind of support from me, he should have been a lot more consistent in his years out of office.
But baggage granted, he still has a record with bona fide conservative excellence on it.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:21 amAlso, Newt has welfare reform on his resume. That is a powerful credential for medicare reform, and indeed, Newt has discussed such a reform.
Romney has repeatedly said he wishes to “preserve” entitlements. In fact, he said he wanted to add back the half trillion to medicare that Obamacare removed. If that’s what you want, vote Romney. I disagree with that, and I doubt that’s what Paul Ryan has in mind.
Newt’s ego and his outspokenness are problems, but they also speak to the guy’s refusal to run it all past the focus group and probably help with authenticity.
It’s hard to say. None of these guys really measure up. Perry was an excellent candidate, aside from the polish and prime time stuff I personally don’t care about (but concede make him a dud anyway).
Perry’s record makes Romney’s look socialist.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:25 amAnd just to preemptively shoot down the Romneyism retort “he was just explaining what the democrats did”, Romney did go all the way to promising to put that money back.
When he talked about preserving entitlements, that’s what he means.
That is centrist politics 101, and Obama will beat him seven days a week at it.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:28 amFor your delectation, from the CBO, somebody must have left them in the exercise yard overnight, they’ve gone all OWS on us:
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/cbo-report-omg
Seriously, does anyone really believe the Progressive arm of the GOP can help us with this mess?
Bring your Mother so I can slap her around, she has sinned.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:37 am“Someone who shut the government down and got welfare reform and lower spending.”
Dustin – You mean lowered the rate of increases in government spending. Check your facts.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:38 am“Perry’s record makes Romney’s look socialist.”
Dustin – Heh. I thought earlier you were complaining about stale Perry comments, yet you just can’t quit the man.
Explain what was wrong with Romney criticizing Perry for demagoguing Social Security as a Ponzi scheme but failing to offer a solution for more than a month. Ponzi schemes typically collapse under their own weight or because they are illegal. Perry was out there scaring people about how all these entitlement schemes were going to collapse but had not offered up his own alternatives as I recall. Give me the timeline.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:43 am“There’s a reason Meghan Mccain and Donald Frum and the like think we should nominate one guy over the other.”
The straw is flaming!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:45 amYou can’t quit Romney.
Sorry if that came out wrong.
Perry’s record is conservative.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:45 amIt is amazingly lucky for Romney that the various Meghan Mccain clones consistently attack Romney’s foes.
Also interesting is how such folks seem to never get around to discussing the relative onerous impact on freedom of Romneycare, or the subsidized abortion it came with.
Seems that of the three, Newt is the least onerous on social lives and freedom and the role of government. He’s offered a lot of opinions on the ind. mandate that are a watered down version of Romneycare (so he kinda sucks too), but he’s only talked about it, and he’s talked about why it’s wrong, more recently.
The main difference between Romney and Newt on the ind. mandate is that Newt notes that if we observe the impact on the romneycare experiment, it’s clear a bad idea. I’d prefer he not need to observe Romneycare to realize that, but at least he sees reality. Romney thinks Romneycare remains a good idea.
Now, Newt argues an ind mandate won’t work and is wrong on various other levels.
I think folks should consider the passionate problem such folks have with government control of how we live our lives when deciding if Romneycare went too far.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:46 am“Newt has private sector experience too, which is something Romney has attacked quite harshly for some reason.”
Dustin – Newt’s private sector experience consists of influence peddling based on his insider status in Washington. He clearly does not understand the business world as evidenced by his clumsy attacks from the left on Romney’s stock holdings, bank accounts and Bain Capital activities.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:48 amNot to worry. Obama will simply skunk Romney. May even be another historic win for The One.
Comment by cedarhill — 2/1/2012 @ 9:42 am
— cedarhill, do you have any money?
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:48 amThanks for noting that I need to substantiate why I consider some arguments on the level of Meghan Mccain’s. You’re right, and I’ve gone ahead and complied.
Now that you’re on record as a die hard extreme opponent of the Gardasil intrusion into our lives as the “needle of sex”, should we support someone who signed into law subsidized abortion and fines for those who don’t get the right health insurance?
Newt says Romneycare is proof the ind mandate concept many have looked at is unworkable. Romney disagrees. Who do you think wins that argument?
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:52 amDustin – I suggest you browse Ace of Spades if you want ramp up your outrage over comments on Tardasil and the needle of sex type.
The thread in question was the one in which EPWJ suggested Palin supported kids getting cancer I believe. Those are the types of commenters you support.
Good on you.
Carry on.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:53 amObama has more government executive experience (President trumps governor)
— And that, of course, explains why Carter ‘trumped’ Reagan.
Heck, it makes one wonder why Gov Rick bothered to run at all!
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:54 am“there are good arguments for Romney, but that he’s the same as Newt ideologically doesn’t seem correct to me.”
It depends which week for Newt, when he was supporting the individual mandate or not, when he was against right wing social engineering or in favor of it, when he was in favor of reducing global warming with Nancy Pelosi or not, when he was in favor of family values or not, when he was in favor of local boards deciding on the residency status of illegal immigrants.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:58 amHey Dustin, how many Democrats do you think Reagan voted for when he was a member of the Democratic Party?
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 11:59 amWell, sure, he should have conveyed his point more clearly.
Yet the attack on Bain is from the right. Bailouts such as Bain led to, and sending jobs to communist countries are not free market activities. They are closed market activities.
The above was Ronald Reagan, of course.
Romney took credit for Bain, and I think he probably took too much credit, for example with the Staples jobs created, given Bain’s fraction of investment. It’s only fair, if Romney is going to take that kind of sweeping credit, that he take responsibility, too. For everything. That includes the FDIC bailout and it includes a lot of jobs in China. Reasonable people disagree about whether outsourcing to China = the free market, but plenty of conservatives wouldn’t go that route because it’s not a free market in their book.
But I grant you have a point. Newt attacking Romney like this just isn’t constructive. If this election is going to be settled by attacks, then Romney will be the nominee and Obama will be reelected.
Newt needs to improve his game by staying away from that kind of argument and living up to why folks like Thomas Sowell believe in him, and why he’s considered to carry Reagan’s torch.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:00 pm“Newt says Romneycare is proof the ind mandate concept many have looked at is unworkable.”
Dustin – Just like John Kerry, he was for it before he was against it.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:01 pm“That includes the FDIC bailout”
Dustin – I’m still waiting for somebody to explain that Politico talking point.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:03 pm“Yet the attack on Bain is from the right.”
Sure, that’s what most people thought. LOL.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:04 pmDustin, the proper way to characterize Gingrich isn’t as a “liberal” — it’s “progressive”.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:05 pmI’m out for a bit.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:06 pmComment by daleyrocks — 2/1/2012 @ 12:01 pm
Which is a hell of an improvement over actually for it, and still defending it, and planning to impose it.
A hell of a lot better.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:06 pmInteresting question. Of course, the democrat party has devolved a lot. I’m sure Reagan wouldn’t say he left that party, but it left him.
I think Jimmy Carter was a lot worse than Reagan, and adults should have seen that and voted accordingly. But to each his own.
I also think a return to Reagan Bush is just what MA needed, and by that I mean someone who stands up and leads, even when it’s hard, at least appealing to the citizens instead of collaborating on ways to control choices.
I disagree, Romney has a single failed term as governor and was pretty unpopular by the end, with a pronounced failure on the things he set out to accomplish.
Reagan had eight years of tremendous success governing a large state, which is superior to what Carter accomplished in his disastrous term of office.
Actually, you are lying and you know that because we discussed this both in private and in that thread. I was extremely critical of EPWJ’s comments about Palin.
Your attack on Perry was rather awful.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:06 pmWSJ’s McGurn:
“Those of us who believed that a primary fight would toughen Mr. Romney up have little to show for it. Far from sharpening his proposals to reach out to a GOP electorate hungry for a candidate with a bold conservative agenda, Mr. Romney has limited his new toughness to increasingly negative attacks on Mr. Gingrich’s character. It’s beginning to make what we all assumed was a weakness look much more like arrogance.”
Oh, snap.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:07 pmNewt has private sector experience too, which is something Romney has attacked quite harshly for some reason.
— Romney attacked Newt over his
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:09 pmrevisionistalternative history Civil War novels? I must have missed that speech.I already conceded that Newt’s attack was very poorly made, but I also explained my point. Your response is to repeat what I conceded? LOL indeed.
Actually, it’s Romney who described himself as progressive.
And Gingrich’s record includes fighting for balanced budgets all throughout his career, welfare reform, and being very robust in the cold war.
That’s progressive in the literal sense, though. Newt’s right about how what constitutes progress on these issues.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:10 pmA legend has passed – Chicagoans remember Don Cornelius:
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/good_day/don-cornelius-dead-suicide-obituary-soul-train-herb-kent-memories-20120201
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:10 pmforgetting all issues of government intrusion on liberty or goverment comandeering of property for the benefit of others, Mitt cannot, even in hindsight, even with evidence of rising costs, reduced access to care, preparations to RATION care – IOW reduction in quality and availability of care, IOW failure, admit mandates are a mistake.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:12 pmA link to the thread where daleyrocks claims I supported EPWJ in order to deflect my criticism of one of his awful comments.
Daleyrocks, do you concede you are mistaken?
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:12 pmIt’s pretty simple, actually. Normally, if you buy a company, you get the assets and the liabilities. If you’re clever, you might find a way to get the taxpayers to take care of the liabilities and pocket the profit. Some say this is not an example of the free market because those funding the profits were not free… they were taxed to do something they probably didn’t want and didn’t benefit from.
Since that company had millions in profitability when destroyed, that money, in my opinion, should have covered the liabilities instead of the FDIC.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:15 pmI’m waiting for Romneybots to predict the weather.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:16 pmProfessor Michael MacDonald of George Mason:
“In counties where Gingrich did better, Republican turnout was up over 2008. In counties where Romney dominated, turnout was lower.”
Enthusiasm, it’s what’s for din din November.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:18 pmSimple minded snark aside, yes, that’s exactly right. Newt flip flopped on the ind mandate. His argument is not even that convincing, as I already noted I don’t understand why Newt would need to see Romneycare fail to realize an ind mandate can’t work. You can’t just ramp up demand like that and hope for the best.
But alas, Romney disagrees and you expressed quite a zealous opposition to intrusions into a single healthcare choice (That didn’t even happen and had an opt out), yet when it’s time to discuss whether Romney is inferior to the opponents on this record, you tend to just deflect by blasting someone with a better (or at least less-bad) record.
I think it’s bad faith.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:18 pmbtw, I didn’t know Politico had discussed Romney’s bailout. I don’t need democrats to tell me that Romney has some baggage predating his lengthy yet amazingly unaccomplished political career.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:21 pmSomebody’s carrying Perry’s torch.
Oh wait, that’s not a “torch” . . . although it is flaming.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:24 pmI went back and checked, and I reference EPWJ in that thread eight times, and I’m critical of him all eight times. In fact, I am surprised at how hostile towards Eric I got.
Daley’s recollection is that I supported something I repeatedly criticized and even emailed daley to criticize, so I am pretty sure he knows his claim is untrue. But maybe he just has memory problems?
I guess his claim of support is that I have agreed with Eric on completely unrelated stuff? That says a lot about how Daleyrocks sees this discussion stuff.
I’m just calling them like I see them. Barack Obama himself could say something in this thread, and if it was true, I’d concede that without hesitation.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:28 pmIcy is carrying Romney’s torch but she took an arrow in the romney.
😉
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:29 pm79. I remember Cornelius and Soul Train, prolly when I worked third shift, at bed time. Pat Boone ‘American Bandstand’, and Casey Kasem also helped tuck me in.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:30 pmCan you explain what you mean?
I’m trying to interpret this given your word that you don’t intend these comments to be personal insults. Of course, you’re a man of your word and you don’t mean to gay bait or personally attack those you disagree with, given your outraged and all caps claims to that effect.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:31 pm88. ” I reference EPWJ in that thread eight times, and I’m critical of him all eight times”
Sorry, you do not do enity well. Try to let you’re inner primitive out more.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:32 pmWhich is a hell of an improvement over actually for it, and still defending it, and planning to impose it.
— Sarah has been flogging that horse so long she now has enough material to make a nice couch. Perhaps she can invite a couple of former Speakers of the House to sit on it.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:33 pmenmity*
Having trouble with the M key, cracker and PB syndrome.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:33 pmI agree. Though I still am easily provoked.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:35 pmThe inner machinations of icy’s mind is an enigma.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:36 pmSarah is right, and Mitt is a contender for President. Why shouldn’t this issue keep coming up? Romney has promised a repeal of Romneycare. That is quite a bold promise… and I’m not sure that he was being honest when he made it. I think he’ll say anything, and his stance on this issue and how hard he fights on this kind of issue matters quite a lot.
You just output out unrelated snark like that, and it’s like arguing with a mad libs routine.
Who cares about the couch ad? We’re talking about twenty billion dollars and freedom of economic choices.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:38 pmAnn on conviction:
“Mitt can argue every side of an issue. He can argue with such passion that you feel he actually believes what he’s saying. But he really doesn’t.”
Meh.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:47 pmOMG, it’s just a joke! Dohbiden understands that, and he’s . . . well, he’s Dohbiden!
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:53 pmKeep those checks and vouchers comin’:
https://twitter.com/#!/alexcast/status/164562040168525824
So does Ogabe have the guts to flip off a real man like Willard when the little red light is off his camera?
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:54 pm🙄 Icy understands the inner machinations of his mind and he’s……well,he’s Icy!!!
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:54 pmSo, Ann thinks that Mitt can do a killer Newt impression.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:56 pmSo what? You’re joking by being nasty and personally insulting people who make arguments you disagree with, after explaining in allcaps (or boldcaps if I recall correctly) that none of this is meant personally.
By all means, present yourself that way, but it’s not very persuasive.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:56 pmI’m waiting for Romneybots to predict the weather.
Comment by Dohbiden — 2/1/2012 @ 12:16 pm
— A pipe will burst in your basement, and mom will tell you to go play outside in the fresh air.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 12:58 pmUm……………ok.
I’m waiting for Icy to predict what will happen in the year 5059.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:00 pmI think she thinks Mitt is a really convincing liar, actually. And I agree. When I see Mitt promote abortion rights, he’s totally convincing. When I see Mitt promote pro life, he’s totally convincing. He appears to be an adult who knows what he thinks and has principles he can never waver on. Indeed, he says he won’t waver.
Yet he made a 180.
And why is that relevant, rather than snark?
Because Mitt Romney is promising a lot of nice stuff, like a repeal of Obamacare. How does Romney know he can achieve that? How do I know he means it?
I think I have to ignore everything Romney says.
Of course, you’ve noted Newt is no saint either, and I’ll concede as much. I pretty much have to ignore at least a lot of Newt’s commentary and look to his record too.
Both of these guys have a mixed record on rhetoric. One has a much more liberal record on policies.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:00 pmIcy: Cedarhill do you have any money?
Why? You got gold to sell. Or discounted shares of GLD?
cedarhill (ddb52b) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:02 pmDamn, Indiana just passed a right to work law.
That is a hell of an accomplishment for the GOP in Indiana.
That kind of fight is what I want to see from Newt. There is no need to attack Romney… let the rank and file do it… it’s fun. Just show us an alternative that is serious about policy.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:05 pm“The economy is improving?”
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/01/news/companies/american_jobs/index.htm?iid=Lead
“Well, Laura, if you have a better line I’d like to hear it”.
Try “This is the day the seas will begin to subside.” An oldie but goodie.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:06 pmYes dustin.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:06 pm108. Sad Daniels didn’t support it, prolly sign it now tho.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:08 pmHe’ll sign it (at least I’m pretty sure).
This is the kind of argument Romney supporters need to be making, too. He’ll sign it, even if he doesn’t fight for it.
It’s a shame such an argument relies on my (nonexistent) faith in folks like Mitch McConnell.
It’s a shame the party isn’t organized enough to just be totally frank about this, and offer some kind of super compromise like a change in Senate leadership if we nominate a RINO.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:10 pmThat is a lie, Gary.
JD (0d2d9f) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:18 pmSarah is right, and Mitt is a contender for President. Why shouldn’t this issue keep coming up? Romney has promised a repeal of Romneycare.
— I think you meant Obamacare, Mr Freudian Slip.
That is quite a bold promise… and I’m not sure that he was being honest when he made it. I think he’ll say anything, and his stance on this issue and how hard he fights on this kind of issue matters quite a lot.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:19 pm— How hard he fights DOES matter a lot. And okay, you’re “not sure”. Sarahw IS sure, and her unrelenting repitition of ‘Romney won’t repeal Obamacare, and he’s going to institute a VAT’ is, to say the least, coming across as an ad hom.
RIVIERA BEACH— Authorities are seeking the public’s help in identifying a man who robbed a McDonald’s on Saturday while wearing a President Barack Obama mask.
[note: released from moderation. Pick a name and stick with it please, unless it’s a sockpuppet thread. Using two different names in the same thread is definitely against the rules. Thanks. –Stashiu]
Ronald (d1c681) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:20 pmMitch signed the law.
My apologies, btw, as I looked into it and it seems that Daniels did support the measure.
I assume there’s some kind of ‘that’s not exactly how I would do it’ argument out there (there usually is), but it seems Mitch is still on the right side of most of the issues I care about.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:30 pmYeah, you got me fair and square on that one.
It basically is an ad hom. She is attacking his character, since he’s promising to do that.
I think it’s a fair attack, but it is an attack on Romney personally.
Regarding Mitt and the VAT:
As usual I can’t in good faith say I have any idea what Mitt really thinks. A consumption tax I great disagree with, a flat tax I support. He’s just saying about the consumption tax what Newt has said about the individual mandate, though. It’s all hot air, in my opinion.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:35 pmThey also have tried to ask Mitt directly about a VAT, and he doesn’t rule it out.
But like I said, what does that mean? Trying to parse this guy’s many statements on any issue is completely beyond me. I think he can appear to support just about anything, and I’m just looking at Mitt’s record.
Mitt’s record on taxes is poor. he increased fees, and he “closed loopholes”, but most of all, he didn’t do what needed to be done on spending, particularly with Romneycare.
The bottom line is that if you do things like that, you are forcing high taxes in some way. Maybe it won’t be called a tax, and maybe that tax will come later, but both parties have a huge problem with spending money on projects they like while trying hard not to be associated with the necessary price.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:39 pmEff you Icy.
Not literally.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:40 pmand yeah, I know a consumption tax is not necessarily a VAT. If someone wants to show me a quote of Mitt rejecting the VAT, that would be great.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:41 pmI’m waiting for Icy to predict what will happen in the year 5059.
— The Church of the Devine Lightworker, from their headquarters on Moonbase Gingrich, looking down upon the ruined Earth (who knew that all of those spontaneously combusting Chevy Volts would bring about climategeddon?) blesses the mutants, for they shall inherit the Democratic Party.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:42 pm“Devine”? Yeesh!
[As usual, I blame my iPhone]
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:44 pmOkay, cedarhill. First, what leads you to believe that Obama will “skunk Romney”. Second, if Obama does win, what would be “historic” about it?
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:53 pm113. “That’s a lie”
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/260410/mitch-daniels-indiana-republicans-should-drop-right-work-bill
Honesty includes knowing whereof one speaks.
More or less.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:54 pmDustin, my problem is that Sarahw says Romney instituting a VAT is a done deal, and she has absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this is the case.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:56 pm118. Not with anything of yours or mine, certainly.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:57 pmg.g. he’s going to sign it, so what’s the problem?
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:57 pmGary, that is not Mitch actually opposing the bill.
It’s hard to justify Mitch’s tactic in that case, but then I’m in Texas where the legislature doesn’t need to be coddled to get decent results.
The GOP’s passing right to work in Indiana is pretty impressive when you consider recent history there, politically. Sure, it’s more satisfying if Mitch doesn’t wheel and deal with liberals and get what he can get at any particular time, but what matters most is real results.
And Daniels signed that law today, after all, because it was passed, which was no minor accomplishment.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 1:58 pmHe already did, albeit very recently.
The problem is that the democrats got some mileage out of a really lame tactic. But I don’t think Mitch had a choice in that case.
But there’s a fine line between being a savvy fighter of democrats and a squish. I measure the difference in results.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:00 pmThat was 2011, Gary. And it was not because he didn’t support it, but rather, because it was blocking moving forward with his legislative agenda. I guess you were also unaware of his aggressive ads in favor of this. So yes, it was a lying lie what you told.
JD (0d2d9f) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:01 pm124. “Sarahw says Romney instituting a VAT is a done deal”
Not merely false but absurd. We have repeatedly quoted Romney as “open to the idea of a VAT”.
He has a 160 page ‘economic plan’ consisting of Republican boilerplate. Nothing in it is even specific let alone a detailed proposal of legislation.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:01 pmI meant to say I grant your point. I guess I neglected to do so.
Romney not answering clearly against the VAT is not a reliable basis to say he will go that way. But my response, however unsatisfying it is, was that it’s the spending, not the taxing. All spending = taxing. All “I will preserve entitlements” = taxing.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:02 pmsteve,
Yes, there are many disapprovers who will vote for Obama anyway. But that’s why I didn’t highlight the 56% disapproval in NY (Marist poll), or talk about Oregon. In swing states, job disapproval is more likely to reflect electoral problems with the demos you mentioned.
gary,
The GOP favorability ratings in the Purple Poll aren’t great, but favorability is a different beast than job approval. Indeed, Obama still has higher favorables than job approval ratings. IMHO, job approval is far more salient. If you hire someone incompetent, their charming personality only saves ’em for so long. O’s favorables, while still higher than JA numbers, have been converging toward them. Those voters who decide to fire him will suddenly find a lot of his previously charming qualities to be annoying turnoffs.
Karl (f07e38) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:05 pmMitch will never get the kind of support I wished he would. That “Truce” comment came across to me as a truly conservative comment about the urgency of the situation, and yet so many folks read “squish” instead of savvy there.
Wish I could get y’all on my wavelength on such things.
But we need more of what the GOP is doing in Indiana and less of what Romney and Newt are both doing lately.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:06 pm129. It was not his initiative and coming around after his lack of leadership was noted and ingnored is non-support.
If you have something substantive to contribute, proving his being behind the push put it up. Ads aren’t squat, show the trail of custody.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:07 pm132. Hear that.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:10 pmRe the vat… He promises it from a distance as it’s so dangerous; I’m on a phone now so exhaustive links are outof the question but the latest telegraph was through Coleman.At this point only categorical denial would suffice. From Coleman, his “advisors” are “advising” it. He means to resort to a VAT; he’s waiting for his ceerladers to start telling folks what an excellent idea this is, or tolerable, or necessary , whatever, while keeping his distance from blowback. He should be asked point blank. If he does not acknowledge the atrociousness of a federal Vat , it’s on his table and he won’t take it off, you should assume it is his plan. You should not be hhoping for what you would wish to be true
Sarahww (455c47) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:11 pmNot merely false but absurd. We have repeatedly quoted Romney as “open to the idea of a VAT”.
— gary, are you and Sarahw a team? I said her, not you.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:12 pmGary, I’m not trying to take a side, but when JD’s called BS on something I’ve said, I’ve at least been able to see where he’s coming from. Even though I mean what I’m saying in complete good faith, it’s healthy to see how someone else, in good faith, calls BS. At a minimum, I know a few pitfalls I can reason around or provide evidence for.
You have shown an example of Daniels relenting on Right to Work legislation, but JD’s point is that Daniels did agree with such legislation and his relenting was tactical because there was other stuff he prioritized over it at that point… and as Icy notes, he’s signed the thing.
We all like the right to work law, and our real issue is how much fight is justified. I honestly barely even remember Mitch giving the democrats their temporary victory when they fled their duty to their state. I bet that was very frustrating to conservatives then, but just imagine how frustrating it is to liberals now, that such a fight amounted to absolutely nothing.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:16 pmSometimes it’s a happy accident how these comments order themselves.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:16 pmIcy, I think Sarah is granting that she’s merely assuming something about Romney’s plan, based on some reasonable data she’s got. Granted, she’s interpreting this with her own bias, but I don’t think there’s anything dishonest there.
What would be better is a better plan. It’s been a while since I looked at Romney’s proposals, but a lot of them were awfully vague.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:18 pm137. “Sarahw says Romney instituting a VAT is a done deal”
Did you miss “Round up the usual suspects”?
Yeah, I’m the slimey one.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:18 pmWasn’t aware Abortion was a woman’s right issue.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:27 pm138. Granting politicians pride of place in the halls of honor is an alternate universe.
Executives can be the leaders of their secular party, and no doubt Daniels has earned the expectation in IN that he’s the 800 lb. gorilla in the room.
But the legislative leadership took point on this one over his ‘order’. It is Feb. 1 and IN is a parttime legislature. If you think he moved it to the head of the list for this session on his initiative, produce.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:27 pmromneyboehnerpalooza coming to a town near you
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:30 pmStill, I’m really pleased with the right to work law in Indiana, a rust belt state, where the unions used to rule.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:31 pmhttp://www.indystar.com/article/20120130/NEWS05/120130014/Gov-Mitch-Daniels-vows-sign-right-work-bill-Indiana-Senate-plans-final-vote-Wednesday
“Today, he said he’d changed his mind to pursue it in his final year in office because “eight years of evidence convinced me we were going to need it” to bring in jobs.”
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:35 pmGary gets do redefine support as far more stringent than actual support. It was the right idea at the wrong time in 2011. He actively supported it this time, in word and deed, and signed thedamn thing. Yet Gary deems that non-support. Good Allah.
JD (65d1c1) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:37 pmSupport is not support. Your brain is frozen.
JD (65d1c1) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:38 pm150. Well since we’re redefining ‘support’, let’s do ‘lie’ and ‘is’ while we’re at it.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:41 pmI like Mitch much more than I did Perry. I probably would have had a stroke had he run, from all the nastiness he would have taken. Just on the truce or his spouse, the indications were that Daniels was going to be fricasseed if he ran.
So he didn’t. They guy was totally frank about his priorities, and that’s how he leads… whatever he can get, he’ll take, and he will keep rolling and take what he can get tomorrow, too.
The guy has all the pizazz of an elderly moose, too. Why that matters is beyond me.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:42 pmOkay, were you wrong, or did you lie?
JD (0d2d9f) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:44 pm152. Under Rollins in Reagan’s adminstration Daniels was part of the political arm, I’d rather see him in the Treasury or the like in a future administration.
He has an uncertain step.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:47 pm153. Neither:
http://race42012.com/2011/02/22/mitch-daniels-right-to-work-blunder/
He has come around because it became a political liability not to do so.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 2:53 pmGary, Mitch got something very important accomplished in Indiana by conceding the fight on Right to Work. He got a massive school voucher program in place.
Education reform is actually one of the most critical things to turning this country around.
What did it cost, long term, that Daniels gave in on one thing in order to pass another? Apparently it didn’t cost anything. Even if you give Daniels no credit for Right to Work, it did happen.
Your post calls this a strategic mistake, yet the battle was won. It challenges the notion Daniels can make hard decisions, but perhaps this is an example of Daniels making such a hard decision in a way that works the best.
All I know is that the results are great. Very few politicians have so much good happen on their watch. A lot of our contenders actually have a lot more bad than good. Some try to skate by on rhetoric alone.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:00 pmRight idea wrong time is not not-support. Having something else as a higher priority at a point in time is not not-support. His words and actions give lie to your fantasy.
JD (0d2d9f) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:04 pmSpambot.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:07 pmMitch said RTW would derail his agenda and bam next thing you know everything’s at a standstill.
He’s a very smart man.
This year he saw a window.
It’s really that simple.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:23 pmRight to Work in IN came up when Walker in neighboring WI could have used moral support, when fleabaggers were ditching for Harvard IL.
The IN legislature also ignored Mitch on Planned Parenthood divestiture.
Why is it so hard to call an elitist a follower?
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:24 pmHe’s very blanc mange, but that’s exciting for some ‘bobby soxers’ like Rubin.
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:26 pmGreece throws itself on the mercy of the Germans, a destitute orphan:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/greece-warns-it-will-soon-be-condition-absolute-poverty
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:28 pmMr. gary it wasn’t RTW that came up in Wisconsin it was an issue of decertifying public employee unions, something Mr. Mitch had already done in Indiana – his first year in office I think.
So, to be clear, Mr. Mitch had already bravely blazed a trail on the challenges Mr. Walker was facing. Without Mr. Mitch demonstrating that this was possible, Governor Walker might never have dreamt it was something he could accomplish as well.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:29 pmFinally, an endorsement for Ronaldus Paoulus:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/im-bill-gross-and-i-endorse-ron-paul-president
Heads up he buys and sells your mortgage, your 401K, your kid’s education,…
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:33 pm163. Sorta kinda, Mitch rescinded an earlier EO granting State employees the right to negotiate benefits as well as pay in contract talks.
He ‘pledged’ at that time and on re-election not to pursue RTW.
Walker’s was a real initiative, WI was first in the nation, 1936(?) to grant the right and passed into law at that time, to not merely State employees but even Municipal employees.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:38 pmyeah i maybe over-sold that a little
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:40 pmHonest, I’m not trying to drag Mitch thru the mud, let alone lump him with you know who, I just think courageous and principled is just a bit of a stretch.
Better than T-Paw, you bet.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:44 pmHonest, I’m not trying to drag Mitch thru the mud, let alone lump him with you know who, I just think courageous and principled is just a bit of a stretch.
Better than T-Paw, you bet.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:44 pmI still like him a lot though I was very disappointed in his state of the union thing and I thought his dig at Newt was very very tacky given his own rather tawdry marital life.
And yeah his decision not to run for president gave the courageous mantle a good ding.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:50 pmWell, I would love to see these other leaders who show Mitch true courage and principles, provided they can match Indiana for results.
Of course, anyone who worships any of these politicians is deluding themselves, but if the GOP was full of guys like Daniels I think we’d be in much better shape.
Yes, he conceded a victory on an issue to democrats, however, that was a temporary victory that seems to have worked out really well for the good guys.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:52 pmYeah, that sucked.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:53 pmMitt’s in favor of automatic increases in the minimum wage, what could possibly go wrong;
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 3:58 pmhttp://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Romney-supports-automatic-hikes-in-minimum-wage-2921805.php
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:02 pmRomney’s not very smart about business stuff
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:09 pmAww, come on Jim, just come out with it, the guy’s a Great Society Democrat:
http://www.rollcall.com/news/demint_calls_on_romney_to_reframe_comments_on_poor-212035-1.html
There’s no fog on the mirror, just lime the body and let’s heal the living.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:15 pmComment by Dustin — 2/1/2012 @ 7:22 am
44% of people in Florida think Obama is doing a good job?
This whole doing a good job poll is misleading, and not correctly understiood by most people, with a few exceptions, like Bill Clinton.
Most of the time, people realate that to current events – note the present tense of the word “doing” – the most important things that happened ove rthe past 4 to 6 weeks maximum.
That is why President Bush the Elder’s approval rating was veyr high at the time of the end of thw gUldf War
It’s also alarming how well he’s doing in VA, given the geniuses running the GOP there appear to have a problem with both the voters and the constitution.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:15 pm_____________________________________________
44% of people in Florida think Obama is doing a good job?
I’d say that by any measurement — unless one is an ultra-liberal — President “Goddamn America” is far, far worse than George W Bush. Yet, so far, the latter generated higher negatives in various polls than what his successor is getting. That undoubtedly reflects all the nitwits in this and other countries (Hello, Venezuela!!) who do back flips to embrace soft-touch leftwing politicians and figureheads, no matter how trashed up the nation or community they’re serving. Why? Because such liberals in positions of authority are perceived as being so nice, humane, loving, generous, sophisticated—and easy to take advantage of by places full of flim-flam artists, flakes and ne’er-do-well opportunists.
Mark (31bbb6) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:19 pmThis got sent before ut was ready.
At the time the end of the Gulf War, (before teh abandonment of the Kurds and espoecially teh shiites in teh south became clear) President Bush’s job approval rating was very high, but it didn’t mean the general; approval of the the way he had done his job as president was very high. Bill Clinton knew that./ Later on, sometimes he would do things, get a poll, and try toi argue it refelected a more long range opinion of himself.
As it gets close to the time to vote, the answer to that question tends to get more long range, and is associated with the probability of voting or not voting for that person.
All that this poll means is that 44% of the people in Florida liked the State of the Union message, or didn’t think too badly of it, or they liked something else he had done or not done.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:20 pmNewt wins the a-hole endorsement!
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/01/report-trump-to-endorse-gingrich-tomorrow-in-nevada/
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:21 pmSome Neumayer guy at American Spectator:
“If “electability” is the goal, why don’t the politically correct plutocrats of the GOP just call for a one-party state? That way they could win every time.”
We gots to track down Generic Republican, that fellow is kicking butt.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:26 pm_____________________________________________
If you hire someone incompetent, their charming personality only saves ‘em for so long
I wonder if those who give Obama the most benefit of the doubt because of what they perceive as his charm are the same types most likely to be the easiest targets for salesmen of used cars, aluminum siding, swampland in Florida or the Brooklyn Bridge? But, at the same time, I’m giving such suckers the benefit of the doubt in assuming they’re totally ignorant of Obama’s scroungy “Goddamn America” background.
Mark (31bbb6) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:29 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romneys-trouble-is-his-near-perfection/2012/01/31/gIQAyv4pfQ_story.html
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:32 pmIf you believe in the minimum wage, or believe it is not too high, or that it doesn’t cover too many jobs, well, then, you would be in favor of indexing it, like tax brackets, and that’s exactly what he came out in favor of here.
Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney renewed his support Wednesday for automatic increases in the federal minimum wage to keep pace with inflation , a position sharply at odds with traditional GOP business allies, conservatives and the party’s senior lawmakers.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Romney-supports-automatic-hikes-in-minimum-wage-2921805.php#ixzz1lBBVw3jb
Now the case against raising the minimum wage, or against indexing it, is really a case for lowering it, but nobody dares to make that argument, unfortunately. There’s really no case for letting it go up and down in real terms randomly, except the case taht Congress and the stgates get laws wrong, so they shouldn’t always be effective.
There really need to be some jobs with easy hiring standards and high turnover. The minimum wage did not cause trouble until 1951, when it was extended to cover many more jobs.
It is quite possible to have a low minimin wage and still maintain competitive pressure to raise wages. For instance, there could be a minimum wage of $10 an hour or more (maybe 410 an hour is getting low now) for anyone who is not paid more often than once every two weeks, and higher if someone is paid monthly. And even a higher wage for those paid once a week, no later than 10 days after the last day in the pay period, as compared to someone paid more promptly. Yes, they would quit more easily. That’s the idea.
Or the number of employees paid below the minimum wage could be limited to 3 per corporation or something. This would help small businesses while keeping pressure to raise wages. And delayed payment could have a penalty.
As for Romney, he doesn’t give much thought to anything.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:32 pmJimPethokoukis: “Great story in The Real Romney. A local Mormon family had 2 sons paralyzed. Romney quietly helped them for years, time + $”
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:36 pmallahpundit: “Gingrich’s Nevada campaign appears in disarray” http://t.co/045Z8YYF
JRubinBlogger: “@allahpundit as opposed to the other 45 states?”
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:38 pm180. Well Adelson seems to like Neut. ‘Course up here in Minnesotastan, Target gave $250K to some right-wing PAC and my relations(by marriage) joined the boycott.
Kmart is still going under, Shopko’s lot has mostly employees’ cars, but WalMart is expanding.
Target only employs half the state.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:38 pm182. Perhaps I’ve said some things about aged NYT spinsters I should be ashamed of–she doesn’t hang with Client #9 after all.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:43 pmThen again, they have the black sheep of the Dayton Hudson clan, joining the geniuses of Ventura and
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:44 pmFranken, too much lutefish.
Romney is very set it and forget it which can make tasty chicken but sometimes you end up sacrificing valuable liberties
oops
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:45 pmOT, he really is that stupid;
http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2012/02/01/anthony-weiner-paid-13k-in-campaign-funds-to-private-investigators-to-chase-down-non
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 4:52 pmI just wanted to add that I don’t think Gary was lying about Mitch. I just think he overstates his case and I disagree about what this means about Daniels as a leader (I mean, for God’s sake… the results speak for themselves).
But lying? No, I think Gary showed where he got his impression.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:09 pmyou can’t boycott Target where I live cause they don’t allow any competitors
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:13 pmDon’t Worry Anthony, chuckles the manboobed spectacle will still defend you.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:25 pmLies! Lies! They don’t believe a word you say.
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:37 pm“I think it was a cool, level-headed decision by the voters in Florida.”
– Dennis Miller
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:40 pmPaging Tommy Christopher, to the red courtesy phone.
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:41 pmObama has his own enemies list that he has filled with the names of corporate CEOs that he hasn’t been able to bumrush via the MSM in his hip pocket. Those men and women, along with the small business owners who have seen their businesses wither on the vine, have a score to settle with the bum in the Oval Office.
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:45 pmas do the majority of the American people.
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:46 pm“The reach and scope of Governor Romney’s primary victory in Florida was enormous. He not only defeated Newt Gingrich by more than 14 points, Romney’s total was larger than the combined total of both Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Romney won among men and women; in all age, income, and education categories; among whites and Hispanics; among those who support and oppose the Tea Party; among those who decided early and those who decided late; and among evangelicals. Among the only categories Romney did not carry was those who described themselves “very conservative” (Gingrich carried 41 percent of the vote while Romney took 30 percent). Those who consider themselves “somewhat conservative” went for Romney 52 percent v. 32 percent for Gingrich.
Almost half the voters in Florida (46 percent) said electability was their top concern – and of that group, they preferred the former Massachusetts governor by 26 percentage points. And of the 62 percent of voters who said the economy was the issue that matters most to them, 52 percent went for Romney v. 30 percent for Gingrich.”
Read more: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/02/01/romney-florida-victory/#more-782549
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:49 pmI think you better vote for Romney.
-Colonel Haiku
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 5:51 pmThat’s how I felt in 1996. I had absolutely no preference between Dole and Clinton. I preferred either one to Perot, but it was of no consequence at all to me which one of them defeated him. So I voted for Harry Browne. Even in hindsight I still don’t think Dole would have been even a tiny bit better than Clinton.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 2/1/2012 @ 6:22 pmDole was just a spoiler for Clintoon’s presidency.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 6:47 pmHarry Browne was a buffoon. Were you that unaware, milhouse?
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 6:56 pmJust maybe Dole would have been more aggressive against al Qaeda. There’s his appointment of Franklin Raines as CEO of Fannie Mae and the Clinton administration’s pressure on Fannie Mae to expand their high risk loans.
Then there’s Clinton’s outrageous pardons although he could have done that if he lost to Dole so maybe that doesn’t count.
Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 2/1/2012 @ 6:57 pmI should have said the Clinton administration’s pressure on Fannie Mae to expand INTO high risk loans.
Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 2/1/2012 @ 6:58 pmInteresting take by Jay Cost on what he’s terming the “regional divide” between conservatives…
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-romney-s-victory-and-growing-regional-divide-among-conservatives_620800.html?nopager=1
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:05 pmThe Myth of Sarah Palin’s influence…
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/02/01/palin-myth-influence-florida-primary-gingrich/
Colonel Haiku (0905b6) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:09 pm188. In Minnesotastan our heroes are those like Sen. Klobuchar, erstwhile Blue Dog, that tows the Reid dragline, and makes meaningful pilgrimages of supplication to Gaia the Mother of All.
She and her staff of 6 flew an Otter to the Greenland glaciers in July to lament the water rolling off toward the sea.
Another is Will Steger, polar explorer, maker of mukluks in Ely, who periodically launches a dog sled expedition from Ellesmere only to turn back a couple weeks in due to extreme cold and corrugated ice.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:14 pmSorry about that, is Lileks the only sane person
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:20 pmin the media business overthere, the Tribune is
insane, also McClatchy.
It’s sad, how Commentary, has had to bend itself
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:25 pminto a pretzel in order to back someone who supported the Arab Spring, it’s as if principles don’t matter.
The myth of Colonel Haiku’s high IQ.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:31 pmHybrid cars when they explode pollute the air…………obots.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:33 pm209. The Strib calls less since I politely told them to “Take me off your list or I’ll sue you Commie bastards”.
But each time I move I get a new land line and haz to enlighten them again.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:38 pmGet a cell phone, they won’t find you, for a while anyways.
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:46 pm206. I’m unclear on the sagacity of comparing McCain’s 2008 exit info with Romney’s 2010 data, rather than just Romney’s data between both.
Moreover, I’m confused about comparing a closed primary with an open caucus in IA, or an open primary in NH.
All those queries of the omniscient voter require self categorization like what does ‘Supports the TEA party’ mean when ‘Strongly Supports..’ gives totally different dispositions toward everything.
Jay seems to be coasting lately. Better check the nalgene contents.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:46 pm214. Yeah, we keep a land line for 911. There are women in the house and who knows what professional criminal might have staked our place out, without street lights, a 50 foot drop off the back, a half hour from the nearest bus line,…
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 7:51 pmAbortion is not women’s health you psychos.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:00 pm199, 207. Commentary, bastion of conservative Judaic opinion, and Kabbalah Mysticism, launchpad of the quintessence of constancy, Jenny ibn Podhertz.
Let us kneel at the font of wisdom.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:14 pmIf you don’t want to pay for an abortion you do not care about women with breast cancer.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:16 pmWhat company are you talking about? If it’s GS Technologies, that’s not at all what happened. Anyway, doesn’t FDIC only insure bank deposits?
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:16 pmPro-abortion people have no right to complain about bullying when they bully women into getting an abortion.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:17 pmYes they do milhouse.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:17 pm“A link to the thread where daleyrocks claims I supported EPWJ in order to deflect my criticism of one of his awful comments.
Daleyrocks, do you concede you are mistaken?”
Dustin – Yes, going from memory I got the wrong thread. It was yet another where EPWJ was bashing Palin, this time related the the new book that came out, rather than his false claims about her denying cures for cancer for political gain a few days earlier.
Although you criticized EPWJ’s overheated comments in this thread, I am not mistaken about your overall recent support for his comments.
In the thread in question you acknowledge you knew exactly what I was doing and then later demonstrate your thin-skin humorless side by losing your sh*t again.
I was glad I absented myself from the thread today to avoid another China Syndrome.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:26 pm“Since that company had millions in profitability when destroyed, that money, in my opinion, should have covered the liabilities instead of the FDIC.
Comment by Dustin — 2/1/2012 @ 12:15 pm ”
Dustin – The FDIC only steps in to cover liabilities to depositors if banks fail, not if borrowers fail to repay loans. If you can trace the failure of one of Bain Capital’s investees to repay its loans to the failure of a bank I would be interested in hearing about it.
Politico has been pushing a story about Bain renegotiating an ESOP with the FDIC. I was under the impression that the loan was renegotiated in 1994, but after some more digging, it turns out this story really traces back to Daily Kos who point to the Boston Globe who Kos say the renegotiation took place in 1991, when Romney was brought back to restructure the parent company. Daily Kos claims the renegotiation was with the FDIC, but I’ve seen nothing to back that up.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:37 pm“I should have said the Clinton administration’s pressure on Fannie Mae to expand INTO high risk loans.”
Gerald A. – What makes you think lower underwriting standards, reduced documentation and lower down payments are inherently higher risk????????
/sarc
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:42 pmWhy would Clinton pardon someone who gave secrets to the mossad?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 8:48 pmas Wall Street Romney becomes more and more inevitable you can feel the enthusiasm oozing out of Team R like melted ice cream
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:00 pmhttp://dailycaller.com/2012/02/01/bribery-compromised-officials-leave-indicted-financial-crime-suspects-free-from-prosecution-under-holders-doj/#ixzz1lC19o5Sf
narciso (87e966) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:02 pm__________________________________________
Even in hindsight I still don’t think Dole would have been even a tiny bit better than Clinton.
When people say things like that, I’m never sure if that means they’re ultra-liberal — and Dole and Clinton are too rightwing for them — or they’re ultra-conservative, and Dole and Clinton are too leftwing for them.
Mark (31bbb6) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:25 pmHuh? What’s tawdry about his marital life? His wife’s OK, but his?! AFAIK his seems to be picture-perfect.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:27 pmI’m going for a people in glass houses thing here Mr. Milhouse.
Work with me.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:32 pmA crook, yes, but a buffoon? No, I still don’t know that. Do tell.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:41 pmI see no reason to suppose that.
Dole would have made other errors, probably just as bad as those if not worse.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:43 pmI love how the left use the homophobe card to silent gay marriage opponents.
They call us bullies though.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:50 pmExcept that Daniels doesn’t live in a glass house as far as marital fidelity is concerned. As far as I know he’s always been faithful to his wife, when he had one. And his forgiving her and taking her back makes him look even better; surely it was the Christian thing to do, wasn’t it? I mean had he been Jewish it would have been wrong, but Xians don’t follow that law, do they? So what’s the problem? How does it reflect badly on him in any way, or expose him to charges of hypocrisy when he condemns someone who did the opposite?
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:52 pmOh, and BTW I had already heard some of the rumours about Browne in 1996, before I voted for him. I didn’t know all the details that later came out, but I knew he wasn’t a completely honest person. He was still a lot better than Dole or Clinton.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 9:54 pmMr. Milhouse I could improvise an answer but I haven’t the spirit for him
I still like Mr. Mitch I just think his abortive feint at the presidency ranks was sort of goofy
in retrospect
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:05 pmoops “ranks” isn’t supposed to be there
I’m multi-tasking!
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:05 pmand it was supposed to be spirit for “it”
sorry so sloppy
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:05 pmOh for Pete’s sake.
Yes, I agreed with EPWJ on some other matter. Big whoop. His comments ranged from true to obviously false, and from insightful to ridiculous. I called them like I saw them. That is some impressive goal post shifting. There is no way you’re unaware that’s what you’re doing. You claimed I supported something that I rather obviously did not.
Before you leveled that charge on me, you should have had the character to check and see if it’s true. If our roles were reversed, I would simply apologize. And if our roles were reversed, you would call me a liar.
You say I’m humorless when you’re calling a presidential candidate a panty sniffer of children and talking about how a cancer preventing vaccine is the needle of sex. Yes, I admit I don’t think that’s humorous. Neither do you. You were trying to punch back twice as hard, rather than draw laughs. Anyone who laughed at your ‘joke’ about EPWJ or Perry sniffing a child’s underwear is mentally ill.
Yep. And your point is? You said unfounded things for months. “Chicago corrupt”, rooted in something you vaguely recall hearing on the radio but when it was time to show Perry benefited from any kind of graft… you apparently never found those facts. The burden of proof for Romney criticisms is beyond any potential of doubt, but for Perry criticisms, it’s ‘did I ever hear something like that on the radio?’ So you moved on to how he’s homosexual because… hey, you don’t like his supporters. And then you really got in gear; his supporters are gay too. And even though you’re the guy saying the crazy stuff, it’s the folks who don’t appreciate their candidate being lied about, or being called gay, who have the thin skin?
Yeah, I hold a bit of a grudge about that kind of thing. You should have taken advantage of the opportunity to clear the air about it, instead of opening fire with more untrue comments.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:25 pmMitt Romney once explained that negotiating a loan forgiveness with the FDIC in 1993 is what gave him the confidence to run for the US Senate.
On the one hand, that’s the government picking winners and losers. That’s taxpayers soaking up the down times for a very profitable company with some very wealthy owners. In some ways, that’s crony capitalism rather than a free market.
On the other hand, without this bailout, Bain would have gone bankrupt (and just to be clear, Romney wasn’t responsible for the bankruptcy potential… the guy named Bain was… and admitting this is simply having integrity). Hundreds of jobs would be lost. So the government picking winners and losers had some positive effects. And Romney was merely playing the system for the best advantage for his company. He didn’t make the policy in 1993.
But my actual point (and perhaps a re-reading for those who have a record of repeating my points completely backwards would be helpful) was that Romney is claiming credit only for all the good from Bain. Indeed, he’s apparently claiming credit for much more than just what Bain can fairly be credited for.
And when folks temper that with ‘well, if you’re taking full credit, here’s the rest of what Bain did, including stuff like a bailout you negotiated and outsourcing’, it’s called “An Attack From The Left!!!!” and dismissed.
Maybe some mean it as an attack on capitalism, but others mean it as an attack on specific choices, rather than the more abstract concept of a system that allows choices. Perhaps Romney created all those jobs for the same reason he negotiated the bailout, and neither reflect in any way on how he would govern (doesn’t this make sense, given how he did govern?)
But taxpayer funded bailouts are not very conservative, and there is room for disagreement on the outsourcing issue too. Those who have insisted the entire line of argument is ‘from the left’ should read how the left describes much of this stuff (as hypocrisy by conservatives who criticize cronyism without having a record to match).
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:32 pmBain & Co, or Bain Capital? Romney’s claiming credit for Bain Capital, not for Bain & Co. He never ran Bain & Co, even if he saved it from bankruptcy.
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:39 pmDole wouldn’t have been perfect or anything, but he would have been a better president than Clinton.
For one thing, and it’s apparently unseemly to note this, but Clinton completely failed to stay up on national security, and a major terror disaster was the outcome.
But on other issues, Clinton did not create the economic boom, but in some ways, he was irresponsible in governing over some aspects of it, and I think that caused or at least increased the downturn at the end of his term.
Your point about pardons is just one reference to a lot of excesses that Republicans just can’t get away with.
Now, would the GOP have surged to the right without Clinton? That’s where a lot of the good in the 1990s came from. But that’s very speculative.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:39 pmThat’s why I note it would be unfair to criticize Romney for Bain (Bain & Co) getting to the situation it found itself in. Romney did not lead them to that point. He did, however, negotiate a bailout for them, and he also took credit for this when explaining why he had the confidence to be a US Senator.
I disagree with such bailouts or negotiating with a government that picks winners and losers. I think folks who make the right donations tend to get a better shake, and I also think the entire concept interferes with the real consequences that would do a much more efficient job guiding our economy.
How did he save it?
With the bailout. With taxpayer money.
They walked away with millions instead of nothing, and the federal debt went up a tick. This saved hundreds of jobs. That kind of perverse incentive rewards politics rather than good management, in my opinion. I’m not even talking about Bain specifically… when a company comes to the taxpayer for money because it’s too big to fail, it needs to fail anyway. Let investors (like Bain) pick up the pieces and make some money.
Anyhow, if you’re saying Romney saved Bain from bankruptcy, it sure sounds like he’s taking credit for the ends and thus must be held to account for the means. This shows why criticizing him on the bailout is reasonable.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/1/2012 @ 10:47 pmIcy, I think Sarah is granting that she’s merely assuming something about Romney’s plan, based on some reasonable data she’s got. Granted, she’s interpreting this with her own bias, but I don’t think there’s anything dishonest there.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:36 am— Dustin, look at the quote of Sarah that you chose:
“If he does not acknowledge the atrociousness of a federal Vat , it’s on his table and he won’t take it off, you should assume it is his plan.”
Does this not sound like “When did you stop beating your wife?”
Did you miss “Round up the usual suspects”?
— If Sarahw wrote that, then I missed it.
If you wrote it, then I ignored it.
Yeah, I’m the slimey one.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:41 am— Self-awareness is the first step in the healing process.
“Yeah, I hold a bit of a grudge about that kind of thing. You should have taken advantage of the opportunity to clear the air about it, instead of opening fire with more untrue comments.”
Dustin – Nothing untrue in what I said in my comment, whereas you continue to obfuscate and mislead.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:42 amWasn’t aware Abortion was a woman’s right issue.
Comment by Dohbiden — 2/1/2012 @ 2:27 pm
— For lefturds it’s a babies-have-no-rights issue.
Icy (60cd65) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:44 am“You claimed I supported something that I rather obviously did not.”
Dustin – Complete BS. Read my comment. I did not claim you supported EPWJ’s comments in that thread. I claimed you supported him as a commenter and you do. Stop claiming I say things I don’t. That’s a bad habit of yours when you get excited.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:46 amThe word bailout does not mean what Dustin believes it to mean in the case of Bain.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:51 am“With the bailout. With taxpayer money.”
What taxpayer money?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 12:53 am231. No help from me, I’ve already kicked that dog enuf.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:16 am250. Prolly Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension_Benefit_Guaranty_Corporation
Bain’s ‘fixes’ are backstopped in Chapter 11 by redundant safety nets.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:21 am242. You know, reading Aramaic is great but we’re using English lately:
“In 1990, Romney was asked to return to Bain & Company, which was facing financial collapse.[56] He was announced as its new CEO in January 1991[68][69] (but drew only a symbolic salary of one dollar).[56] Romney managed an effort to restructure the firm’s employee stock-ownership plan, real-estate deals and bank loans, while rallying the firm’s thousand employees, imposing a new governing structure that included Bain and the other founding partners giving up control, and increasing fiscal transparency.[46][50][56] Within about a year, he had led Bain & Company through a turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without further layoffs or partner defections.[50] He turned Bain & Company over to new leadership and returned to Bain Capital in December 1992.[46][69][70]”
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:27 amThe mens in white are here to help you Ann, we all care about you. You can’t feel your hair? That’s a good thing, thorazine is your friend:
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-02-01.html
Move over Joe Biden, and you, Alan Colmes, there’s a new sheriff in towwwn. YEeAAAarghhh!
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:44 amWe should thank Axelrod for TOTUS:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/289880/not-best-choice-words-robert-costa
The transition team can thoroughly brief and bring Willard’s teleprompter up to speed prior to inauguration.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:52 am246. It’s ok, with all those specs hanging about your neck, readin’ the Iphone and driving can be a little like juggling with a chainsaw.
The peepers are the third thing to go.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:58 am249… China Syndrome 2: 有兩個您得到eggroll？
Colonel Haiku (af1a14) — 2/2/2012 @ 5:42 amThe problem is, once you choose that phrase, it’s very hard to walk around that. Had he said, I’m
narciso (87e966) — 2/2/2012 @ 6:10 amconcerned about all groups. . .
What do you have against the chinese?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 6:12 amExcept that:
Is “misleading” on multiple levels. Sure, you use a lot of weasel words built in, but that’s because you know how dishonest you’re being.
I will continue shining a light on your vile comments that you call “thin skinned” for people to criticize and refuse to take responsibility for. I expect you to continue defending yourself with comments that aren’t true.
And of course, if someone says something about Romney you think they are “unconciously” mistaken about, you will call them a liar. Because you’re a hack.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 8:59 amYou’re ridiculous.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 8:59 amI granted as much, Icy.
What I’m saying is that Sarah is admitting she is relying on an assumption and bias. I also admitted that she does not have a basis for knowing that the VAT is Romney’s agenda.
What her issue is is that she, like many, are worried by Romney’s record on taxes (which doesn’t include a VAT but does include a lot of “it’s not a tax if I word it this way”, and also includes some hesitance to reject the VAT). Whatever she’s said in her comments prior… she’s also made clear in the comment you quoted that she then assumes something based on those factors (more specifically, Romney not ruling out the VAT).
I don’t think that’s dishonest… I just think it’s a critical opinion. You liken it to “when did you stop beating your wide”, and I also don’t think that’s dishonest either.
That’s actually totally right. This is going to be a crude comparison, but trust that I don’t mean anything about Romney by using it: if you knew a guy who had problems with rage and violence in the past, and when you asked him about rejecting beating wives, he strangely refused to say that was wrong, would it be a legitimate expression of opinion to say “because of some assumptions I’m making, when did you stop beating your wife?”.
That’s where a lot of conservatives have trouble with Romney, because he has a liberal record in some respects, and his plans are often quite vague, and frankly the right has been burned so many times by our own party.
Since Sarah granted she is assuming something here, I think you’ve gotten the confession that she doesn’t actually know Romney’s agenda so much as she’s filling in some blanks as best as she can.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:08 amAlso, I’m being completely straightforward and direct. You claim I’m “misleading” because you were asked to stop saying I’m dishonest while your comments shows you know I’m not (which is misleading, chump), but how was I misleading anyone?
I had to provide a link showing that what you claimed I supported I rejected multiple times with actual anger. Your response “I was not mistaken”. But you obviously know you are. That was absolutely false and just another nasty smear from Daleyrocks.
Do you really think Perry is “chicago corrupt” or homosexual? No. Do you think Perry is a pervert, or that garbage about panty sniffing was justified? No. Do you think gardasil is the “needle of sex”? No. Do you have some basis to think I’m gay or to even care if I were? No. Do you really think I support cancer for kids? No.
Do you really think any of that is funny? No. Do you really think folks criticizing your effort to outrage them is thin skinned? I don’t know, but it’s bizarre if you do.
The burden of proof for attacks on Perry was the thinnest crap you could come up with, such as “I didn’t mean it anyway” or “I heard it on the radiot”.
Yet in Romney’s defense there have been multiple instances of you freaking out about legitimate and good faith criticisms of Romney’s record. Often there is room for more than one opinion, but your effort to defend Romney from his own record are hacktastic.
There’s nothing wrong with calling the FDIC deal with Romney a bailout. I’m sure there is a less negative word to describe it. Relief program? Do you like that instead? What do you call it when a business is going to go bankrupt if the federal government doesn’t give them money, and Mitt Romney negotiates for millions from the FDIC which saves the company?
You demand proof the taxpayer had to pay for the FDIC’s ‘relief program’ and insist this isn’t a bailout program. But if Newt or Perry or Obama had done this?
It reminds me of your angry defense of Romney when I said he increased taxes too much, after linking multiple hikes in the hundreds of millions. After noting that Romneycare was predictably very, very expensive both for citizens and government, and that too is ultimately a tax increase.
It reminds me of your angry defense when I criticized the $100 gun tax, which was signed into law by Romney (you noted the democrats gave him that bill as though that takes it off Romney’s record).
I honestly don’t get it, Daleyrocks. I’ve always known you get emotional, but I never thought that was bad (these issues are serious). I simply thought you were an honorable guy. You should have expected a lot of folks to have a negative opinion of Romney, and not give him as much slack as he wants on a number of things. Sure, argue with them in Romney’s defense… that’s great and I enjoy arguing about Romney. But you show an amazing level of unfairness and you know you’re not proud of some of the stuff I brought up.
Too bad.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:37 amWe’re criticizing Flopney because of his religion like how Israel defends themselves against palestinian genocide because their muslims.
/Sarcasm off
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:44 am________________________________
有兩個您得到
OT, but I’m always amazed that people in countries like China or Japan can manage to read such complicated characters. I sometimes have a tough enough time — particularly when font sizes are too small or words aren’t printed clearly — differentiating an “l” from an “i,” or an “a” from an “o,” in spite of the alphabet being so much simpler in shape and form.
When the written language was being crafted in China, I think they went the wrong route in favoring a pictogram format instead of a format that uses simpler and fewer forms, such as that of the Roman/Greek alphabet. Not sure if that reflects merely a different type of creative know-how between the East and West, or a somewhat less sophisticated one. Probably a bit of both.
Mark (31bbb6) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:47 amI love how the left use the word redneck as an racial slur.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 10:02 amThey say it actually affects the way Chinese readers think. My ethnocentric view is that English rewards abstract thinking and patterns.
I had much more difficulty memorizing characters and stems in an Asian language (back when I actually tried to learn one, which was Korean… and I found it quite complicated) than I have working out how to spell words in a phonetic one.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 10:10 amGeorge Soros the self-loathing jew is greedy.
Only wanting to make money and not caring who he kills.
Notice how only the rich are considered cheap to the left.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 10:14 amYou demand proof the taxpayer had to pay for the FDIC’s ‘relief program’ and insist this isn’t a bailout program
Dustin – Taxpayers don’t fund the FDIC.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:41 am“The thread in question was the one in which EPWJ suggested Palin supported kids getting cancer I believe. Those are the types of commenters you support.
Is “misleading” on multiple levels. Sure, you use a lot of weasel words built in, but that’s because you know how dishonest you’re being.”
Dustin – What is misleading is your denials that you generally support EPWJ even though you bashed him in that thread for his despicable comments about Palin. Just keep spinning.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:45 am270. Unfunded mandate of hidden costs.
Your government at work, protecting you from evil doers on your tab.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:46 am“I honestly don’t get it, Daleyrocks. I’ve always known you get emotional, but I never thought that was bad (these issues are serious).”
Dustin – The only person I see getting emotional is you, day after day. It seems like you are wrapped too tight or something. Take a breath or drink some decafe. Buy a sense of humor. Lose your class envy.
Life is to short to melt down over blog comments. Obsession is a perfume, but with you it seems to be the personal destruction of Mitt Romney and anybody holding a contrary opinion of him. Beldar has echoed the points I have made about Romney and Perry, but for some reason you have not felt the need to call him a troll, moby or put him on your double secret ignore list. Hmmmmm.
Just remember that when you point your finger at somebody else, three fingers are pointing back. Self-reflection is not one of your strengths.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:53 amThen who does? (Hint: when the government forces you to buy a service from it, at a price it sets, that’s a tax.)
Milhouse (d7842d) — 2/2/2012 @ 1:52 pmThat’s right, Milhouse.
Just as Romneycare is a tax.
Sure, you don’t have to pay the tax TO MA if you just get yourself a $3000 insurance plan, but you did have to pay $3000 because Romney signed a bill making that the law.
That’s a tax, of course.
Any time the government imposes costs on folks in a roundabout, some say that’s not a tax, but I think it is. In fact, I think the worst tax is inflation, which is particularly evil because of how it’s a tax for spending from some time ago.
If were balance the budget this year (lol), our kids will be paying for 2011’s spending for thirty years, and a lot of it will be via inflation.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:00 pmThat said, the FDIC is backed by the federal government. Simple as that, any time the feds have to bail someone out, that’s something the taxpayers should pay attention to. In this case, it’s a minor amount of money in comparison to the Bush and Obama era bailouts, and Romney wasn’t a politician at the time… he was just saving his company with a very successful negotiation. He happened to do it in a way that I disagree with ideologically, but was he thinking about ideology? No.
This kind of concern is getting quite far from my original point, which was that of course much of the criticism of some of Romney’s business record is conservative. I don’t think the federal government imposing an insurance program and imposing costs and negotiating with very well connected people to pick winners and losers is a free market.
Now we’re nit picking whether the taxpayers had to pay for something the federal government forces Americans to pay for in a roundabout way?
This reminds me a lot of Obama’s refi plan. CBS news recently informed me that this plan is great because the government wont have to pay for it. It’s not going to require a tax increase, they say.
Only everybody has a bank account, and banks have to pass the cost of this kind of control on to citizens, who become, by virtue of paying for these programs, taxpayers who should be 100% aware that they are taxpayers who expect their money to be used well and with accountability.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:08 pmVery good points.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:15 pmI love this ad
I think it explains my inflation and cost to kids point so much better than I will ever be capable of doing.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:18 pmBeldar is just a romney shill.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:20 pmThat was one of the things, I liked about Perry, although he was as maladroit as Romney on other issues, when you are buying your own debt, re
narciso (87e966) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:24 pmQE, you are ‘crossing the streams’ and possibly summoning
Naw. Beldar is quite a respectable commenter. He is very irritated about Newt’s attacks, and a lot of that irritation is justified.
Folks who recognize Beldar has more credibility than they do should try to emulate how Beldar carries out his disagreements.
For example, he doesn’t level hysterical and extremely ugly claims that he hasn’t verified, but feels like throwing out there to see if it might stick, and then when it’s proven absolutely untrue find a sad weasel’s way to explain how he wasn’t mistaken.
He also doesn’t tell jokes about sniffing children’s panties.
He does however, have a real bone to pick with a lot of Newt’s comments, and if you argue with him about it, he’s able to back up his points 100% of the time. It’s very convincing not because Beldar is more slick, but because Beldar is honest rather than a shill.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:38 pmEven Zuul, Gatekeeper of Gozer, realizes that such efforts to keep spending at current levels is short term desperation that shamefully burdens the next generation.
It’s reckless at best, and it’s a shame our House has failed to put a stop to it, such as with the debt ceiling fight. That was a time when we badly needed a bastard like Newt in the House.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:41 pmBloomberg to give money to Planned Parenthood?
No surprise.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 2:42 pmDustin – The only person I see getting emotional is you, day after day. It seems like you are wrapped too tight or something. Take a breath or drink some decafe. Buy a sense of humor. Lose your class envy.
Life is to short to melt down over blog comments. Obsession is a perfume, but with you it seems to be the personal destruction of Mitt Romney and anybody holding a contrary opinion of him. Beldar has echoed the points I have made about Romney and Perry, but for some reason you have not felt the need to call him a troll, moby or put him on your double secret ignore list. Hmmmmm.
Just remember that when you point your finger at somebody else, three fingers are pointing back. Self-reflection is not one of your strengths.
Comment by daleyrocks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well said and a must read for anyone with even a passing interest in the sad sacks afflicted with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
Colonel Haiku (e6abb6) — 2/2/2012 @ 4:49 pm“Dustin – Taxpayers don’t fund the FDIC.
Then who does? (Hint: when the government forces you to buy a service from it, at a price it sets, that’s a tax.)”
Milhouse – Why did I know you would show up with Milhousian word splitting here. Dustin was obviously referring to the deposit insurance fund bailing out Bain and making an analogy to other taxpayer bailout. The only problems I see are a) I don’t believe any cash changed hands in the loan renegotiation as it did in other bailouts; b) the deposit insurance fund is supported by assessments on banks not taxpayers, and c) not all taxpayers keep money on deposit with banks, so trying to make an analogy between something like a GM or TARP bailout where federal government money was directly injected into companies and a loan principal renegotiation, which happen all the time, does not pass the smell test.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 8:46 pmI love how Nazi Haiku accuses others of leading sad lives I hope you and Daleykos drop dead.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 2/2/2012 @ 8:51 pmThis was just a long rant of insults.
It’s amusing that Daleyrocks complains I’m ignoring him. But that’s true. I spend 99% of the time just talking to other folks.
When Daleyrocks, the guy who said I should have a sense of humor about his “panty sniffer” jokes about a presidential candidate, claims I’m obsessed and emotional, he and I both know he’s projecting.
The reason I do not use that kind of ugliness towards Daleyrocks, Haiku, or their favored candidate is because I couldn’t even pretend to be as obsessed and emotional and they are every single day.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:05 pmYou’re a troll. You already admitted you to not intend to persuade anyone, and you’re a racist piece of crap, too.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:07 pmI love how Daley has come up with a special new demand for usage of the word bailout in the same comment where he insults Milhouse for word splitting.
And does Daleyrocks plan to offer a link to bolster his claim about the romney bailout? Nope. He insists he is right until proven wrong. Let the honest people do the linking, not that Daleyrocks is wrong even once that happens. He’ll just come up with a new demand for the use of whatever word.
But the fact is that Romney negotiated with the government for something that saved Bain from bankruptcy by getting the feds to absorb millions in debt (and it’s so amusing that if the feds absorb millions of debt, that’s not a bailout because, hey, they didn’t hand Romney some cash in a bag with a dollar sign on it).
btw, Daleyrocks, you’re stunningly ignorant. FDIC borrowed money from the US Taxpayers in the early 1990s, and there was a reason they needed to do that, hint hint, and that’s what I meant when I referenced taxpayers.
I just thought Milhouse’s point was excellent and reflected on what that meant for various intrusions the government makes over us. When the government forces me to pay for a government program like Romneycare or FDIC, that is actually a tax.
How can anything critical of Romney ever pass your smell test? To you, the burden of proof for any Romney criticism is basically impossible for anyone to achieve, yet the burden of proof for you to say things appears to be ‘is daleyrocks mad?’
You are a small person.
Dustin (401f3a) — 2/2/2012 @ 9:17 pmExcuse me? Are you claiming that “assessments” are not taxes? What exactly is the difference between them? And what is this distinction you are drawing between banks and taxpayers? Are banks not taxpayers?!
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:03 pm“I love how Daley has come up with a special new demand for usage of the word bailout”
Dustin – Why don’t you define it? Did cash change hands in the case of Bain?
Please enlighten us. Go ahead.
Please explain why it was similar to other taxpayer funded bailouts.
This should be good!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:11 pm“And does Daleyrocks plan to offer a link to bolster his claim about the romney bailout? Nope.”
Dustin – Have you offered any to support yours?
Here’s a link explaining one version.
Here’s another link from Politico from last July from when they first started flogging the story confirming my point that no new cash was injected in Bain.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:21 pm“The reason I do not use that kind of ugliness towards Daleyrocks, Haiku, or their favored candidate is because I couldn’t even pretend to be as obsessed and emotional and they are every single day.”
Dustin – Just count your comments on the various threads yesterday and today, excitable boy. Your claims are laughable.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:23 pmthat’s really a lot scary like a g6 I think Mr. daley
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:23 pm“Excuse me? Are you claiming that “assessments” are not taxes?”
Milhouse – Excuse me, I am claiming they are assessments made on institutions engaged in the banking business based on the type of balance sheet they maintain.
They are in no way similar to funds derived from general income taxes from the entire population.
What was unclear about I said?
If you want to claim that the banks pass on the assessments to their customers in the form of lower interest rates on interest bearing accounts or service charges, be my guest. Not everybody keeps money in banks and not every bank has the same business profile.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:30 pm(sober girls aroun me they be ackin like they drunk)
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:33 pm“btw, Daleyrocks, you’re stunningly ignorant.”
See how excited you’re getting. You had no clue about any of this information.
“When the government forces me to pay for a government program like Romneycare or FDIC, that is actually a tax.”
Dustin – The government doesn’t force you to pay for the FDIC. You can keep your money somewhere else. It’s just like if you choose to drive and own a car, the government requires you to get a license and purchase insurance. I guess you are forced into those taxes against your will too.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:38 pmIn other words, taxes. Or is there some difference that I’m missing? How does your definition above differ from a tax?
How are they different? Income taxes are also assessments made on people engaged in whatever it is they do, based on the amount they made. What’s the difference? And who said anything about income taxes anyway? Why do you bring them up? What’s so special about them? Or are you now claiming that the term “taxpayers” is somehow limited to one specific tax, and people who pay other taxes are somehow not taxpayers?
Milhouse (9a4c23) — 2/2/2012 @ 11:49 pm“There’s nothing wrong with calling the FDIC deal with Romney a bailout. I’m sure there is a less negative word to describe it. Relief program? Do you like that instead? What do you call it when a business is going to go bankrupt if the federal government doesn’t give them money, and Mitt Romney negotiates for millions from the FDIC which saves the company?”
Dustin – The above is from comment 264. All along you have been assuming there was a fresh injection of cash into Bain but have provided no proof or links in support of that assumption.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/3/2012 @ 12:00 am“In other words, taxes. Or is there some difference that I’m missing? How does your definition above differ from a tax?”
Milhouse – Is there still something unclear about what I wrote? What are you prattling on about?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/3/2012 @ 12:01 amWhat are you planning on making with that puree, daley?
Colonel Haiku (1ae0d7) — 2/3/2012 @ 4:48 amor was that just another crushed tomato on just another day?
Colonel Haiku (1ae0d7) — 2/3/2012 @ 4:49 amColonel – Milhouse just wants to fornicate with words. Or does he want to have adulterous relations with them across the social construct of an international border. I get confused sometimes.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 2/3/2012 @ 8:41 amYou are the one drawing some sort of strange distinction between “assessments” and “taxes”, and between “banks” and “taxpayers”, as if banks don’t pay taxes. You’re also the one who introduced the red herring of the income tax, as if it were the only tax that exists.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 2/3/2012 @ 1:07 pmDaley, you’re not confused, you’re deliberately dishonest.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 2/3/2012 @ 1:07 pm