Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 · Sep 23, 2012

To the point...GOP needs to redefine itself.
Get back to the subtle principles that drove it, not drowning itself in Kool-Aid.

Blame Fox, not Mitt
By Jonathan Bernstein Saturday, Sep 22, 2012 1:00 PM UTC

Romney's run an awful campaign. But his real problem is most Americans reject the Fox News/Limbaugh fairy tale

I’m still more hesitant to accept the post-convention polling than almost anyone, but suppose that Barack Obama has in fact pulled out to a solid three- or four-point lead over Mitt Romney. Is it because of the Romney campaign’s mistakes? We’ve certainly seen several: a generally lackluster convention capped off by the Clint Eastwood moment (great TV, but almost certainly a wasted moment as far as electioneering goes), a reaction to events in the Middle East that was widely panned, and the “47 percent” tape.

Greg Sargent makes the excellent point this week that part of what’s happening is that Obama has pulled even or ahead with Romney on the question of who would do a better job on the economy, partly because a lot of people still blame George W. Bush for creating these economic problems but also because a lot of people are newly optimistic about the current economy.

There are two parts to this: First, the idea that the sluggish recovery would lead to an easy Republican win is just wrong. There’s a fair amount of disagreement among political scientists and others who construct election prediction models, but the general consensus is that the current economy suggests a relatively close race, with Obama perhaps a mild favorite for re-election. To the extent that people believe, however, that this was Romney’s race to lose – a belief that seems to be especially popular among conservatives – the current Obama lead seems to cry out for an explanation. Therefore, it’s natural that Romney and his campaign get blamed.

The second part is that Romney himself, or at least his campaign, seems to have massively misunderstood how the economy is perceived. That’s perhaps due to the conservative closed-information feedback loop. If most of your information comes through Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, you might think that the economy was just fine or maybe a bit on the weak side until January 2009 and that it has gone from bad to worse since then. Certainly, that’s what Republican rank-and-file voters seem to think. In the meantime, while Democrats are optimistic about the economy and Independents are moderately pessimistic (but far less so than in 2008), economic confidence among Republicans is as low as it was back in the nightmare winter of 2008-2009.

The outcome of all this is a Republican campaign theme emphasizing the question “Are you better off?” — a terrible match for what are, after all, miserable economic circumstances. Rather than inviting people to compare the present to how things should be — and therefore encouraging them to compare Barack Obama to whatever their ideal might be — Romney is asking people to compare Obama to George W. Bush. While that might work really well among those listening to Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck, it’s a losing fight with everyone else.

And yet blaming Romney for this one – or for his “47 percent” statement, or for his botched response to the deaths in Libya – is missing the point. For that matter, so is looking at his choice of Paul Ryan as a running mate, which invited everyone to think about Ryan’s unpopular history of opposition to traditional Medicare and Social Security.

The truth is that Romney is constantly constrained by what conservatives want him to do and by what they believe. Furthermore, what they want is generally unpopular, and what they believe is far too often simply cut off from the reality that the rest of the nation lives in.

So Romney cannot have a coherent foreign policy because what his voters want to hear is that Barack Obama sympathizes with terrorists. Most Americans, meanwhile, think of Obama as the guy who took out bin Laden. Romney cannot have a sensible tax policy because conservatives insist that he promote large, self-funding tax cuts for the rich. Most of the nation, however, supports raising taxes on the rich, and reality insists that cutting taxes also reduces revenues. Also, Romney didn’t invent the 47 percent nonsense; whether he truly believes it or not, he was simply parroting back what his voters have been hearing for years from Rush Limbaugh and others like him.

Nor would another candidate fare any better. Some have suggested that Romney is unusually constrained by conservatives because they don’t trust him, and so he (unlike a hypothetical “real” conservative nominee) isn’t able to move to the middle. But there are two problems with that theory.

One is that it’s likely that any winning candidate, after spending years fighting for the Republican nomination, would be so far inside the conservative closed-information feedback loop that he or she would be doing the same things. It’s not because the candidate pressure from the right but rather because he or she has lost perspective on what anyone outside of that loop believes. And the second is: We’ve seen no evidence that Tea Partiers are willing to trust anyone.

Sure, we’ve had some campaign goofs that appear to be about Romney and not the GOP: the flap about his tax returns, the decision to put Eastwood on the podium without a script, the candidate’s brilliant plan to insult the Brits over the Olympics. But for the most part, what’s been happening hasn’t been a series of gaffes; it’s been the very predictable consequence of the triumph of Tea Party conservatives in the Republican Party.

Copyright © 2011 Salon.com. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...

redux · Sep 23, 2012

Snippets of the conservative history of the US might explain today's conservatives:

1607: First welfare state collapses: “Jamestown colony, when it was first founded as a socialist venture, dang near failed with everybody dead and dying in the snow.”—Dick Armey

1619-1808: Africans set sail for America in search of freedom: “Other than Native Americans, who were here, all of us have the same story.”—Michele Bachmann

1775: Paul Revere “warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms, by ringing those bells and making sure as he was riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.”—Sarah Palin.

1776: The Founding Synod signs the Declaration of Independence: “…those fifty-six brave people, most of whom, by the way, were clergymen.”—Mike Huckabee

1787: Slavery is banned in the Constitution: “We also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”—Michele Bachmann

1801: “Thomas Jefferson creates the Marines for the Islamic pirates that were happening.”—Glenn Beck

1861: Civil War breaks out over pitting “individual rights as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence against collective rights.”—The Weekly Standard

1908: The real Pledge of Allegiance is written: “I pledge allegiance to the Christian flag, and to the Savior, for whose Kingdom it stands, one Savior, crucified, risen, and coming again, with life and liberty for all who believe.”—Dan Quayle

1916: Planned Parenthood opens genocide clinics: “When Margaret Sanger—check my history—started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world.”—Herman Cain

1950: Senator Joseph McCarthy saves America from Communism: “Joe McCarthy was a great American hero.”—Representative Steve King

1961: Barack Obama is born, in Africa: “And one thing that I do know is his having grown up in Kenya.”—Mike Huckabee

1961: The Soviet Union brainwashes its first Marxist terrorist spybot: “Soviet Russian Communists knew of Barack from a very early date… he was raised and groomed Communist to pave the way for their future.”—Janet Porter

1963: G.O.P. clergyman delivers his famous “I have a dream” speech: “It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was a Republican.”—Human Events blog

1964: Republicans fight for the Civil Rights Act: “We were the people who passed the civil-rights bills back in the sixties without very much help from our colleagues across the aisle.”—Representative Virginia Foxx

1967: Indonesia brainwashes its first Islamic terrorist spybot: “Why didn’t anybody ever mention that that man right there was raised—spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father—as a Muslim and was educated in a Madrassa?”—Steve Doocy

1967: John Kerry likely shoots himself in the leg in order to score a Purple Heart medal: “There are legitimate questions about whether or not… it was a self-inflicted wound.”—Michelle Malkin

1993: Hillary Clinton claims her first kill, Vincent Foster—Jerry Falwell video

1994: Bill Clinton tops Hillary with twenty-four murders: these people died “under other than natural circumstances.”— Representative William Dannemeyer.

1998: Update: Clinton murders eighty people: “In recent months, a list of more than 80 deaths associated directly or indirectly with Clinton has been the buzz of the new media.”—Joseph Farah

1999: Global cooling begins: “For the last decade the climate has been cooling.”—Mary Matalin

September 11, 2001: Nothing happened: “We had no domestic attacks under Bush.”—Rudy Giuliani

May 1, 2003: The war in Iraq is won: “Mission Accomplished”—White House banner

May, 2004: Abu Ghraib pranksters pull some funny ones: “This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation … I’m talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release?”—Rush Limbaugh

2006: W.M.D. discovered: “We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”—Rick Santorum

2009: The Department of Veteran Affairs institutes new cost-cutting policy: they have “a manual out there telling our veterans… to commit suicide.”—Michael Steele

2009: The $3,128 light switch tax begins: “…a series of new taxes, including a light switch tax that would cost every American household $3,128 a year.”—House Republican Conference

2009: Obama strikes traditional motto from America’s coins: “ ‘In God We Trust’ is Gone!”—Patriot Action Network

2009: Democrats give preferential treatment to their base: The federal Hate Crime law would create “special protection for pedophiles.”—Representative Steve King

2010: Flying Jihad Terror Babies invade America: “It appeared they would have young women who became pregnant. They would get them into the United States to have a baby, they wouldn’t even have to pay anything for the baby, and then they would return back where they could be raised and coddled as future terrorists.”—Representative Louie Gohmert

2011: Arabic is declared America’s second language: “Some of our state’s educational administrators joined the feds in seeking to mandate Arabic classes for Texas children.”—Chuck Norris

2011: Obama provides health insurance for dogs: “In the health care bill, we’re now offering insurance for dogs.”—Glenn Beck

2011: President George W. Bush kills Osama bin Laden: “Thanks to George Bush…. Because if Obama had his way we wouldn’t have gotten bin Laden, you know that.”—Sean Hannity

Click to expand...

rogue49 · Sep 27, 2012

Now see...this is one of the things I'm talking about.
Doubling down on stupid.

Now I know they are now under the gun for GOP result this election from their "supposed" advantage they had earlier in the year.
But to support this shmuck, after the media firestorm...just so soon ago.

I know they think people are ADD and stupid, so noone will "realize" that they've gone back to supporting him.
But I don't thing people's memories or attention spans are THAT bad.
Beside the whole lack of integrity in the first place...

Perhaps there is a "war on women"
but it's more likely a few rogue soldiers...and the rest are like generals not caring about the collateral damage.

More Republican leaders get behind Akin in Missouri Senate race
By Kevin Murphy | Reuters

KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - More Republican leaders came to the side of Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin on Wednesday, a day after the deadline passed for him to withdraw from the race after controversial comments he made last month about rape.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which had cut off financial support to Akin, said on Wednesday it backs his campaign to defeat incumbent Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill in the November 6 election. Former Republican presidential contender Rick Santorum also endorsed Akin on Wednesday.

"There is no question that for Missourians who believe we need to stop the reckless Washington spending, rein-in the role of government in people's lives, and finally focus on growing jobs in this country that Todd Akin is a far more preferable candidate than liberal Senator Claire McCaskill," Rob Jesmer, NRSC executive director, said in a statement.

"As with every Republican Senate candidate, we hope Todd Akin wins in November and we will continue to monitor this race closely in the days ahead," Jesmer said.

He did not say whether the committee would change its mind about contributing to the Akin campaign.

Many leading Republicans nationally and in Missouri disavowed Akin after his remarks in a TV interview that women have a biological defense against "legitimate rape" that keeps them from getting pregnant. Akin apologized but was urged by prominent Republicans to drop out. The deadline for him to withdraw from the race passed on Tuesday.

The NRSC support came on the heels of word Tuesday from the Senate Conservatives Fund that it may put money into his campaign. The Missouri Republican Party also backed Akin on Tuesday after earlier saying he should consider quitting.

Santorum and U.S. Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, a Tea Party leader and major backer of the Senate Conservatives Fund, endorsed Akin on Wednesday.

"Todd Akin is a principled conservative who is committed to winning and fighting for freedom in the U.S. Senate," they said in a joint statement. "Todd will work to stop reckless spending, stop the out of control debt, repeal the government takeover of health care, support our military and defend life at every stage."

Meanwhile, the Missouri Democratic Party said it filed a complaint Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission alleging Akin illegally changed his position on congressional earmarks in order to get contributions from the Senate Conservatives Fund. DeMint and the fund oppose earmarks, which Akin has at times defended.

"In an attempt to salvage his campaign, Todd Akin has agreed to change his position on earmarks in an effort to secure the support of a SuperPAC - brazen and shocking behavior that is a clear violation of federal campaign laws and House ethics rules," Mike Sanders, Missouri Democratic Party chairman, said in a news release. "As an elected member of Congress, Todd Akin should hold himself to a higher standard of conduct."

Akin's spokesman, Ryan Hite, did not return a call for comment on Wednesday on the Democrats' allegations. But Akin's campaign website responded on Friday to criticism from McCaskill about his alleged flip-flopping on earmarks.

"For the record Todd's position on earmarks has been clear and consistent and is not in conflict with Senator DeMint's ban on earmarks," the website stated.
Click to expand...

redux · Sep 27, 2012

Republican hopes of taking the Senate are fading and Missouri is key to any chance they might have.

Particularly, now that the Indiana senate race is in play (and should not be) because the Tea Party republican (who defeated the popular across the spectrum incumbent in the primary) has been campaigning on "no compromise, no way, never, ever"

Much like how the Republicans blew chances to win Senate seats in CO, DE, and NV last election, but were stuck with weak Tea Party extremists and lost all three.

Baraka_Guru · Sep 27, 2012

I think it's a good thing if people realize that the Tea Party is a political movement, not a platform or party.

redux · Sep 28, 2012

Akin is making the news again, telling a reporter after a debate that his opponent, Sen. Claire McCaskell, is not as "ladylike" as she was six years ago.

"...she was very aggressive at the debate, which was quite different than it was when she ran against Jim Talent,” Akin said. “She had a confidence and was much more ladylike (in 2006), but in the debate on Friday she came out swinging, and I think that’s because she feels threatened.”
Click to expand...

Tully Mars · Sep 28, 2012

Baraka_Guru said: ↑

I think it's a good thing if people realize that the Tea Party is a political movement, not a platform or party.
Click to expand...

I think it would be great if people would realize the the "Tea Party" is AstroTurf being funded by billionaires and millionaires who've managed to convince a lot of middle class folks to vote against their own interests. In years past these folks funded groups who opposed gay rights, freedom of choice regarding women's health issues and to a lesser degree gun control (gun nuts didn't/don't need any help or incentive to get wound up.) Those groups were more then willing to jump on any train that included their "base fear/concern" even if that meant getting screwed financially. Issues such as gay rights and abortion just aren't producing the votes they used to so folks like the Koch brothers needed to shift strategies if they wanted to keep getting the huge tax breaks they enjoy. Tax breaks they enjoy on the backs of the working/middle class.

I've said it before and I'll say it again- you've got to hand to these folks. They're damn smart. When you can get grandma and grandpa to not only vote against Social Security and Medicare but to convince them to protest against candidates who support those program you've managed quite a hat trick.

Indigo Kid · Sep 28, 2012

In truth, the Republicans, much to their angst - are truly sucking the hind tit. They've got "nuthin"... and if the entire World wants to evolve and see a better FUTURE and some peace, us Americans really need to vote Democraticly in this next election. It's gotten down to brass tacks as many say, because a healthy middle class will keep the USA from imploding and sending the USA into a downward spiral that won't stop until the end of Democracy et al. We must keep evolving and keep our freedom.

Folks, this is BIG and you must vote from your heart and soul.

Joniemack · Sep 28, 2012

Voting from my heart and soul would require a better choice. I think Obama has done a fairly good job considering and we all know what has to be considered and I will vote for him again.

But what I would really prefer would be a choice between a moderate like Obama and a candidate who was more progressive.

I can't remember when the country had a choice like that. Ford/Carter maybe?

Shadowex3 · Sep 29, 2012

Dewey/FDR.

The problem is one of ignorance. Specifically deliberate, voluntary, and willful ignorance. The mere continued existence of the entire rest of the developed world is prima facie proof that virtually everything the right has said for going on 10+ years now is utterly the opposite of reality, but people still fervently believe it while still somehow managing to recognize and accept that said rest of the world does exist and does not remotely resemble the allegedly inevitable end result of "socialism".

When someone can accept every step of logic disproving a tangible viewpoint and yet still refuse to believe that viewpoint has been disproven you can't have any kind of functional interaction with that person anymore. They exist in a world beyond the laws of logic, causality, and reason where there is only blind and unquestioning obedience in whatever they are told.

Joniemack · Sep 29, 2012

Shadowex3 said: ↑

When someone can accept every step of logic disproving a tangible viewpoint and yet still refuse to believe that viewpoint has been disproven you can't have any kind of functional interaction with that person anymore. They exist in a world beyond the laws of logic, causality, and reason where there is only blind and unquestioning obedience in whatever they are told.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think there might be quite a large payoff inherent in the process of denying fact and logic and opting for the la-la land diet.

That being - a lifetime accumulation of biases, prejudices, and ways of regarding the world have become so ingrained that any questioning of them on the part of the owner results in psychic and in some cases physical, pain and discomfort. The staunch support of right wing Republican distortions simply makes it easier for the supporters to maintain their rubber room sheng fui.

Actually, we all have perceptions of a reality that may not be reality at all and when called upon to deny it in the face of someone else's reality or new information, we are just as likely as anyone else to retreat to our rubber room.

I suppose it's a matter of degree and a question of just how dangerous the result of the perceived reality of some might be.

rogue49 · Oct 19, 2012

The realities of money in election politics...taken from a GOP point of view.
Necessary or not?

BTW...I love the term "shadow-boss"

Playing to donors, GOP groups spill some secrets
By: Kenneth P. Vogel - October 19, 2012

For two years, outside money was a secretive game, with deep-pocketed conservative groups refusing to detail their methods or strategies — let alone discuss their donors.

Nowadays, though, it seems like they won’t stop talking.

No ad buy, direct mail drop, bus tour stop or robocall is too small for a news release or leak to a hungry political press corps.

Even Americans for Prosperity, the main political group of the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch (once regarded as the most secretive of secret spenders), has opened up about its spending, instructing its press shop to provide reporters with details about its $72 million worth of ad buys.

The reason is clear: Conservative super PACs and outside groups face the very real possibility they’ll have spent $1 billion and failed to elect Mitt Romney or deliver a GOP Senate.

That means professional political types could have a lot of explaining to do, especially to the rich donors who financed the record spending spree and are wondering if their investment was squandered.

So the operatives running the superPACs and nonprofits are scrambling to prove they made a difference in any way they can. They’re positioning themselves to claim credit for successes, dodge blame for failures and prove that they’re not one-trick ponies that can only do narrowly targeted advertising.

Karl Rove’s Crossroads outfit, which mostly focused on television ads boosting Romney and GOP Senate candidates, has been branching out into House races and get-out-the-vote activity, working with Ralph Reed’s newly robust evangelical mobilization group Faith and Freedom Coalition.

A coalition of groups in the Koch brothers’ network — including Americans for Prosperity, 60 Plus, Concerned Women for America and CitizenLink — met recently to discuss how to prove they were giving donors bang for their buck.

The pro-Romney Restore Our Future superPAC has been boasting to donors that its advertising in Michigan and Wisconsin helped make both states competitive, while the nonprofit American Future Fund has sought to differentiate itself from the crowd by spending on anti-Obama ads in Midwestern turf not long ago regarded as nearly impossible for Romney to win — Minnesota.

It’s all being done with an eye toward after the election, when operatives, donors and fundraisers expect a major reshuffling of the conservative groups that reaped an unprecedented flow of cash resulting from rich Republicans’ enmity for President Barack Obama and from the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision loosening campaign finance rules.

“Without question, after it’s over, there is going to be a sorting out of who got the job done, and I think there will be some who might lay claim to accomplishments that they maybe didn’t personally accomplish,” said Idaho businessman Frank VanderSloot.

“Some of these organizations will gain in stature and some will probably fall by the wayside,” said VanderSloot, who has contributed $1.1 million to Restore Our Future, raised at least $2 million more for Romney’s campaign and hinted he might have given to Crossroads.

To be sure, after every election there’s typically both a donor drought and a bit of upheaval in which some techniques and operatives rise and fall. But the combination of a Democratic president seen as beatable plus a concerted effort to create a permanent coalition of unlimited money independent groups that form a shadow party rivaling the traditional party committees ups the ante this year.

Perhaps as a result, there’s been competition in the shadow party ranks, with occasional tension between Rove’s network and the Koch brothers’. Rove at times also has questioned Restore Our Future in conversations with donors, suggesting for instance that the group may be squandering cash on high-fundraising fees, sources tell POLITICO.

If Romney wins, his allies at Restore Our Future are uniquely positioned to replace Rove as the shadow party boss.

Restore Our Future, which had raised $97 million through August, has sought to protect its standing with donors, holding phone calls with them at least twice a month, along with regular gatherings on the sidelines of Romney campaign finance events, including one in August at the Republican National Convention in Tampa featuring Olympic gold medalists and a “strategy briefing” on Tuesday afternoon at New York’s Waldorf-Astoria hotel.

Co-founder Charlie Spies wouldn’t comment on either Rove’s criticism or the calls but did say “we don’t have to ‘protect’ ourselves because we have kept our donors involved with our strategy every step of the way, and their support is evidenced by their continued generous giving.”

If Obama beats Romney and Democrats maintain control of the Senate, conservative finance operatives predict that there are going to be a whole lot of angry donors demanding answers or, worse, closing their checkbooks.

In fact, some are already expressing more interest in grass-roots organizing, partly as a result of mounting questions about the effectiveness of the record television ad barrage, said Ned Ryun, president of American Majority Action.

“We’ve done well with donors who get it, who understand the law of diminishing returns with TV and radio ads,” said Ryun, whose 501(c)4 nonprofit group has opened dozens of get-out-the-vote offices in Florida, Ohio, Virginia and other swing states. He’s been urging big conservative donors to shift their giving away from advertising to grass-roots organizing and mobilization efforts, which he says yield better long-term results than advertising.

The Koch brothers’ groups are also emphasizing voter contact and mobilization ahead of Election Day.

Koch political operative Sean Noble recently led a meeting in Washington outlining metrics to demonstrate effectiveness to donors in the weeks before the election, including total number of voter contacts. The meeting drew representatives from Koch-backed groups Americans for Prosperity, the conservative seniors group 60 Plus Association and the Hispanic outreach outfit Libre Initiative, Concerned Women for America and the James Dobson-affiliated evangelical outfit CitizenLink.

AFP has seen its fundraising soar — it’s on pace to spend $135 million in 2012 — by demonstrating to donors that it’s not just focusing on the next election, said its president, Tim Phillips. “Our mission is to build a long-term grass-roots infrastructure focused on economic freedom in the states that’s going to be bigger, stronger and more organized in January of 2013 to fight the next wave of issue battles,” he said.

“There are plenty of groups doing TV ads — and that’s good, by the way — but if you’re a donor who thinks TV ads are important, and you also want to have your money build a grass-roots infrastructure that can knock on hundreds of thousands of doors and make millions of calls, then there really isn’t anybody like Americans for Prosperity,” he added.

Yet this particular election has created the ideal environment for conservative fundraising, suggested the Koch brothers’ top fundraising operative in an email last week urging groups in his network to hit up donors now.

Kevin Gentry wrote, “If you’re involved in the public policy process and if your work is related to the appropriate role and size of government in a free society, then right now you should be at the ultimate point of your fundraising effectiveness.”

That gusher won’t continue after Nov. 6, said Stanley Hubbard, a Minnesota media mogul and major Republican donor.

“No matter what, there’s going to be a little slowdown, because people have been giving so much money in this particular time period that I think they’re going to take a breath,” Hubbard said. “After 2013, it’s a different story again. Then, you reassess the situation, see where you are and ask if there is any critical need to donate.”

Hubbard attends the Koch brothers’ donor summits, has given to Americans for Prosperity and, through his company, donated at least $250,000 to Restore Our Future and Rove’s Crossroads. He said he’ll continue his AFP giving, because “they always deliver,” but suggested the jury was still out on Crossroads. “I think their ads are pretty good, so we’ll see what happens,” he said. “Who knows? … They might fold. I have no idea what they’re going to do.”

Of course, donor attitudes will still depend on the final results. “If Romney wins, all will be forgiven. There will be fewer questions,” Ryun said. “They’re less likely to ask to see data on specific deliverables and return on investment.”

© 2012 POLITICO LLC
Click to expand...

Joniemack · Oct 23, 2012

Tennessee state Senator Stacey Campfield…

"Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community…It was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall…My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/26/stacey-campfield-tennessee-senator-dont-say-gay-bill_n_1233697.html

rogue49 · Oct 23, 2012

Interestingly enough this is from Republicans for Obama

The Republican party isn't what it used to be. Our leaders and our most vocal activists have written moderates out of the party and have refused to work with the other side, to the detriment of the nation. Center-right presidents such as Reagan, Bush Sr., Ford, Nixon and Eisenhower would have no chance being nominated today.

Unfortunately, Mitt Romney has not proven to be able to stand up to our party's most extreme elements. Instead, he has fallen for the "one-size-fits-all" mentality that tax cuts for the already-wealthy will solve all of our problems, and has no workable plans to solve the challenges we face.

President Obama has shown himself to be a common-sense centrist. He has cut taxes when necessary, has taken steps to protect the environment, and has aggressively pursued Islamic extremists who threaten America. Most notably, he has reformed our healthcare system by signing a Republican-inspired healthcare plan into law. In most other points in our party's history, Obama would fit in well as a Republican.
Click to expand...

And it sounds close to how I feel.
It's surreal...it's like up is down, down is all the way to Hell.

Like the debate, the GOP candidate was agreeing with all of the Democratic president's points and foreign policies.
Obama was sounding more like a firm Republican with balanced but strong commentary.

And he's doing everything I've always liked the GOP to do...exact opposite from a "commie" or "socialist" he's called by their current group.
And the GOP is doubling down on unbalanced and extreme idealogy. (Like saying well, instead of a hammer we need a wrecking ball)

Baraka_Guru · Oct 29, 2012

This is a bit long to post in the thread itself (plus it's an interview with bold text, etc.), so I will just leave a link and a pull quote.

This basically is Frank Rich stating how an Obama win will further enrage the right but that the Republican Party will continue to radicalize either way. Great, huh?

Frank Rich: Right will rage if Obama wins - Salon.com

So how would the Republicans behave in a second term? You argued last week, in a piece that I am sure surprised some people, that the party will continue moving to the right no matter what – that there is no chance a loss in this election would convince them to become more moderate.

Whether he’s reelected or not, I think the party, the radical, conservative, right-wing party, is going to keep moving to the right. Keep getting rid of dissidents, purging dissidents. To liberals, something like the Richard Mourdock thing is, “Oh my god, this is the end of the Republican Party,” but, no. A lot of Republican powers that be circled back to Todd Akin once the spotlight was off of him. That is the party. For liberals to have the illusion that it’s going to change, or that they’re going to learn a lesson if Romney loses, is to make the same mistake liberals always make.
Click to expand...

Joniemack · Oct 29, 2012

There's never been any doubt in my mind that Republicans will continue to obstruct until they get their way.

rogue49 · Oct 30, 2012

I just want to make a call-out to NJ governor Chris Christie.

This is the kind of attitude that America is screaming for.
Non-partisan, get the job done, work with those that move it forward...

GOP, DNC and otherwise...be damned.
Kudos to you, sir.

Christie praises Obama, doesn’t ‘give a damn’ about Romney photo op
By David Edwards - Tuesday, October 30, 2012

The presidential candidates have canceled all campaign events on Tuesday, but Republican New Jersey Chris Christie seemed to be stumping for President Barack Obama by appearing on several networks to praise the federal response to Hurricane Sandy.

In an interview on NBC, Christie called Obama “outstanding” for expediting relief efforts. He also told MSNBC that Obama “deserves great credit.”

“He gave me his number at the White House and told me to call him if I needed anything,” Christie said.

The New Jersey governor even took his message to Fox News, saying that Obama had helped “tremendously.”

“I spoke to the president three times yesterday,” he explained. “He called me for the last time at midnight last night asking what he could do. I said, if you can expedite designating New Jersey as a major disaster area that that would help us to get federal money and resources in here as quickly as possible to help clean up the damage here.”

“The president was great last night,” Christie continued. “He said he would get it done. At 2 a.m., I got a call from FEMA to answer a couple of final questions and then he signed the declaration this morning. So I have to give the president great credit. He’s been on the phone with me three times in the last 24 hours. He’s been very attentive, and anything that I’ve asked for, he’s gotten to me. So, I thank the president publicly for that. He’s done — as far as I’m concerned — a great job for New Jersey.”

Fox News co-host Steve Doocy wondered when Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was going to get some of the same benefits from the hurricane with a photo op in disaster-stricken New Jersey towns.

“Over the last couple of months, you have appeared throughout the country, Governor, on behalf of Mitt Romney,” Doocy remarked to Christie. “[W]e hear that perhaps Mr. Romney may do some storm-related events. Is there any possibility that Gov. Romney may go to New Jersey to tour some of the damage with you?”

“I have no idea, nor am I the least bit concerned or interested,” Christie replied, immediately shutting down the idea. “I’ve got a job to do here in New Jersey that’s much bigger than presidential politics and I could [sic] care less about any of that stuff.”

“I have a job to do,” he added. “I’ve got 2.4 million people out of power, I’ve got devastation on the shore, I’ve got floods in the northern part of my state. If you think right now I give a damn about presidential politics then you don’t know me.”
Click to expand...

Baraka_Guru · Oct 30, 2012

rogue49 said: ↑

I just want to make a call-out to NJ governor Chris Christie.

This is the kind of attitude that America is screaming for.
Non-partisan, get the job done, work with those that move it forward...

GOP, DNC and otherwise...be damned.
Kudos to you, sir.
Click to expand...

Has he been crucified yet?

Ostracized at least?

He knows there's an election next week, doesn't he?

grumpyolddude · Oct 30, 2012

Baraka_Guru said: ↑

Has he been crucified yet?

Ostracized at least?

He knows there's an election next week, doesn't he?
Click to expand...

First thing out of his mouth I can recall that demonstrates dedication to his constituents. Well done!

Borla · Oct 30, 2012

Baraka_Guru said: ↑

Has he been crucified yet?

Ostracized at least?

He knows there's an election next week, doesn't he?
Click to expand...

When I saw Christie's quote this morning I thought it was classy and appropriate for the occasion. What is sad is my twitter feed. I steer clear of most online political chatter. I hate the vehement partisanship that comes at the expense of common sense and what's best for those they are supposed to help. So most of the people I follow on twitter are news feeds, sports figures and analysts, comedians, and other light hearted fare. Any tweets from them involving Sandy have been supportive and humane. Until the last few hours, where everyone from Andy Richter to Slate to Huffington Post decided they needed to use the occasion to sling mud. It really turns me off.

Log in or Sign up

Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

Indigo Kid Getting Tilted

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

Shadowex3 Very Tilted

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

grumpyolddude Very Tilted

Borla Moderator Staff Member

Log in or Sign up

Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

redux Very Tilted

Tully Mars Very Tilted

Indigo Kid Getting Tilted

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

Shadowex3 Very Tilted

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

grumpyolddude Very Tilted

Borla Moderator Staff Member

Useful Searches