An accurate depiction of what is happening in Washington today. With the economy in shambles, all elected officials should come together to find a common solution. Instead, GOP party politics are at play.
Cartoon by Monte Wolverton
Author: Ezra Grant
I'm just tired of the lies and nonsense coming from the GOP, so this is my little contribution to combat the nonsense!
This is a big LOL! moment. The Huffington Post is reporting that Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has a major problem – his campaign staffers are heading for the door in droves.
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich’s campaign manager, senior strategists and key aides in early delegate-selection states all resigned on Thursday, a mass exodus that leaves his hopes of winning the Republican nomination in tatters.
Rick Tyler, Gingrich’s spokesman, said he, campaign manager Rob Johnson and senior strategists had resigned, along with aides in the early primary and caucus states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Other officials said Gingrich was informed that his entire high command was quitting in a meeting earlier in the day. They cited differences over the direction of the campaign but were not more specific.
Maybe they all saw something shiny on the outside and decided to go investigate. How easily they get distracted.
Gingrich said he is determined to continue his campaign. At this rate, he may be doing it all by himself.
Mitt Romney was one of the main opponents to President Obama’s auto bailout, a bailout that has brought back the United States auto industry and saved thousands of jobs nationwide, especially in Detroit Michigan, the major producer of automobiles. So strong were his disagreements with the bailout, Romney suggested that Detroit and the auto industry should “go bankrupt.”
Today however, Romney made his way back to Detroit as a Republican presidential candidate for the 2012 elections, hoping to sell his economic policies, but the people of the motor-city have not forgotten about Romney’s stance on the auto bailout.
Below is their Welcome Message for Mitt Romney.
It’s a painting that was placed in the Wisconsin Governor’s mansion for a reason – to remind the leaders, whoever he or she might be, of their obligation to the homeless and the poor people of the state. Scott Walker, the Republican governor who recently tried to enact a bill to dismantle collective bargaining rights of the Wisconsin public worker, had the painting removed.
The painting called, Wishes in the Wind, was done by Wisconsin artist David Lenz. It depicts three children – one African-American, one Hispanic and one Caucasian – playing with bubble wands on a Milwaukee street. Lenz explained that he carefully chose the characters in the piece because of the importance of their life stories. The African-American girl was featured in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in an article done about homelessness. She and her mother spent three months at the Milwaukee Rescue Mission. The Caucasian boy’s father was killed by a drunk driver in 2009 and the Hispanic girl is a member of the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Milwaukee.
Governor Walker’s decision to remove the painting sent a strong message to Lenz. He said
“The homeless, central city children and victims of drunk drivers normally do not have a voice in politics, this painting was an opportunity for future governors to look these three children in the eye, and I hope, contemplate how their public policies might affect them and other children like them.”
I guess that was a conversation Governor Walker did not want to have.”
And in a direct reference to Scott Walker’s proposed budget cuts in state’s funding for Milwaukee schools services, Lenz said, “This seems symbolic, you would think we could all agree on the need to support the hopes and dreams of children.”
Walker’s excuse for removing the painting? In a press released, this explanation was given;
In recognition of the 150th anniversary of the Civil War, Governor Scott Walker and First Lady Tonette Walker are pleased to announce the addition of Civil War themed artwork and artifacts to decorate the interior of Wisconsin’s Executive Residence.
The painting Wishes in the Wind, which was previously on display in the Drawing Room, is on loan to the Central Library in Milwaukee where 560,000 visitors each year will see it, learn about its significance and continue the discussion about providing hope and optimism for the least privileged in our society. By comparison, the Executive Residence hosts approximately 15,000 visitors each year.
It was bound to happen. Andrew Breitbart, the same guy who just a few days ago claimed that he wanted to protect Anthony Weiner by not releasing this photo of the congressman’s erect penis, went on Opie and Anthony’s radio show today and passed the picture on his cellphone around for all to see.
According to the description given to explain how the photo was captured, a video camera in the studio caught the image, and voilà – it is spreading on the internet for all to see, and yes, it seems that the congressman – an avid left leaning Democrat – leans left in more ways than one.
The official explanation of how the photo was captured is shown in the video below:
And below is the picture, as captured by the camera in the studio.
Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of The United Kingdom, were considered close allies. So Sarah Palin, in an effort to show her conservative Republican followers that she is the ultimate ‘ Reagan’ candidate, expressed her desire to meet with Mrs. Thatcher.
Palin told Christina Lamb in the Sunday Times about an upcoming trip she’s planning;
I am going to Sudan in July and hope to stop in England on the way. I am just hoping Mrs. Thatcher is well enough to see me as I so admire her.
But it seems this admiration is a one-way-street. Mrs Thatcher has other plans and according to the report, she is really not very fond of Sarah Palin.
It would appear that the reasons go deeper than Thatcher’s frail health. Her allies believe that Palin is a frivolous figure who is unworthy of an audience with the Iron Lady. This is what one ally tells me:
“Lady Thatcher will not be seeing Sarah Palin. That would be belittling for Margaret. Sarah Palin is nuts.”
Thatcher will show the level she punches at when she attends the unveiling of a statue of Ronald Reagan outside the US embassy in Grosvenor Square on Independence day on 4 July. This is what her ally told me:
“Margaret is focusing on Ronald Reagan and will attend the unveiling of the statue. That is her level.”
There’s simply no other way to describe the Presidential hopeful.
In a speech given at the Family Leader Presidential Lecture Series in Pella, Iowa, Hermain wowed the conservative audience by complaining about President Obama, and telling the audience that the only bills a Herman Cain president will sign into law, will be three pages or less. The audience loved it.
CAIN: Engage the people. Don’t try to pass a 2,700 page bill — and even they didn’t read it! You and I didn’t have time to read it. We’re too busy trying to live — send our kids to school. That’s why I am only going to allow small bills — three pages. You’ll have time to read that one over the dinner table. What does Herman Cain, President Cain talking about in this particular bill?
ThinkProgress made this observation.
Cain’s pledge received a raucous round of applause from the crowd, who didn’t seem to fully appreciate the implications of such a radical cut-off mark. The vast majority of substantive bills passed by Congress are longer than three pages. Under this bright-line rule, Cain wouldn’t have signed such landmark pieces of legislation as the Civil Rights Act, the Social Security Act, or thePATRIOT Act. In fact, he wouldn’t have even been able to sign the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, which ran 114 and 18 pages, respectively.
As president, Cain wouldn’t be able to sign any of the always-lengthy appropriations bills that keep the government running and the military funded. In fact, pretty much the only legislation that could squeak by under Cain’s three-page cut-off would be the simplest bills naming post offices and the like. But perhaps that’s exactly what Cain wants — to completely shutdown government by refusing to take any action that requires a prolonged attention span.
When Romney announced his desire to run for President back in 2008, one of his major flaws among the American voter was his Mormon beliefs. But that was then and this is now, and according to a new Quinnipiac poll, Americans will vote for anyone of any belief, as long as that person is not a Muslim. The poll released on June 8th, found that of the different Religions, Americans are more comfortable with a Catholic president at 60%, than they are with a Muslim at 21%. Mormons are just below Christians, getting a 43% vote. 
- Howard Cain is at 9%
- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 8%
- Texas U.S. Rep. Ron Paul at 8%
- Minnesota U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann at 6%
- Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty at 5%
- Former Pennsylvania U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum at 4%
- Jon Huntsman at 1%.
Another 20 percent are undecided.
Just when you thought we had heard the last of The Donald, he pops up again like a bad dream. This time, his excuse for showing off that critter on the top of his head, is the Anthony Weiner debacle that is playing out now in the media, you know… weinergate!
Of course Donald Trump is no reference point on the morality scale, but then again, which Republican politician is? Donald Trump was married to his first wife Ivana in 1977, but he couldn’t keep his “weener” in his pants and cheated on her with Marla Maples. Marla became his second wife in 1993. The two lovebirds stayed married… oh… sorry, the two divorced after a short 6 years, then The Donald married his third wife Melania Knauss. Between these three wives, The Morality King fathered 5 children.
And his moral standing more than qualifies Donald Trump to share his 2 cents on Anthony Weiner, the Democratic Representative from New York who sent pictures of himself to various women over a 3 year period, then lied to the media about it. Trump, being the one without sin in this case, cast his stones;
“Anthony Weiner is a bad guy, he’s a psycho and when this came out I was not surprised at all. I’d watch him in interviews, I’d watch him on television, I’ d hear what he’d say and you could see he was like a boiler ready to explode,” said Trump.
“Little did anybody realize, especially me, that he’d get into this kind of trouble,” said Trump. “I thought that his career was so important to him. The fact is what he was doing was more important or probably he just had a death wish.”
Now that the Donald has maneuvered his way back into the spotlight and is again commanding the short attention span of the so-called media, we should expect another book deal or something. This is how the Donald thinks – capture the limelight, then quickly make some money off the experience. Let’s see how much of a bump his Apprentice show gets now.
Fresh off his very own one week suspension for calling Laura Ingraham a “Slut,” Ed Shultz – host of the nightly 10PM time slot on MSNBC called The Ed Show – tore into Anthony Weiner, demanding that the congressman retire his seat in House of Representatives, telling his audience on Monday night’s show, Anthony Weiner lied, and his constituents may no longer trust the congressman.
Now, as an American worker put yourself in the Congressman’s position. He’s tweeting pictures to a girl half his age on company time and lying about it to the boss. By the way, you’re the taxpayer. You’re the boss. Do you think you would survive that in your workplace?
Maybe you would. Maybe that’s just the way America and society is now. I have no interest in Congressman Weiner’s private life. He and his wife, I think, have got quite a bit to deal with and work out at this point. He made this a public issue. He did it. When he lied repeatedly during a media tour that lasted a week.
This is about trust. Do you trust what he says now? This is about character. And this is about the people and what the people of this country deserve in elected officials. All of the people that have gotten in trouble before I’ve advocated them resigning because the taxpayers deserve total focus. Congressman Weiner, if you believe in yourself, you will resign and you will come back and run again in 2012 because that’s what the taxpayers deserve.
Ed spent the majority of his show talking about Rep. Anthony Weiner and asking his many guests whether they believe the congressman should retire. None of the guest including Rev. Al Sharpton supported Shultz’s call for Weiner to step down.
Even a telephone poll conducted on the show showed strong disagreement with Ed’s position, with over 67% wanting Weiner to continue as Representative of New York, and just 33% siding with Mr. Shultz.
This is one time Ed should listen to his viewers.
Anthony Weiner has always been one of the loudest voices in Congress when it comes to fighting for the middle class American worker. He has represented New York well. He has never claimed to be an angel, and neither is Ed Shultz. Ed calls Ingraham a “slut”, apologized, and maintains his job. Weiner sent half nude photos of himself, apologized, but Ed wants him to quit.
Come on Ed, you cannot be more wrong on this matter.
The unfortunate part of this whole Weiner episode is that now, he will forever be remembered as the man who sent a picture of his covered weener on Twitter, instead of being remembered as the great Democratic voice in Congress.
Will Anthony Weiner survive this? No. We expect another press conference where Weiner will announce his resignation.
Today, another Republican joker pitched his hat in the ring, telling America that he is going to run for President in 2012. And immediately after Rick Santorum made it official, social network sites like Twitter went crazy. It seems that everyone has an opinion on whether or not Santorum should run, and most of the “tweets” were asking Americans to know their candidate, advising them to use google, like the tweet shown below:
So in an effort to shed a little more light on the subject, I took @paulfreid up on his challenge and googled “Santorum.” What I found was indeed scary! Below is part of the unbelievable results Google returned:
Comparing Gay Sex to Man-On-Dog and Sodomy.
In an interview with the Associated Press, as reported in USATODAY, the question of outlawing homosexuality was asked;
AP: I mean, should we outlaw homosexuality?
SANTORUM: I have no problem with homosexuality. I have a problem with homosexual acts. As I would with acts of other, what I would consider to be, acts outside of traditional heterosexual relationships. And that includes a variety of different acts, not just homosexual. I have nothing, absolutely nothing against anyone who’s homosexual. If that’s their orientation, then I accept that. And I have no problem with someone who has other orientations. The question is, do you act upon those orientations? So it’s not the person, it’s the person’s actions. And you have to separate the person from their actions.
AP: OK, without being too gory or graphic, so if somebody is homosexual, you would argue that they should not have sex?
SANTORUM: We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion. And now we’re just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it’s my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that’s antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it’s polygamy, whether it’s adultery, where it’s sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.
Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —
AP: I’m sorry, I didn’t think I was going to talk about “man on dog” with a United States senator, it’s sort of freaking me out.
SANTORUM: And that’s sort of where we are in today’s world, unfortunately. The idea is that the state doesn’t have rights to limit individuals’ wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire. And we’re seeing it in our society.
AP: Sorry, I just never expected to talk about that when I came over here to interview you. Would a President Santorum eliminate a right to privacy — you don’t agree with it?
Rick then went on the Glenn Beck Show and defended his man-on-dog claims.
There’s more. We advise you to take @paulFreid’s advise and google Santorum.