The clip below features the cast of Republican candidates trying to get their party’s nomination to take on then candidate, Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential elections.
In the clip, moderator Chris Matthews asked Mitt Romney a question – who will you consult before sending our troops into war? This should have been easy one for Mitt. The Constitution already answered this question – Congress is the body of Government authorized to declare war. But when asked, Mitt Romney replied that his lawyers would make that decision.
This is not a joke people, this man could be the next president of the United States.
As Hurricane Sandy makes her way toward the United States’ east coast, Governors in the path of the hurricane are declaring their states disaster areas. Even New Jersey’s Republican Governor Chris Christie said in a press conference today that he spoke with President Obama, and he is set to accept help from the Federal government as Sandy approaches his state.
But imagine if Mitt Romney was in charge. Huh? You can’t remember what Mitt Romney had to say about the government helping its citizens in the event of a natural disaster?
Well let me jog your memory.
Remember during the Republican primaries when Romney and his fellow Republicans were trying to out nut each other? A question was asked about government relief during times of natural disasters. Mitt Romney answered that question by saying that federal spending on disaster relief is “immoral.”
We cannot — we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all.
Just what Americans need. A president who thinks it is “immoral” to provide help to Americans after a natural disaster.
1. “Mitt Romney has a plan to help the auto industry.” No specific plan is referenced in the ad, and Romney’s campaign web site does not include a plan to “help the auto industry.” In 2008, Romney wrote a New York Times editorial titled, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt,” and he re-upped his call against the auto rescue during the Republican primaries this year.
2. “[Romney] is supported by Lee Iaccoca and the Detroit News.” Chrysler Chairman Lee Iaccoca has indeed endorsed Romney. The Detroit News, a self-described “conservative newspaper,” endorsed him last week. But in that endorsement, the paper slammed Romney’s “wrong-headedness on the auto bailout.”
3. “Obama took GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy.” Obama did take both companies into a managed bankruptcy, the path Romney says was originally his idea. Romney, however, supported private sector financing of the bankruptcy, a plan that was “pure fantasy” at the time since no private lenders could lend to the companies in the middle of the financial crisis. Without federal intervention, the companies would have almost assuredly collapsed, costing 1.3 million jobs, according to industry estimates.
4. “[Obama] sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China.” This week, Romney claimed he read a news story that said Chrysler was planning to “moving all production to China.” The Bloomberg News piece he referenced, though, made it clear that Fiat, the Italian company that now owns Chrysler, was opening new factories in China to make Jeeps for Chinese consumers. No American plants will be closed, and no American jobs will be lost. The ad’s claim may not be as false as Romney’s previous statement, but it is certainly misleading.
It doesn’t come as a complete surprise, but this article from Yahoo! News about racial attitudes is a shameful comment about our so-called post-racial attitudes. Turns out they aren’t very post-anything.
Antebellum would be more accurate.
From the article:
In all, 51 percent of Americans now express explicit anti-black attitudes, compared with 48 percent in a similar 2008 survey. When measured by an implicit racial attitudes test, the number of Americans with anti-black sentiments jumped to 56 percent, up from 49 percent during the last presidential election. In both tests, the share of Americans expressing pro-black attitudes fell.
In the small mind of a zealot, that makes sense. Not only is this offensive from a racial point-of-view, it is meant to reduce Colin Powell, a great military leader and public servant who actually enunciated a military doctrine that all presidents should honor, to someone who can’t think for himself and must endorse Obama for emotional reasons. He’s questioning Powell’s intelligence. Bad move.
The strategy of dividing the country by race has been a Republican staple since Richard Nixon used the Southern Strategy in his 1968 and 1972 campaigns. Ronald Reagan endorsed state’s rights very early in his 1980 campaign, and Sununu’s boss George H.W. Bush famously made Willie Horton the face of black males in 1988. Racism was muted, for the most part, in the election of 2008 (many Democrats feared a Bradley Effect where people say they’ll vote for a black candidate in a poll, but don’t vote for them in the actual election) as the economy and a near-Depression pushed it to the background. But racism is alive and well in 2012.
Fortunately, I believe, this might be the last national election where the Republican Party’s coalition of older southern and western white voters influences its policy choices. The country is changing demographically and the GOP had better nurture the few African-Americans in its ranks for 2014 and 2016 if it wants to remain competitive. I also expect Latinos like Marco Rubio to be the face of the party at the expense of Paul Ryan. Even young people might find a GOP message more reassuring if it wasn’t so anti-black, brown and gay.
Despite these attitudes, it does look like the United States is about to reelect its first African-American president, and that means something. Obama doesn’t betray a great deal of passion in his non-campaign face, but he desperately wants to win this election for symbolic and political reasons. A one-term presidency would embolden the racists to say that the US tried an African-American president and he failed. Two terms allows Obama to be an even more powerful symbol and leader, as he will now be president when the economy recovers, and the health care, Dodd-Frank and tax reform laws take hold.
In short, he will leave a legacy worthy of a great president.
Donald Trump dropped his “big” breaking news yesterday, saying that he would donate $5 million dollars to a charity of President Obama’s choice if Mr. Obama shows his college papers and passport. A foolish gesture indeed and one not worthy of a response from the President of the United States.
But on last night’s appearance on The Jay Leno show, the President mocked the donald’s proposal, saying;
“This all dates back to when we were growing up together in Kenya. We had constant run-ins on the soccer field… He wasn’t very good and resented it. … When we finally moved to America I thought it would be over.”
We’re still trying to figure out who Mitt Romney is. With all his shifting positions moving from severely conservative to endorsing the president’s foreign policies, it is fair to say that Mitt Romney is still trying to figure out Mitt Romney.
But when Mitt Romney makes an official endorsement, it is a good indication of what Mitt Romney believes and stands for.
Mitt Romney officially endorsed Richard Mourdock. Richard Mourdock thinks that a pregnancy that results from rape is God’s doing.
In the first debate, I think we can all agree that Mitt Romney won. The President just didn’t show up. In the second debate, President Obama returned to the stage and dominated the debate, clearly winning and shaking Mitt Romney to his core. And now, in the third debate, probably because he was still shaken from the second debate, Mitt Romney chose to agree with practically everything President Obama said tonight.
Mitt Romney offered a ringing endorsement of the President.
Romney agreed with President Obama’s decision to go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden. His previous position was saying there’s no need to “move Heaven and earth” to get Bin Laden.
Romney also decided to change his position and agree to the 2014 deadline to bring our troops home from Afghanistan. Previously, it was understood that Romney wanted to base his decision on the recommendation of the Generals in the field. Now, that’s changed.
And where the auto bailout is concerned, Mitt Romney simply lied, trying to fool the American people into believing that he wanted the government to finance the bailout. He actually said he wanted the government to step up and bailout the industry after they went through a structured bankruptcy. Of course we all know that what Mitt Romney said in his infamous op-ed, was “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”
And teachers? According to tonight’s debate version of Mitt Romney, he “loves teachers,” he actually said that. But just this year, Mitt Romney stood in Wisconsin and mocked the President’s wish to hire more teachers, saying;
“He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”
On and on Mitt Romney went, abandoning his previous positions and accepting the President’s positions on the issues. Mitt Romney accepted the president’s policy on drones, he accepted President Obama’s policies on Syria and he agreed with the President on the crippling sanctions in Iran.
So thanks to Mitt Romney and his apparent lack of ideas on the issues, we leave this final Presidential debate knowing that what the President has done so far is correct, and that Mitt Romney has no different plans to do things differently. And for that reason, among others, I solidify my vote for President Obama in November instead of trying an amateur with no ideas.
With the third and final Presidential debate airing tonight, it will be helpful if you get up to speed with what actually happened in the last debate. But instead of sitting down for 90 minutes watching the President’s smack down of Mitt Romney, just spend 10 minutes and get a full understanding of what really took place.
With that said, here’s the second Presidential debate… Saturday Night Live version:
Remember when foreign affairs wasn’t a major part of the presidential campaign? It was supposed to be about jobs, jobs and jobs. But now that the world has intruded on our parochial election, the third debate will play a major role in the last two weeks of this contest.
This does not bode well for Mitt Romney, and it plays into one of Obama’s strengths.
Romney has also boxed himself in on Afghanistan. According to this story in the LA Times, his policy is much like the President’s.
In the 16 months that he has been running for president, the thrust of Mitt Romney‘s policy toward Afghanistan has been this: He would hew to President Obama‘s timeline to withdraw U.S. troops by the end of 2014, but he would part ways with the president by giving greater deference to the judgment of military commanders.
Beyond that, Romney has revealed little about what his guiding principles would be for committing U.S. troops in conflicts around the world or what elements have shaped his thinking about Afghanistan — subjects likely to be broached in Monday’s foreign policy debate.
Excuse me for being naïve, but don’t we needa sense of Romney’s worldview? Would he keep troops in Iraq and Afghanistan if he already was president? And how much deference would he give to the military commanders? I thought that our Constitution guaranteed civilian control of the military. Ultimately, the president is the Commander-In-Chief. President Obama has made those tough decisions. It looks like Mitt is ready to…defer.
Obama’s foreign policy has been pragmatic, and at times he has angered the left by keeping some of the Bush security laws and not closing Guantanamo Bay. But the killing of Osama bin Laden and treaties with Russia on weapons and Colombia, Panama and South Korea on trade prove that he is a president who has his eyes on the future and a keen sense of how the United States will succeed in a truly global environment. He needs to hammer these points home and expose Mitt Romney as the foreign policy rookie that he is.
Tagg Romney is the son of Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney is running for president of the United States of America. Mitt Romney is losing in the battleground state of Ohio. So Tagg Romney, son of Mitt Romney, has bought the voting machines in Ohio. How is this not a conflict of interest?
If the Romney’s can’t win legally, they’ll take over Ohio’s electronic voting machines through investments, a direct conflict of interest in a contentious state in this election.
The new owners of Ohio’s voting machines under the brand name HART Intercivic is none other than Tagg Romney the son of one of the candidates Mitt Romney. In recent weeks Tagg has taken a more “active role in his father’s campaign management” but when you look further, he also has a major problem with that role.
By virtue of conflict of interest alone, this role should be investigated by the DOJ preferably involving the addition of the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA to ensure this connection will not endanger the vote in Ohio and other states.
After all isn’t the security of an election both state and federal authorities responsibility to ensure the election is not stolen, tampered, or results altered?
Mitt Romney is known as a flip flopper, we all know that. And sadly, we are slowly beginning to accept the fact that the man Republicans want to be the next leader of the free world, has no backbone, no real grounds to stand on. It is sad that we are accepting the fact that Romney can be influenced to change his position by anyone and everyone.
And another example of this came in the second Presidential debate. Mitt Romney, realizing that he was losing among women voters, came up with a brand new position – that he is now for contraception and against employers telling women what they can and cannot use in the privacy of their bedrooms.
This is the same Mitt Romney who, just a few months ago, stated his strong support for the Blunt Amendment. The Blunt Amendment says that employers are allowed to tell women what they can and cannot do in the bedroom.
A video all voters must see. It only makes sense that you know the character of the man you want to make that next President of the United States. It’s the responsible thing to do… especially if you consider yourself a patriot!
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
