Michele Bachmann’s former campaign manager and present senior advisor Ed Rollins, appeared on Hardball with Chris Mathews today, and could not seem to answer one simple question – would you like to see Michele Bachmann as Commander In Chief?
After beating around the bush and failing to answer, Mathews conceded by saying “you are so slippery, I know you’re not going to answer my question… I know I’m not getting an answer from you…..”
In an explosive new book by Joe McGinniss, some shocking claims are made about the 2008 Republican vice president candidate, Sarah Palin. The book , called The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, seems to have found her and includes claims that Mrs. Palin used cocaine, cheated on her husband with his business partner and had an affair with an NBA star.
Joe McGinniss’s book The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, which is due to be published on September 20, also alleges that the former governor of Alaska is far from the traditional family woman she claims to be.
Mrs Palin, 47, had a one-night stand with Miami Heat basketball star Glen Rice less than a year before she eloped with her husband, the book claims.
She is said to have met the 6ft 8ins player in 1987 when he was playing in a college basketball tournament in Alaska and she worked as a sports reporter for KTUU television.
It is also claimed that she had a six-month affair with Brad Hanson, who ran a snowmobile dealership with her husband Todd – a betrayal which led to Todd dissolving their business.
How will the Fox News and Conservatives spin machine explain this one? Don’t be surprised if they praise Sarah Palin’s cheating ways as more evidence that she is “just a regular person.” They will claim that everybody does it, and may even build a shrine in her honor. It’s the Republican way, sweep this under the rug if the possibilities exist that she can advance their political agenda.
The question Wolf Blitzer of CNN asked Republican presidential candidate, Ron Paul seemed hypothetical. But as fate would have it, Paul knew how real the question was. In 2008 when he ran for president, one of his campaign chairman died at the age of 49, owing $400,000.00 in healthcare cost because he had no insurance when he died.
The question Mr. Blitzer asked Mr. Paul was what should happen to a young man who couldn’t afford health insurance, but finds himself in a hospital needing intensive care. Ron Paul began his answer, “…that’s what freedom is all about: taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to take care of everybody…” at which point, members of the Teaparty audience began applauding. After Blitzer asked again if “society should just let him die,” members of the audience answered, “yeah!” and “let him die!”
His name was Kent Snyder, and the report was filed by Gawker;
Back in 2008, Kent Snyder — Paul’s former campaign chairman — died of complications from pneumonia. Like the man in Blitzer’s example, the 49-year-old Snyder (pictured) was relatively young and seemingly healthy* when the illness struck. He was also uninsured. When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder’s surviving mother, who was incapable of paying. Friends launched a website to solicit donations.
And Ron Paul has an answer.
According to other answers Paul provided on this issue, he thinks that churches and other charitable organization should pick up the tab for those who cannot afford life saving health care. Although what happened to the Snyder family is unfortunate, maybe Mr. Paul should direct them to some of these churches.
After all, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Kent Snyder was the driving force behind Paul to run for President in 2008. The least Paul could do, would be to provide the names of the churches and charitable organizations that would handle the $400,000.00 hospital bill.
And while he’s at it, there’s another 45,000 Americans who die each year because they cannot afford health care. Why not provide them and their families with this information? Maybe Paul could publish the names of these churches on his website. That will help!
The seat had not gone to a Republican since the 1920’s, but on Tuesday, the heavily Democratic congressional seat left vacant by Anthony Weiner went back to Republican control, with the win of Bob Turner. Republicans also won a special election in northern Nevada, where Republican Mark Amodei led Democrat Kate Marshall, 56 percent to 39 percent almost from the start.
The New York seat was originally held by Anthony Weiner, but after his Twitter mishap where he lied about sending naked pictures of himself to various women, both Democrats and Republicans demanded his resignation. The Nevada election was to replace Republican John Ensign, after his affair with a married campaign worker and a later revelation of bribery.
Both Republicans in the races tied their winning over their Democratic challengers to President Obama and his handling of the economy, and with that, Republican conservative radio and television shows went rampant with this new talking point.
Reports indicated that the Nevada election was basically ignored by Democrats, as they believed they had no chance of winning the heavily Republican constituents in that district. But in New York, Democrats went into a frantic, final, last-minute push to save the seat dumping $500,000 into the race in the final days, after it became clear that the seat could go to a Republican.
Although the New York district could eventually be zoned out through re-districting, Democrats should have tried harder to avoid this victory to the Republicans. Giving them even more ammunition to spew their lies is simply not worth it. The talking points about this Republican win in New York and associating it to President Obama and the economy, will be around for a long, long time.
A new Poll conducted by PPP shows President Obama extending his lead over Republican Rick Perry. According to the results, the lead is now in the double figures, and is the direct result of Rick Perry’s recent claims that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. PPP reports;
Only 20% of voters agree with Perry that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme to 70% who dissent from that statement. Democrats (4/87) and independents (20/69) are pretty universal in their disagreement with Perry and even Republicans (39/49) don’t stand with him on this one. When it comes to the possibility of actually ending Social Security voters are even more unanimous – 82% oppose taking that step to only 10% who would be supportive of it. If Perry ends up as the Republican nominee and Democrats can effectively convince the electorate that he does want to end Social Security it could be an extremely damaging issue for him.
Since bringing up the Ponzi scheme claim at the MSNBC Republican debate earlier this month, Rick Perry has already begun his campaign to distance himself from that remark. But could it already be too late? Is the damage already done? If these poll numbers hold up over the next few months, expect the Republican elites to start moving away from Perry, and back to Romney.
My prediction for the general election? It will be President Obama and Vice President Biden, going against Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty.
And Progressives and Democrats rejoice everywhere!!!
Consumer advocate and former White House official Elizabeth Warren will announce on Wednesday that she is running for the United States Senate seat currently held by Scott Brown (R-Mass.), a close source tells The Huffington Post.
The announcement will not come as a surprise; Warren has spent the last few weeks traveling across Massachusetts and speaking at several high-profile political events as part of a statewide listening tour. Still, her formal entrance into the race is likely to be cheered by progressives and national Democrats alike, as Warren is both beloved by the base and represents one of the party’s best chances to unseat Brown.
Good Stuff. Mrs. Warren is a fighter for Democratic values. She will be the perfect person to take back the seat that Ted Kennedy held for over 30 years. After Ted Kennedy passed, the seat went to Republican Scott Brown.
This race just got very, very interesting.
Read the rest of this story here
The call themself pro-lifers, you know, for life. But apparently, that belief stops immediately after birth.
That was evident in the Republican’s last debate, where a hypothetical question was asked of the panel. What to do if a healthy person cannot afford healthcare and get’s sick to the point that they need intensive care, these pro-lifers, or conservatives, or Teaparty members think that person should just…die.
I’m not making this up!
Wolf Blitzer of CNN asked the question in the last Republican Presidential debate. It was directed to Ron Paul about what the person needing intensive care should do if they have no health care. But before Ron Paul could get his full answer on the record, the pro-lifers in the audience answered for him, shouting “let him die!”
This is where the Republican party is today, where the revelation that Rick Perry of Texas has executed more people than any other governor in the state’s history was met with applause, and the only solution for the sick who cannot afford the care they need, is to let them die!
Base on these Republican audience reactions, would it be far-fetched to conclude that voting for a Republican is almost as bad as committing suicide?
Rick Perry’s statements on any particular issue depends on what day it is. In 2010, the Texas governor and leader in the Republican field of Presidential wannabees for the 2012 election went on the Fox News Sunday program and said that social security is a “Ponzi scheme” and should be done away with.
“What I’m saying is that between Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, there’s $106 trillion of unfunded liabilities and not one dime saved to pay for them. My children who are in their 20’s know that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.”
Rick Perry has used this definition on many other occasions since then. In another interview with The Daily Beast, Perry said that the three programs are “bankrupt,” and again, referred to them as a Ponzi schemes. He also blamed the Progressives for what he calls, the “deterioration of our Constitution,” and suggested that we should ” have a legitimate, honest, national discussion about Washington’s continuing to spend money we don’t have on programs that we don’t need.”
Then in the previous MSNBC Republican debate, Perry stuck to his guns, but this time, he added the word “monstrous,” to his definition of Social Security, saying;
“It is a monstrous lie. It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you’ve paid into a program that’s going to be there. Anybody that’s for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and that’s not right.”
Then last night, after spending the last few days hearing the outrage his remarks caused, Perry decided that was enough and did a backtrack, flip-flop, moonwalk on the issue. All of a sudden, Social Security was no longer a program “we don’t need,” it became a program that “needs fixing.” One the Texas Republican governor believes in, and he attempted to assure the public of his new-found embrace of the program.
“The people who are on Social Security today need to understand something. Slam-dunk guaranteed, that program is going to be there in place for those individuals.”
And today, with more media coverage on Perry’s dumb statements, he felt the need to issue this statement, as reported by Politico;
“America’s Goal Must Be To Fix Social Security” So Americans “Really Can Count On [It] For The Long Haul.” “America’s goal must be to fix Social Security by making it more financially sound and sustainable for the long term… Americans must come together and agree to address the problems so today’s beneficiaries and tomorrow’s retirees really can count on Social Security for the long haul.” (Rick Perry, Op-Ed, “I Am Going To Be Honest With The American People.”
Rick Perry – someone who says whatever he thinks is necessary to win an election… sounds Republican to me!
If you expected anything different from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor- well then – I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you.
After President Obama gave his speech on ways to create jobs for unemployed Americans, Eric Cantor was among the first Republicans to voice his opposition, albeit rather mildly. But this report shows that although Cantor refuses to spend any money to help or rebuild America, he voted for $120 Billion to be raised to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan.
Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) voted for over $120 billion to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, funds that were used to construct and repair schools, roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure.
Now, Cantor is opposing President Obama’s proposal to spend $30 billion to modernize 35,000 American schools.
The report states that to bring American schools up to standard, about $500 billion will have to be spent. However, even the extremely smaller amount of $30 billion – that was paid for and proposed by the Obama administration – was opposed by the Republican congressman. It states;
“While the funding Obama is proposing is fully offset, Cantor voted to build schools in Iraq and Afghanistan with deficit spending.”
Would anyone be surprised if Cantor’s name is on the Taliban’s payroll?
After detailing his plan to get Americans back to work in a joint session last Thursday, President Obama sent his proposal to Congress to officially begin the process. The bill will cost $447 billion dollars, and will include infrastructure spending and tax cuts to small businesses and middle class workers.
The President held a press conference in the Rose Garden of the White House today, where he was surrounded by middle class workers like Teachers, Police Officers and Construction workers – the type of workers the President said the bill will support. He repeated his call to Congress to “pass the bill now,” saying “this is a bill that will put people back to work all across the country.”
Mr. Obama also addressed the Republicans in Congress, and asked for them to put country ahead of party, saying, “The only thing that’s stopping it is politics. We can’t afford these same political games… Let’s get something done. Let’s put this country back to work.”
Republicans on the other hand are already paving the way to put up a fight against the President’s jobs bill. House Speaker John Boehner hinted at various spending bills enacted in the previous Democratic controlled congress, suggesting the additional spending may be an issue for Republicans. He said;
“The record of the economic proposals enacted during the last Congress necessitates careful examination of the president’s latest plan as well as consideration of alternative measures that may more effectively support private-sector job creation,” Boehner said. “It is my hope that we will be able to work together to put in place the best ideas of both parties and help put Americans back to work.”
President Obama has said the $447 billion jobs bill will be paid for through various ways, including;
If the past is any indication, expect Republicans to fight this jobs bill with everything they have. Keeping Americans unemployed is their main priority – just another case of party over country.
It’s not often I’ll agree with Ron Paul. The Republican/Libertarian has, by the very nature of his ideology, suggested that the only role government should have is an invisible one. He also criticizes the Civil Rights Act of 1964, fought for an end to all regulations on businesses, and as recently as the last Republican debate, suggested that airlines are best equipped to stop terrorism. All things I strongly disagree with.
But on his website, Ron Paul wrote about his feelings on the 10th year anniversary of September 11th, and something he said had me nodding in agreement. He said;
We should never forget those in our government who used the worst terrorist attack in our nation’s history as an excuse to launch completely unrelated wars, to do unprecedented damage to Americans’ historic liberties, to run roughshod over the Constitution, and to betray the Founders’ vision by savaging some of our most deeply held values.
A clear swipe to the Bush Administration who, instead of using the opportunity of September 11th to get the terrorists responsible for killing almost 3,000 people, preached fear to the American people and began a war with Iraq, a country that had no link to the destruction caused by Osama Bin Laden.
The war in Iraq ended up costing the lives of thousands of American troops, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, and over $1 trillion. But war is a business, and someone made millions from the decision to use September 11th as the reason to invade Iraq.
Dick Cheney – the Vice President in Bush’s Administration, and one of the most influential voices for the war in Iraq – was CEO of a company call Haliburton. Dick Cheney insisted that he severed all ties with Haliburton in 2000, but after the war started in Iraq, Haliburton was awarded no-bid contracts worth millions for “rebuilding Iraq.”
In 2004, Cheney appeared on Meet The Press and was asked about his relationship with his former company, to which more denials were given. But Time Magazine uncovered internal Pentagon emails proving that Cheney was not being the least bit honest. According to the report, the emails showed that these no-bid contracts were going through Cheney’s office. From the report;
The e-mail says Feith approved arrangements for the contract “contingent on informing WH [White House] tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has been coordinated w VP’s [Vice President’s] office.” Three days later, the Army Corps of Engineers gave Halliburton the contract, without seeking other bids.
So yes, in this particular case, I wholeheartedly agree with Ron Paul. The war in Iraq was not one of necessity, but one of choice. There were billions of dollars to be made, and no-bid contracts by unscrupulous government officials was the way to do it.
And the lives lost in the process? Cheney recently said that if he had to do it all over again, he wouldn’t change a thing. In other words, in war you lose some then you lose some more. But the profits gained… priceless!
With just a few hours remaining before the elections in New York, a new poll is showing that a congressional seat once held by former Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner, may now go to a Republican.
The Republican candidate has taken a surprising six-point lead over the Democrat in the closely watched special election to fill the congressional seat vacated by Anthony Weiner, who was forced to quit amid a sexting scandal, according to a Siena (College) Research Institute poll released on Friday.
Republican Robert Turner is ahead of Democrat David Weprin, 50% to 44%, in the latest survey of likely voters in the congressional district that covers parts of Brooklyn and Queens. In an Aug. 10 poll, Siena found that Weprin led Turner 48% to 42%.
Mr. Weiner was forced out of office by both Democrats and Republicans after secret “inappropriate” behavior came to light on Twitter.
The poll was conducted among 886 registered voters and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
