Obama Blows It
"WHERE WAS OBAMA TONIGHT???"
-Chris Matthews, MSNBC
Where indeed? Since I'm usually up each day two or three hours before the sun, the hours between 9 and 10:30 are kind of late for me. Because of this nocturnal habit I watched last night's debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney from the comfort of my bed. It's a good thing that I was lying down, too. I would have fallen out of my chair otherwise. The president should have been able to pull this one off with both hands tied behind his back and blindfolded. That didn't happen. For ninety solid minutes Romney successfully and effortlessly defended the indefensible.
-Chris Matthews, MSNBC
Where indeed? Since I'm usually up each day two or three hours before the sun, the hours between 9 and 10:30 are kind of late for me. Because of this nocturnal habit I watched last night's debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney from the comfort of my bed. It's a good thing that I was lying down, too. I would have fallen out of my chair otherwise. The president should have been able to pull this one off with both hands tied behind his back and blindfolded. That didn't happen. For ninety solid minutes Romney successfully and effortlessly defended the indefensible.
While watching this debacle I got the feeling that Barack Obama has not read a newspaper in over a year. No mention of Bain Capital. No mention of Romney's sick and insensitive "forty-seven percent" remark or of his undisclosed tax returns. The Cayman Islands? Not even a dishonorable mention. If the president was waiting for moderator Jim Lehrer to bring these subjects up, he waited in vain. Lehrer is a terrible moderator. He proved it twelve years ago during Bush v Gore. Last night he merely sealed his reputation. He allowed Romney literally to control the night. He's perfectly fine on PBS. I respect his journalistic integrity, but please - PLEASE! - let this be his very last debate.
Obama's performance was beyond abysmal. The split screen shots were devastating. While Romney vomited out one lie after the other (while hardly being called on them by Obama) the split-screen shots showed the prez staring down at his notes, his lips pressed tightly together. He was hardly recognizable! And to make matters worse, all through the night he was caught nodding in smiling agreement with Romney! I couldn't believe it! It was the most inept performance I've ever seen. At times he reminded me of a befuddled Stan Laurel crumbling under Oliver Hardy's verbal tirade. I half expected him to scratch the top of his ahead and start wimpering.
I had a bad omen when I heard that John Kerry would be sparring with him during the debate preparations. John Kerry? JOHN KERRY? He couldn't beat a half-witted little jackass like George W. Bush! Did the complete irony of that choice dawn on any of the people on Team Obama? It dawned on me!
MEMO TO THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN: Bring in Bubbah.
You people need Bill Clinton now more than you ever needed him - more than you needed him at the convention in August. You need Bill Clinton more than a first degree burn victim needs a mega-dose of Dilaudid; more than a starving dog needs a plate of filet mignon. To paraphrase a seventies soft rock band, "Like a flower needs the rain, you know you need him."
John Kerry is a smart guy and a good senator - no one is arguing that fact. But why settle for a PT boat when you have an aircraft carrier at your disposal? You people need to bring in the heavy artillery, okay? Three words: William Jefferson Clinton. He would be the perfect Romney stand-in. Just a suggestion.
If the Republican party is ever again allowed to take over all three branches of our government, it's all over. The next four years will see - at the very least - two more appointments to the Supreme Court. One more uber right winger within that body will mean the end of democracy in this country within a decade. Obama has got to win this thing. As Will Rogers once said, "Or else? Or else nothin'. There ain't gonna be no 'else'"
This should have been the political equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. Obviously it wasn't. Although the campaign of 2012 is far from over, last night was a wake up call. If any of us were over-confident prior to nine o'clock on Wednesday, October third, we were just fed a stern spoonful of nasty-tasting reality.
"It ain't over till it's over."
-Yogi Berra
Barack will be back to form by the next time. Call it the audacity of hope!
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
AFTERTHOUGHT:
The Kennedy/Nixon debates of 1960 and the Carter/Ford debates of 1976 were held within the confines of a television studio - no audience. It's time to go back to that format. A huge studio audience and auditorium is a distraction.
A gentleman by the name of William B. Wittmeyer just posted on Abbey Arletto's Facebook page that he only listened to the debates on the radio and that Romney's "win" was not as decisive as you might imagine. That reminds me of the Nixon/Kennedy debates of 1960. According to Pierre Salinger (Kennedy's own press secretary) the majority of the people who heard the debates over the radio believed Nixon had won them. The majority who watched them on television believed Kennedy to be the winner. One imagines that had the debates of 1860 been televised, the lanky and awkward Abraham Lincoln would have lost to the charismatic Stephen Douglas. Image is everything.
You people need Bill Clinton now more than you ever needed him - more than you needed him at the convention in August. You need Bill Clinton more than a first degree burn victim needs a mega-dose of Dilaudid; more than a starving dog needs a plate of filet mignon. To paraphrase a seventies soft rock band, "Like a flower needs the rain, you know you need him."
John Kerry is a smart guy and a good senator - no one is arguing that fact. But why settle for a PT boat when you have an aircraft carrier at your disposal? You people need to bring in the heavy artillery, okay? Three words: William Jefferson Clinton. He would be the perfect Romney stand-in. Just a suggestion.
If the Republican party is ever again allowed to take over all three branches of our government, it's all over. The next four years will see - at the very least - two more appointments to the Supreme Court. One more uber right winger within that body will mean the end of democracy in this country within a decade. Obama has got to win this thing. As Will Rogers once said, "Or else? Or else nothin'. There ain't gonna be no 'else'"
This should have been the political equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. Obviously it wasn't. Although the campaign of 2012 is far from over, last night was a wake up call. If any of us were over-confident prior to nine o'clock on Wednesday, October third, we were just fed a stern spoonful of nasty-tasting reality.
"It ain't over till it's over."
-Yogi Berra
Barack will be back to form by the next time. Call it the audacity of hope!
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
AFTERTHOUGHT:
The Kennedy/Nixon debates of 1960 and the Carter/Ford debates of 1976 were held within the confines of a television studio - no audience. It's time to go back to that format. A huge studio audience and auditorium is a distraction.
A gentleman by the name of William B. Wittmeyer just posted on Abbey Arletto's Facebook page that he only listened to the debates on the radio and that Romney's "win" was not as decisive as you might imagine. That reminds me of the Nixon/Kennedy debates of 1960. According to Pierre Salinger (Kennedy's own press secretary) the majority of the people who heard the debates over the radio believed Nixon had won them. The majority who watched them on television believed Kennedy to be the winner. One imagines that had the debates of 1860 been televised, the lanky and awkward Abraham Lincoln would have lost to the charismatic Stephen Douglas. Image is everything.
posted by Tom Degan @ 8:43 AM
74 comments
74 Comments:
Obama better hope "ass kicked" is covered under Obamacare.
It actually looked at times last night that Obama simply didn't want the job any more. And who could blame him.
yeah, I hate it when they debate the actual issues
"While Romney vomited out one lie after the other (while hardly being called on them by Obama):
Could it be they were not lies?
I have never seen a President perform like Obama last night. Here he has a record of four years to run on and to be proud of and he doesn't. Instead he brings up Clinton (the husband of his democrat opponent in 2008 primary)to hide behind, instead of bragging about all the Hope and Change he has brought about in his first term. Instead of asking are you better off now than you were four years before I became President, he shoots and prays something will stick. Like the bit about tax breaks to industries who move their production overseas. He should have knocked Romney's response how in 25 years of running business never hearing of such a deduction. But no, Obama just lets Romneys lie sit there.. Obama should have said:
"Gov Romeny, I'll send Timmy Giethner over to show this loop hole in the tax laws. Giethner is an expert in evading taxes, and if he cant help I'll send over Charlie Rangel. Both are know experts in income tax law"
And Obama didn't reply to the Mitt's claim of the 90 billion tax dollars spend of failed green energy plans that could have been spend on teachers wages. I thought Obama was a big supporter of the public sector unions?
What was wrong with Obama?
Wow, what a shockingly poor performance. I bet it was the altitude like Gore said that caused it.
Cant wait for SNL. Mitts big bird comment will povide lots of laughs.
AARP bails on the Presidnet
President Obama invoked AARP to defend his health care law last night, prompting the influential group to release a statement telling him not to do that again.
“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,” the group posted in a statement. “AARP is a nonpartisan organization and we do not endorse political candidates nor coordinate with any candidate or political party.”
Obama can perhaps be forgiven for thinking he could mention AARP given how they coordinated with him to pass Obamacare, which is a golden goose for the organization.
“Thanks to its cuts to Medicare Advantage, Obamacare is expected to expand the number of seniors buying “medigap” supplemental insurance plans,” The Washington Examiner explained in an editorial. “AARP controls 34 percent of the market for such plans. According to a 2011 House Ways and Means Committee report, AARP stands to make between $55 million and $166 million from Obamacare in 2014 alone.”
BLAME BUSH
Tom,
I was hoping for a more searing indictment of Obama's performance from you.
First...@JT: I have to agree. I got that feeling too. Every see the movie "My Fellow Americans?" It resonates here.
Next...
Holy Shit-balls. I have n't seen that bad of a beating since Chris Brown and Rihanna. Incumbents are typically on the defense about their record, but somewhere along the way the DNC forgot that Romney has a record too. One that is well documented and covered.
Chris Matthews said it looked like Obama "endured" the debate rather than participated. I'd agree.
But where was the fire? Was Obama going to "offend" conservatives? Obama woke up yesterday and "offended" conservatives, so the Miss Manners lil' bitch act ain't working for the Dems.
There were shots Obama needed to take and should've have taken.
Romney: "In my State..."
Obama: {interuppting}"...uh...which State Mitt? The one you haven't mentioned since this debate--Massachusettes? Or your 'home state' of Michigan, where the "trees are the right height." Depending on your needs at the moment, 'your state' seems to...ah...fluctuate."
---
Romney: "...for all Americans..."
Obama: {interuppting}"I'm glad you're getting warmed up to that idea...35 days before the election. This is progress for the governor, as previously he's said he only needs 51% of the vote and that for 47% of the country, he can't care about them. I'm glad the governor is finally at 100%.
--
Romney: "I love teachers..."
Obama: {interuppting}"Seriously? Your party has gone after unions left and right; teacher unions as well. You were in Wisconsin supporting the Governor and you've supported voucher programs. That isn't love--it's evisceration."
--
Romney: "In my State I worked across the aisle..."
Obama: {interuppting}"Really?!? You mean YOUR Senate Majority Leader didn't publicly state that his/her only goal was to make you a one term governor? Wow...what's that like?"
--
Y'know Tom I just don't get it. Of all the GOP candidates, Romney has the biggest and best flubs and they didn't exploit any of them. They didn't take on Romney. They didn't take on the GOP. And they certainly didn't take on conservatives. Which they needed too.
~Unless
loraxlog.blogspot.com
I agree with you, Jody. We just need to wait - AND PRAY - that during the next debate he shows a little more fire. I've got my fingers crossed and my hands folded.
For the first time in my life I did not get a tingle up my leg when Obama spoke during last night's debate.
I guess I have finally realized that Obama is nothing but a smooth talking bullshit artist who blew a lot of smoke up our asses in 2008!
OK, let's all just step back and take a deep breath. After the fact checkers are through it will be shown that everything Romney said was either an outright lie or simply smoke and mirrors with no substance and no facts to support anything. He came across with all of the slick smarminess of a used car salesman.
I can't believe that our young president would let Romney repeatedly throw blueberry pies at him in last night's debate that repeatedly struck him on the side of the head!
MSNBC ratings have gone up after last nights debate. Watching these liberal Obama lap dogs cry in their kool aid is just too damn funny!
"I don't know who won that debate..."
lol for the "brilliant" and "leaning forward" progressive Cambridge graduate.
Obama will win the election. Put it from your mind. He has given so many freebies to people who won't work, he can't lose. I'd bet my life savings on it, all $250.
I was reading the other day how Obama and Mitt both eat only pristine organic foods at home and on the campaign trail. That really pisses me off because both of them are responsible for the success of Monsanto, the prime maker of GMO foods and seeds. Obama is strongly against the labeling of GMO also.
So they get to eat the good stuff and we are supposed the eat the GMO crap! I say fuck the both of them.
Romney is not winning. If he does, he'll break a national statistical record. No candidate back this far at this stage in the game has ever come back to win the election because of a good showing at a debate. I agree that Obama did not do badly. He was measured and smart. He had no zingers, but that is not his style. Can't get blood from a stone. NY Times article today said it is likely R might get 2.2% bump from the debate, but that is all, and not enough to be a game changer. And the undecided vote is so small. R continues to lie, refuses to explain his policy specifics, and anyone with half a brain doesn't want to vote for "just trust me because I say so." That said, too many Americans do not have even half a brain.....
By the way, Obama ran roughshod over Lehrer as much as Romney did, if not better. O managed to get 4 more minutes of talking time in. O asked Lehrer to let him finish numerous times. I just do not see how R is claimed to have done so well. He spoke quickly and threw a few jabs, but he wasn't smarter, nor more correct. Debates are definitely a lot about style over substance, I think Obama was no less like himself when interviewed than he usually is.
This will be nothing compared to what MSNBC does with their Chris Mathews knives, and Axlerod does with the Harry Reid Lies. It aint gonna be pretty what the liberals will do when they feel they are losing.
CHICAGO (CBS) — The President of the South Suburban Branch of the NAACP alleges a director of the re-election campaign of Barack Obama has threatened and intimidated him because he doesn’t support the president.
David Lowery says he believes he was threatened during a phone conversation with Louis Raymond, the Obama for America Illinois regional director.
Lowery says he doesn’t personally support the president because he’s not addressing issues important to the black community. He said he was explaining that to Raymond when the Obama campaign official told him, “You know what? I know everything about you.”
Lowery says Raymond added, “We’ve been watching you, and since you don’t support Obama, we’ll deal with you,” before hanging up.
Lowery filed a report with the Oak Forest police report, he says, “in case something happens.”
He says it was suggested the NAACP should automatically back the president. Lowery notes a non-profit cannot support a particular candidate.
He says it’s a clear signal the Obama campaign is concerned about the black vote.
"It actually looked at times last night that Obama simply didn't want the job any more."
Who would want to preside over the inevitable collapse of the 40 year fiat currency experiment? The US debt Ponzi scheme is up pretty soon. Someday, the Fed will hold an auction and nobody will show up.
Hi Tom,
I don't want to say it all over again, so I'm sending you a copy of a comment I made to Sheria Reid's take on the debate.
Hi Sheria,
Halfway into the first debate I turned off the TV and put my puzzled self to sleep. I woke up this morning feeling sickened at what I had watched transpire during the first half of the debate that I watched.
The first thing I thought about was how in the world was an unmoderated Romney allowed to tell lie after lie, interrupt the President and Jim Lehrer...How did this in all reality happen? Why didn't the President call him out on his lies? Why didn't Lehrer call him out with "fact checks?" Why in the world didn't he ask the right questions? How did Romney get away without revealing any specifics when all his lying and posturing was going down? It was like "Mitt on Meth!"
As for Jim Lehrer, he should never be allowed to moderate anything ever again. He had no control over what was happening and that was more than apparent. He can go back to being a journalist and leave the debate moderating to someone more capable. He couldn't at this point moderate a 7th grade middle school debate.
What happened to our President? I think there was a lot of expectation involved with him, and at the same time the bar was so low for Romney that people didn't expect much from him, and he surprised them by looking like he could finsih a sentence without flipping. He was rude, obnoxious, at for many unfortunately that appeared like a win.
There are two more debates. I want our president to stop listening to his handlers and be himself, which is when he is at his best. I think this can still happen.
I'm part of a family who loves this president. I voted for him in 2008 and I'll vote for him again.
I can't even entertain the possibility of a Romney win. Why are people so eager to give up their rights and end up being 2nd class citizens? If he wins, we are handing over the remnants of our Democracy.
Best,
Sal
October 4, 2012 3:50 PM
Multiple Choice Question:
"Why didn't the President call him out on his lies?"
a. They were not lies
b. Obama did not know they were lies
c. Obama was suffering from the altitude
d. Obama didn't know which of his lies he should to call him out with
Here is a summary of each fact-checker’s findings:
factcheck.org: The experts found plenty of exaggerations and false claims in both candidates arguments. Considering the higher number of false statements, Romney was targeted more than Obama.
politifact.com: The website rated claims as false, mostly false, half-true, mostly true or true. On the Denver debate they used the ends of the scale only once (Romney false). Both candidates are generally rate well as truth-tellers – with a slight advance for Obama.
The Washington Post: Fact-checker Glenn Kessler examined highlight-quotes of the debate. According to him the first debate is a tie when it comes to telling the truth.
cbsnews.com: The network’s website picked a group of key issues and checked them on facts, but was not as specific in its conclusions as the other fact-checkers. Again no advantage for Obama or Romney can be told by reading the fact-check.
cnn.com: The politics online portal concluded that Romney was guilty of “stretching his figures to the breaking point.”
Politico: This authoritative political site said policy expertst saw “details often so jarringly at odds that the two men seemed to be inhabiting two parallel universes.” Still, according to Politico’s results, Obama would have won this debate if it was about telling the truth.
I find it astounding that the left wingers don't see the danger posed by the entitlement culture which Obama endorses. Promise everything to everyone and it's hard to lose. This is the real threat to rational governance. We simply can't afford all of the entitlements that make the left feel so good about themselves. Romney and the right are not evil. They understand the world as it is - not as they wish it were. vilanizing them is ignorant. If the left wingers get everything they wish for, our government will consume us all. But hey, at least the left will feel morally superior along the way, so they got that going for them.
OBAMA's solution? raise taxes
(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama said in Wednesday night’s presidential debate that Social Security is “structurally sound,” but Social Security’s Board of Trustees said in their 2012 annual report that the program faced $8.6 trillion in “unfunded obligations”–meaning that it is currently obligated to pay out $8.6 trillion more in benefits than it is anticipated to bring in through taxes.
During Wednesday debate, moderator Jim Lehrer asked Obama: “Do you see a major difference between the two of you on Social Security?”
“I suspect that on Social Security we’ve got a somewhat similar position,” Obama responded. “Social Security is structurally sound. It’s going to have to be tweaked the way it was by Ronald Reagan and Speaker–Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill. But it is, the basic structure is sound.”
Ed Said:"We simply can't afford all of the entitlements that make the left feel so good about themselves"
you must be talking about the 1%
After my acceptance that The President would be MIA for the initial debate I focused on Romney and his message. Mitt had the bed side manner of a physician telling his patient "everything would be alright" while getting to pull the plug on the life support system. Delving past he hyperbole the message was "We will we will fuck you" ... with conviction and a Reaganesque smile.
And when the 1% runs of money, who will pay for the entitlements that make the left feel so good about themselves?
That's the question you refuse or can not answer.
Either Obama lied or doesn't know his "Affordable Health Care Act" he's so proud of.
Standing up for his health care law during the debate President Obama cited the Cleveland Clinic as a “model” for how Obamacare should be implemented nationwide.
The Cleveland Clinic is owned by doctors. But thanks to Obamacare it’s illegal for doctors to own hospitals.
Section 6001 of the health care law effectively bans new physician-owned hospitals (POHs) from starting up, and it keeps existing ones from expanding. It has already halted the development of 24 new physician-owned hospitals and forced an additional 47 to struggle to meet the deadline to complete construction, according to the Physician Hospitals of America (PHA).
Cant wait to see how Edwin and other Obamanites spins this.
I know Tom won't like my comment here on his blog, but I agree with the following quote from Rush Limbaugh on why Obama got runover in the debate:
"Obama has been shielded from any kind of opposition his whole life. He's been protected. If he got a C at Harvard, somebody gave him an A. If he needed to get into Harvard Law, somebody greased the skids. He's had the way paved for him. He's protected, he's shielded, he has a teleprompter, and his words are written for him. His surroundings are carefully crafted. His appearances are assembled. There are no people of substantive opposition permitted.
As such, Barack Obama has never faced opposition."
Obama gave lots of promises in 2008: "cut the deficit in half", "my stimulus plan will bring down unemployment", "I will stabilize Middle East relations with the US", yah-da, yah-da,yah-da,yah-da,yah-da.
My only question to Obama on all his promises is Where's The Beef?
obama is no man. no man at all. why didnt he look romney in the eye and attack? i will tell you why. it takes a coward to attack a man in a tv ad but when he is face to face, it takes more of a man. obama has lied so much about romney he couldnt muster up the courage to look him in the eyes.
What the lefties can't get through their empty little heads is that our clueless nothing-in-chief got his clock cleaned by the far more intelligent, capable and experienced man. Everything about Obama is judged by the lefty media on the affirmative action curve. Subtract that and he's just Al Sharpton without the marbles in his mouth.
A Fantasy Election, an Imaginary Man
Barack Obama has always been less real than dream—a media dream.
Even before his inauguration, Barack Obama was an imaginary man, the creation of his admirers. Think back to the 2008 Time magazine cover depicting him as FDR, the Newsweek cover of the same year on which he was shown casting Lincoln’s shadow, or the $1.4 million Nobel Peace Prize awarded to him “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” - this in 2009, less than a year after he had taken office.
It was not that Obama had done nothing to deserve these outsized comparisons and honors—it was that he seemed for all the world to be a blank screen on which such hysterical fantasies could too easily be projected, a two-dimensional paper doll just waiting to be dressed in leftist utopian dreams.
And it is revealed in Obama’s blankness, his make-believe greatness, and the suppression, ridicule, and dismissal of any evidence that he is not the man this powerful media faction once wanted so badly for him to be. No other modern president could have associated so intimately with lowlifes like Wright and Ayers and the now-imprisoned Tony Rezko and not had those associations exposed in every detail. No other president could have made the radical remarks he’s made—about wealth redistribution, religion, and the federal government’s alleged ill-treatment of blacks—and not had them headlined all over for weeks. No other could have presided over such a crippled economy and such universal failures at war and in foreign policy and escaped almost without mainstream blame.
" No other could have presided over such a crippled economy and such universal failures at war and in foreign policy and escaped almost without mainstream blame."
That statement fits Bush like a glove and you were not aware of how it could be used against you? Amazing!
James,
List all the success's of Obama's past four years. Now tell us, are we not to expect and want a President better than GWB, if as you say, Obama has not fixed the mess he got? Why stay with a failure, a proven one at that?
Oh, and by the way, don't know if you realize this, but GWP is NOT running for office in this election. So bringing GWB up as a reason to vote for Obama and not for Romney is delusional at best and more an indication of pathologically liberal rationalization at worse.
Tom, DAVE, EDWIN, CHARLES,
Can any of you post here how I can get my Obamaphone?
T.Porrly
(one of the 47%)
James said...
" No other could have presided over such a crippled economy and such universal failures at war and in foreign policy and escaped almost without mainstream blame."
"That statement fits Bush like a glove and you were not aware of how it could be used against you? Amazing!"
The mainstream media did not constantly criticize Bush on the economy and the Middle East during his reign? You are amazing James, but keep your hopey changey glasses on anyhow like MO and vote for the Charlie McCarthy president who reads words on his teleprompter from his masters!
anybody know where our favorite communist Jefferson's Guardian has been? has he move to Canada?
Jefferson's Guardian? Can you get free Obama stuff in Canada?
Occupy Portland Leader Openly Calls For Overthrowing The Government With A Socialist Revolution…
Che shirted Black Panther protege returns to Occupy Portland to say that “Capitalism is a backwards, blood sucking system” that’s “got to be destroyed”, and talk about “People rising up and seizing power” and creating a socialist state. He also brags about seizing houses and interfering with the police.
Weasel Zippers: Scouring the bowels of the internet
Occupy Portland Leader Openly Calls For Overthrowing The Government With A Socialist Revolution…
“God bless them” – Nancy Pelosi, Tom Degan, Dave Dubya, Jefferson's Guardian, Charles Moore and a host of other liberals who claim the Tea Party is the most dangerous group in America.
John Stossel reports:
I sent four researchers around the area. (NYC) They quickly found 40 job openings. Twenty-four were entry-level positions. One restaurant owner told me he would hire 12 people if workers would just apply.
It made me wonder what my government does in buildings called “job centers.” So I asked a college intern, Zoelle Mallenbaum, to find out. Here’s what she found:
“First I went to the Manhattan Jobs Center and asked, “Can I get help finding a job?” They told me they don’t do that. ‘We sign people up for food stamps.’ I tried another jobs center. They told me to enroll for unemployment benefits.”
So the “jobs” centers help people get handouts. Neither center suggested people try the 40 job openings in the neighborhood.
My intern persisted:
“I explained that I didn’t want handouts; I wanted a job. I was told to go to ‘WorkForce1,’ a New York City program. At WorkForce1, the receptionist told me that she couldn’t help me since I didn’t have a college degree. She directed me to another center in Harlem. In Harlem, I was told that before I could get help, I had to come back for an 8:30 a.m. ‘training session.’”
It's tough being a part of the 47%.
"And when the 1% runs of money, who will pay for the entitlements that make the left feel so good about themselves?"
Anon - you won't get a straight answer, so I'll answer it best I can. It will continue the same as it has been for 40 years since we "temporarily" suspended money. We are victims of a Ponzi setup. The US Treasury will continue to (has no choice but to) print currency backed by debt issuance until we drive over the cliff - we're getting close. 2008 was a tremor. They can take every dollar the "1%" has and that cannot stop the inevitable.
Also, make no mistake, Obama and the Democrats are just as tied to Wall St. as anybody. Their rhetoric is so much hot air.
This "1%" argument has everyone paying attention to the wrong problem, but that's Politician 101.
Lots of Obama bashing here, but not much Mitt loving going on. Where's the love? What you got? Anyone?
I love the fact that Mitt doesn't see the role of government the same as Obama.
1n 2008, did we see a lot of McCain bashing and very much Obama loving on this blog?
I would imagine the simple reason for the bashing of Obama is he has a record that he is trying to run on. Obama is no longer an unknown, he is now a proven failure.
Anonymous said...
I love the fact that Mitt doesn't see the role of government the same as Obama.
The Big Bird thing?
I'm watching MSNBC more now than ever. The liberals are now crapping their pants on set knowing that Obama has been exposed as an empty chair.
More and more people are saying "The Emperor Has No Clothes!"
Sesame Workshop, the independent nonprofit corporation that produces the popular children's’ program Sesame Street, received a $1,067,532 stimulus bill grant in August 2010, via the Department of Health and Human Services.
The projected created “1.47″ new jobs, the website reported. How they could calculate this to a hundredth of a percent is anybody’s guess. In any event, that comes out to about $726,000 per job created.
Do you really think Sesame Workshop CORPORATION needs one dime of tax payers money, with all the billions of dollars they make on the selling of the license rights to their programs?
And then there is this difference.
President Obama touted it in 2010 as evidence “manufacturing jobs are coming back to the United States,” but two years later, a Michigan hybrid battery plant built with $150 MILLION IN TAXPAYER FUNDS is putting workers on furlough before a single battery has been produced.
Workers at the Compact Power manufacturing facilities in Holland, Mich., run by LG Chem, have been placed on rotating furloughs, working only three weeks per month based on lack of demand for lithium-ion cells.
The facility, which was opened in July 2010 with a groundbreaking attended by Obama, HAS YET TO PRODUCE A SINGLE BATTERY for the Chevrolet Volt, the troubled electric car from General Motors. The plant’s batteries also were intended to be used in Ford’s electric Focus.
Production of the taxpayer-subsidized Volt has been plagued by work stoppages, and the effect has trickled down (or as Romney called it "trickle down government)to companies and plants that build parts for it — including the batteries.
If you watched the Obama debacle for a debate, you would have heard Romney ask if since Obama was picking the winners and losers in American business, when was he going to start to pick some winners?
So no, I don't mean just that Big Bird thing.
Did anyone listen to Ed Schultz today when a self professed democrat from PA. called in and expressed strong reasons why NOT he did NOT believe the unemployment numbers just released were true? It was a classic moment that I with I could get a tape of.
Any view Romney has on anything could change at any moment.
Tom,
Good post. Romney knows he can get away with saying anything. His arrogant and authoritarian aristocratic demeanor has never been challenged. He knows he can have it both ways, and never be called a liar by the corporate media and spineless Dems.
If truth could win debate points, then the President was the clear winner.
BTW, this is the deepest copy-and-paste troll crap I've seen yet. Perhaps some fumigation and antiseptics are called for.
Harley,
It is in the corporate media's interest to portray, and encourage, a close race. (They profit outrageously from ads, you know.)
And why should a crooked question deserve a straight answer?
The top 1% is not “running out of money”. They are getting wealthier. This is thanks to the entire Republican Party, and many corpo-dems, working for them; who convert their millions of dollars in “free speech” money into more tax cuts, trade deals, and deregulation.
Look at how swell the stock market is doing, thanks to a bailout from the American people. Too bad only the economic elites, and not most of the American people, see any benefit.
It’s the Big Con game in plain sight.
Safety nets are not killing us. They can be adjusted by raising caps on the rich, modifying qualifying age and needs requirements, and putting more people to work. Unfortunately the corporatist obstructionists do not compromise, and they have utilized Americans’ misfortunes as their political wedge to gain power and hand our public safety nets over to insurance companies.
The Republican Party works for the rich. Period.
BTW, this is the deepest copy-and-paste troll crap I've seen yet. Yup, that Liberals are Sexy is out of control.
B. Phillips
DD different day, same song.
Blame Bush
Eat the rich
Raise taxes on the rich
Hire more public workers
GOP is only for the rich
The rich are greedy.
Yawn.
Not only did Obama blow it, he had to be told he blew it by staffers and the debate. So much for being the smartest President we have ever had.
Hope MO can explain how this happened.
Corporate tax revenues coming in to Ottawa were up slightly last year, even as the Conservative government was in the midst of an aggressive plan to lower the corporate tax rate.
The federal government raised $31.7-billion from corporate taxes in the fiscal year that ended March 31, up from $30-billion in 2010-11.
DD said:
"Look at how swell the stock market is doing, thanks to a bailout from the American people. Too bad only the economic elites, and not most of the American people, see any benefit."
And...
"The Republican Party works for the rich. Period."
Obama is a Republican? Or did I miss something when folks out here were patting him on the back for "saving the economy" with his bailouts?
Come back in 12 months and let's talk about how swell the stock market is doing...
Harley,
Read this sentence again.
They are getting wealthier. This is thanks to the entire Republican Party, and many corpo-dems, working for them; who convert their millions of dollars in “free speech” money into more tax cuts, trade deals, and deregulation.
And yes, Obama would have been accepted in the GOP of thirty years ago. Just as Nixon and Reagan would be called RINO's today.
Have you not noticed the GOP's disastrous shift to the Right?
It looks like King O'bama doesn't want to rule anymore. What a difference four years makes. What happened to hope and change? The American people were suckered into believing that this guy could waive a magic wand and create world peace and economic stability. What a joke. Now that he can't blow that line of crap down everyone's throat, he has nothing substantive to say. It's making all of them squirm. Just watch Racheal M. and Chris M. on MSNBC. They are highly entertaining.
I don't cheer for any politician, but I believe in less government, which is why I support Romney. Do we really need to be funding PBS and NPR with government dollars? I think Big Bird will survive just fine without Uncle Sam buying him bird food.
I want everyone on Toms blog to relax. We are working on a small earpiece that our young amateur president will wear in the next debate. I will be in the small room behind the podium speaking into a microphone to coach Barack on what to say to counter the slick talking mormon!
DD,
So, Obama is a corpo-Dem actually working for the Republicans, then? How is that better than a Republican? I would submit it is worse.
Harley A.,in response to Dave Dubya: "So, Obama is a corpo-Dem actually working for the Republicans, then?"
No...reread his statement again. Here, I'll copy & paste it for you...
"This is thanks to the entire Republican Party, and many corpo-dems, working for them..."
"Them" refers to the rich, the elite, the whatever you choose to call them -- not the Republican Party. [Although, it can be universally agreed upon, the two certainly aren't mutually exclusive.]
BLAA BLAA BLAA YADDA YADDA YADDA,
Blame Bush
Eat the rich
Raise taxes on the rich
Hire more public workers
GOP is only for the rich
The rich are greedy.
Yawn.
QUESTION FOR YOU JG, WITHOUT THE RICH, WERE WOULD GOVT GET THE MONEY TO GIVE TO THE NON RICH?
But, in all fairness, it would be perfectly correct to say The Republican Party and the "corpo-dems" do work hand-in-hand in robbing you blind and stealing your liberties and democracy from you.
I've said it more than once, and I'll say it again. There's really no significant difference between the two major political parties. Until you...everybody, actually...start rethinking the whole idea of partisan politics and the supposedly "two-party-system", we'll never see any meaningful change. Don't think in terms of "Democratic" (Obama)...don't think in terms of "Republican" (Romney...Bush, or whoever). Think in terms of a one-party corporate-state, separated only by two wings with marginal and mostly fictional differences -- differences designed to create separation and friction among us, while the machine of the corporate-state continues with the same policies -- election cycle after election cycle.
Yes, we're heading for full-blown fascism -- and by voting for either major party, we're only endorsing it. But, just as in presidential election cycles of years past, almost everyone reading this blog will vote for their Democratic incumbent, or their Republican challenger, and they'll continue believing their illusion-of-choice. Human nature seems to love clinging to "a winner" -- except in this case, no matter who is crowned late next January, the loser always ends up being us.
Anonymous: "QUESTION FOR YOU JG, WITHOUT THE RICH, WERE WOULD GOVT GET THE MONEY TO GIVE TO THE NON RICH?"
Your statement is based upon a non-valid premise, therefore I can't possibly answer your question.
Now, if you were to ask your question in this manner, I could possibly help you:
Without a strong and vibrant middle-and working-class, where will the government get the money to pay subsidies to Fortune 500 corporations who don't pay taxes, and to finance the Military-Industrial-Security Complex?
Would there be a middle class if there no rich?
Anonymous: "Would there be a middle class if there no rich?"
Had a few too many belts tonight? Your syntax is getting a little sloppy.
Yeah, sure, there were plenty of rich back in the 1950s when marginal tax rates were as high as 91%.
But you never answered my question. I'll copy & paste it for you:
Without a strong and vibrant middle-and working-class, where will the government get the money to pay subsidies to Fortune 500 corporations who don't pay taxes, and to finance the Military-Industrial-Security Complex?
As usual JG when you don't like the question you use critism to avoid answering. Even we "simply minded"non liberals, (65% of Americans) are aware of your methods to dodge answering. No JG u have not answered my question and until you do I will assume that you are afraid to answer mine. Time out to check with your handlers?
BTW, how proud are you to be supporting the President after his big failure in the first debate?
We all await your answer to my question.
I know where they'll get it Jefferson. How about 1% who pay about a third of the tax burden in this country.
i'm sure they would be happy to pay more
JG, you've hit upon my point.
Economically, to blame everything on "Republicans" is nonsense. To act as if Obama is a savior and Ronmey would be our death is silly.
Fiscally, there is little that can be done - I don't care if Ayn Rand or Karl Marx were to take over. Our fiat currency cannot survive. Ponzi schemes ALWAYS fail - not if, but when - and they care little about your politics. We can argue Medicare, welfare, food stamps, this % tax, that % tax, etc... but it is moot in the end. So, again, most of the discussions and arguments are missing the real problem.
We all sense there's a problem and are so busy blaming the "other side" and protesting that we are blind to the fact that both are to blame and neither can solve it barring some unprecedented cooperation and setting aside of poltical ideology for a season.
I say let's work together to turn the car away from the cliff, THEN let's debate and discuss which road to take... though I fear it's too late for that.
Anonymous: "No JG u have not answered my question and until you do I will assume that you are afraid to answer mine."
Sure I did. You were probably too drunk last night to know it, though. Here, I'll copy & paste the answer for you:
Yeah, sure, there were plenty of rich back in the 1950s when marginal tax rates were as high as 91%.
Now, please answer my question.
Harley A.: "To act as if Obama is a savior and Ronmey would be our death is silly."
As I've said all along, both major parties are leading us down the road to perdition, it's just that the Republican vehicle will drive us to ruination faster. I don't know about you, but I could use some extra time to prepare.
"Fiscally, there is little that can be done..."
Nothing that will prevent us from eventual economic collapse -- I agree.
"... but it is moot in the end."
Everything that we attempt will prove to be too little, too late. The wheels are already in motion. That's why the Fed keeps pumping out QE after QE -- it's trying desperately to stave-off the inevitable.
"...again, most of the discussions and arguments are missing the real problem."
Totally. But people are reluctant, if not scared to the point of repressing the truth even to themselves. It's a horrible scenario to wrap your mind around, but we're in what generational sociologists Howe and Strauss term the last and final season ("winter"), the crisis stage, in their book, The Fourth Turning. As they explain, we're now in a decisive era of secular upheaval where we'll either come together and turn this crisis into a new beginning {"spring"), or we'll end up in the dustbin of history as so many empires throughout our world's history did.
Strauss and Howe are totally nonpartisan in their approach and analysis. I strongly recommend that you read it. By the way, the book was published in 1997, and they predicted events and movements that occurred in just the last few years. It seems the pinnacle of this crisis stage should be no later than 2021, so there may be time...or not.
"...though I fear it's too late for that."
It's too late to divert a disaster, although there is still time to decide whether the disaster will engulf and destroy us -- meaning the whole world-wide community -- or whether we'll come out on the other side a better and more humane society. These are the choices facing us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnX7TNFIELg
Anonymous, exactly. Asking that those who got almost all of the gains from both the last decade and that during the recent stumbling towards recovery to pay the punitive Clinton-era rates (which, as we know, resulted in the crippling Depression of 1992-2000) is foolish madness. Worse, Obama's trying to get healthcare to more people (and we all know that getting more people on private insurance is socialism*). And also he once called bankers "fatcats", which is totally rude and just one of the reasons why he people call him what he is; a secret muslim Kenyan Black Liberation church'd atheistic member of Al Qaeda whose radical extremism (in nibbling around the edges of, and supporting) the system as it exists is just like what Hitler and Stalin did!
* SOCIALISM!!!
Want to become a multibillionaire like Thomas Peterffy? Learn the art of illegal hacking! (Or, how most people become rich and famous -- they cheat.)
NEWS FLASH: Big Turd wants to kill Big Bird!
Post a Comment
<< Home