90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Foreign Policy Debate

Foreign policy, center stage in the last debate. We size up the Obama and Romney world views.

 The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) launches an F/A-18 Hornet while conducting an air power demonstration, Oct. 19, 2012.  (U.S. Navy)

The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) launches an F/A-18 Hornet while conducting an air power demonstration, Oct. 19, 2012. (U.S. Navy)

Last debate. Foreign policy. The whole world on the docket, but it was tough for Barack Obama and Mitt Romney to fight their way out of the Middle East last night. Iran, Egypt, Syria, Israel. If Romney came on strong in the first debate, it was the president on offense last night.

Painting Romney as “wrong and reckless” while Romney pointed to an Obama world of chaos. The challenger, who has sounded bellicose, talked peace last night. But they both love drones.

This hour, On Point: the talking is almost over. Sizing up the last debate.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Elisabeth Bumiller, Pentagon correspondent,  and former White House correspondent, for the New York Times.

Jon Meacham, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and executive editor at Random House. He is a former co-anchor of the public-affairs broadcast “Need to Know on PBS” and  former editor of Newsweek. He’s the author of the forthcoming book Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power.

Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst.

From Tom’s Reading List

Foreign Policy “That would be a merciful version of Monday, Oct. 22′s upcoming debate on foreign policy. In fact, we should probably feel thankful that Candy Crowley, the moderator of the Oct. 16 town-hall debate earlier this week, did not, as expected, divide the questions equally between foreign and domestic policy. During the few minutes devoted to foreign affairs, both candidates postured shamelessly on getting tough on trade with China, after which Barack Obama won a round on Libya by catching Mitt Romney (“get the transcript…”) in a semantic error. But that was fair, because Romney’s objection to Obama’s Libya policy was itself semantic: When did he say “terrorist,” and what did he mean when he said it?”

The American Interest “Governor Romney cannot run on restoring the Bush foreign policy. There is not a groundswell of support out there for the second coming of Cheney and Rumsfeld. Romney needs to present himself as the Goldilocks candidate here: if Obama is too cool on foreign policy issues, Bush was too hot—and Romney pledges to get it just right.”

The New York Times “We can hope that it is a chance for both candidates to describe, at a level of detail they have not yet done, how they perceive the future of American power in the world. They view American power differently, a subject I try to grapple with at length in a piece in this Sunday’s Review, “The Debatable World.

The Atlantic “Often third debates are less revealing on these personal-dynamics fronts, because each candidates has become familiar with the opponent’s moves and the format as a whole. Sometimes actual points of policy force their way into our consciousness! Toward that end, a friend with a long career as a scholar of and participant in national politics sends this wish-list for the themes the candidates should be made to discuss.”

 

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Michiganjf

    WOW!!

    Romney, IN A FOREIGN POLICY DEBATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY, NO LESS, claims Syria is Iran’s only route to the sea!!!

    Syria not only DOESN’T border Iran, but fully one third of Iran borders THREE SEAS!!!

    Romney couldn’t be more clueless!!!
    He’s been blustering about Iran for a year-and-a-half now, and he doesn’t even know where it is on a map!!!!
    The man who also claims Russia is now our number one geo-political foe!!

    It’s unfathomable that Republicans would even CONSIDER letting the idiot Romney into the White House, much less vote for the moron and serial LIAR!!!!

    Republicans REALLY ARE intent on driving the U.S. into the dirt!!!

    As if Bush wasn’t bad enough, now they want to give us Romney!!!

    What a JOKE they’re making of America!!!!!

    I doubt the bonehead will get a single military vote now, from ANYONE who’s served in the middle-east!!

    Terrifying!!!

    • John_in_Amherst

      Facts?  What is all this about Facts?  Climate science? evolution? reproductive biology? geography?  math?  who needs facts when you have a slick salesman as your candidate, FOX as a megaphone and a big slice of the electorate that is poorly educated, unable to think critically and obsessed with the economic insecurity brought about by lax regulation, Big Banks and bursting economic bubbles?

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    On foreign policy debates, I think I’ll borrow :

    “Prediction is difficult, especially about the future”

    Niels Bohr

     
     
    Judge, I would like a Side Bar, please !

    I wonder if a Romney win will have women singing the Carly Simon tune, “ That’s the way I’ve Always Heard It Should Be”, but women wishing they would have been able to sing, “ Haven’t Got Time For the Pain” ? I can’t help but giggle, because as I think of Romney and his one percent base, I am secretly singing Carly’s tune, “ Your so vain”, as I stare into the “clouds in my coffee” ! It comforts me to know that given another two thousand years mankind might come to understand “The Message”. Oh wait, I just took a sip of java and came back to reality !

  • hennorama

    Mr. Romney – WWI is calling… they need more horses and bayonets!

    On Monday afternoon, NPR’s All Things Considered had a segment titled “How Big Should The US Navy Be?”  Very prescient.  Here’s what caught my ear, right off the bat:

    “October 22, 2012

    MELISSA BLOCK, HOST: And now, to an issue that Mitt Romney often raises in campaign speeches. He chides the Obama administration for cutting military spending and he says one branch in particular is suffering.

    MITT ROMNEY: The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916. I’ll restore our Navy to the size needed to fulfill our missions by building 15 ships per year, including three submarines.

    Then later:

    JOHN LEHMAN (Sec. of the Navy under Reagan): Governor Romney believes we can maintain a stable world environment with 350 ships. Not being the world policeman, but being able to reassure our allies, being able to protect against pirates and other potential rogue states and so forth.

    ABRAMSON (NPR correspondent): Romney bemoans the fact that the Navy now has only 287 ships, which is indeed around the same number we had back in 1916. But the World War I Navy did not have cruise missiles or jet fighters. At a recent election forum, Richard Rurma(ph) of Obama campaign said what matters now is that U.S. naval power has no match.

    transcriptsource:http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=163419358

    hearthestory:http://www.npr.org/2012/10/22/163419358/what-does-the-navys-size-tells-about-u-s-power

    While listening, I had a strong reaction:  “What?  You want to compare the US Navy now to the one from 1916?  That’s stupid!  So what if we have the same or fewer ships now?  They’re way more powerful and lethal.  Why the heck would you compare them?  That’s like saying we have way fewer horse-drawn artillery now than we had back then.”

    I practically jumped off the couch during the debate, watching this exchange:

    ROMNEY: Our Navy is old — excuse me, our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We’re now at under 285. We’re headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That’s unacceptable to me. ….

    OBAMA: Bob, I just need to comment on this.

    First of all, the sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.
    The budget that we are talking about is not reducing our military spending. It is maintaining it.

    But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works.

    You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed.

    We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.

    OBAMA: And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships…”

    “Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets … [this]  is not a game of Battleship.”

    Line of the night for Pres. Obama.  Probably the single line most people will remember and talk about.

    What a silly comparison for Mr. Romney to make.  And it reinforces the narrative that he is looking to the past, rather than the future.  1916?  Sheesh … whoever fed him that line (Sec. Lehman – I’m looking at YOU) should be forcibly retired from the Romney campaign.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Mr. President, the marines still use bayonets.

      We already know the Navy and Marine Corps is a weakness of Mr. Obama since we know he doesn’t know how to pronounce corpsman.

      Also, the Army is still using horses in Afghanistan .

      Oops.

      It was still a good zinger.

      • Shag_Wevera

        We have TWELVE Nimitz class aircraft carriers.
        France has one carrier.  England has one.  Brazil has one.  China has one that they bought from the Russians after they were done with it.

        How many more do we need than the rest of the world combined?

        • 1Brett1

          “How many more do we need than the rest of the world combined?”

          When chest beating, as many as we can get! Gotta do something with that increase in the military budget! 

          • Shag_Wevera

            Is this that “American Exceptionalism” thing again, Brett?

          • 1Brett1

            Yes! Under a Romney presidency, Americans will be exceptional, AND the American military will be exceptionally exceptional!!!

          • 1Brett1

            …Most excellently, exceptionally exceptional, dude!

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             You were supposed to say severely exceptional.

          • Don_B1

            And the drain on the American economy will be exceptional!

            Republicans are military Keynesians, except that buying defense jobs has always been considered the least efficient way to stimulate the economy.

        • Ray in VT

          It surprises me that Brazil has a carrier and that the Russians don’t have an active one.

          • Shag_Wevera

            I’m pretty sure Brazil bought one that France retired.

          • Ray in VT

            That’s what the all powerful and all knowing Wikipedia says.  Commissioned in 1963, sold to Brazil in 2000.  It surprises me, though, because I’m not sure of it’s strategic necessity for Brazil, but I guess that they had a reason.  They are an up and comer after all.

        • hennorama

          China’s “pre-owned” (former Soviet navy’s) aircraft carrier, which they’ve had for 14 YEARS, quite hilariously has NO PLANES nor will it for quite some time.
          “It will take years to build the proper aircraft, to train pilots to land in adverse weather on a moving deck, and to develop a proper carrier battle group.”

          Look at this proud image – NO PLANES only sailors with rifles!

          source:http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/25/china-unveils-first-aircraft-carrier-to-enter-service/#ixzz2A8lgrHiF

          China is no military threat to the US, at present.  They’re quite happy to not spend on their military, and to benefir from the US navy’s dominance of the world’s oceans, providing super-safe shipping for the goods China exports to ports around the world.

      • LinRP

        He said they have “fewer bayonets.” Fewer, was the word, not zero. If you’re going to slam, get it right.

        • 1Brett1

          Silly…See, LinRP, “Worried” knows what Obama meant, and he meant that armed forces use ABSOLUTELY NO horses and bayonets!!! See, Obama was agreeing with Romney on Romney’s statement about our Navy! 

          Worried has mind reading capabilities…that’s why he can parse what Obama says differently than anyone else and can get a slam in on the President in areas where ostensibly there are none to be had! 

          • LinRP

             HA! Awesome. :)

      • Michiganjf

        Brains, I say!

        It’s one thing to be issued bayonettes for decorative purposes… the marines no longer “use” bayonettes, brainiac!

        Show me one MODERN photo of a marine using or deploying a bayonette on his assualt rifle!

        • Michiganjf

          Modern “use,” as in “in the field,” outside of training!

          • jefe68

            I said that. But the Marines, like the British army, have bayonets in the field and will use them if they need too. As the Brits have. 

            The point is you made a sweeping statement about bayonets and there use in modern warfare. It would seem that they are very much in use.

          • Michiganjf

            We’ve ALL seen videos and photos of Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan for years now, AND NO ONE can tell me they’ve seen one equipped with a bayonette!!!

            So NO!… marines aren’t “using” bayonettes in the field, outside of training!

            … And at any rate, the president said fewer… not NONE!

            My point is modern marines would RARELY get themselves into ANY situation requiring hand-to-hand combat… even close quarters combat would have them drawing a firearm of some sort.

            Bayonettes are cumbersome and dangerous in the field, especially indoors, where close quarters combat is most likely!

        • jefe68

          Sorry the Marines still do bayonet training.

          As I stated above the British have used full bayonet charges in Iraq and they have them attached to their rifles.

          British forces in Afghanistan have used bayonets on numerous occasions. In 2009, Lieutenant James Adamson, aged 24, of the Royal Regiment of Scotland was awarded the Military Cross for a bayonet charge whilst on a tour of duty in Afghanistan: after shooting one Taliban fighter dead Adamson had run out of ammunition when another enemy
          appeared. Adamson immediately charged the second Taliban fighter and
          bayoneted him. In September 2012, Lance Corporal Sean Jones of The Princess of Wales’s Regiment was awarded the Military Cross for his role in a bayonet charge which took place in October 2011.

      • jefe68

        If you took enough time to research the bayonet and our modern military you would have known that the Army does not use them anymore in training but the Marines still do.
        Basically the bayonet is a knife used for a lot of things, it’s been designed to do more than attach too a rifle.

        Interesting note, the British army has used bayonets in combat in Afghanistan and in Iraq.

    • Shag_Wevera

      We want to be ready for the 2nd battle of Jutland.  We’ll have the Kaiser’s high sea fleet crossing our “T” in no time!

    • 1Brett1

      Come on, “Romney meant” that, unlike the President, he would work to get Iran into a unilateral agreement to only use horses and bayonets! (Then, see, Israel could sneak in and crush them like mosquitoes!)! (Then, see, Syria wouldn’t need to help them to get to the sea!) BRILLIANT!!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       The bayonet and horse line was a good zinger.

      However, the aircraft carrier and sub line was way too much snark for a Presidential debate.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Team Obama is pissed that they were unsuccessful painting Mr. Romney as a reckless warmonger. Further, Mr. Obama several times seemed petty and small with his attacks. Not Presidential.

    However it is interesting that Romney didn’t hammer the President on how he has handled the Libyan crisis. Missed opportunity? Perhaps. Maybe the MSM will do its job and get to the bottom.

    Romney did hammer Mr. Obama on the apology tour and scored points.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JBZGEKODLMMN4FON37X5OMTL4E Paul Johnson

      Uh, no.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        You don’t believe the MSM will get to the bottom of the Libya scandal? Oh ye of little faith.

    • Shag_Wevera

      What’s an apology tour?  I’ve never heard that one before.

      • 1Brett1

        What’s an apology tour? …Something we’ll have to do in four years if Romney is elected!

    • 1Brett1

      Romney didn’t make enough hay over the Libya? …It must be a vast conspiracy, covered up, and the MSM is in on it! (Is that about right?)

      • Gregg Smith

        The cover up makes peanuts of watergate.

        • 1Brett1

          Yeah, Vince Foster, Jimmy Hoffa and the Lindbergh baby are all buried underneath the consulate!

          • Gregg Smith

            I was thinking about the blood Hillary has on her hands. She’s dealt with it before. Poor Vince.

        • Shag_Wevera

          Hyperbole.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Also, Mr. Obama made news when he stated that sequestration won’t happen. His administration had to walk that one back immediately after the debate. It is bizarre that he blamed sequestration on Congess when it is a law he signed. Blaming others is a pattern for this President.

    It also highlights his failure in leadership to avoid the fiscal cliff.

    • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

      Go back to civics class.

    • Ellen Dibble

      What I heard the president say was that sequestration would not happen “on my watch,” which I took to mean that there was some kind of agreement with Reid and Boehner to kick it down the road from the lame duck session, and if it’s still “on Obama’s watch” in the next term, I guess he has a plan, but probably that depends on whom we elect for Congress.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Both Boehner and the Admin (David Plouffe) denied there was any deal (or secret activity)  directly after the debate.

        • Don_B1

          @WorriedfortheCountry:disqus  
          @ellendibble:disqus 

          Senator Christopher Coons of Delaware stated that there were groups discussing possible solutions, but he had no details because he is not on any of the relevant committees.

          It is reasonable that Obama might have made a judgment that there was enough concern within Republican circles on the bad effects of across-the-board cuts on both the Defense Department and Domestic spending, that an agreement to reach reasonable targeted cuts that will help the country meet its economic needs for future growth.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             There has been reports of splinter groups in congress trying to work out a deal.

            However, these were squashed when the admin signaled last month that the President will sign NO deal that doesn’t include a tax increase.

            He has drawn a clear line in the sand and is sort of holding the entire economy hostage.

            It will be interesting to see what happens IF Romney is elected.  I suppose Romney would have to signal strongly that he will propose a retroactive solution just to prevent a market meltdown.

    • Gregg Smith

      The entire episode is a debacle.

      • Don_B1

        The sequestration was proposed by the House Republicans to get out of the debt limit debacle that the Tea/Republicans had created for political gain and country destruction.

  • Shag_Wevera

    Is the Iran geography flub better or worse than the infamous Palin blunder about seeing Russia from her house?  

  • ttajtt

    remember what we change our plows into bayonets and the red horses for in armageddon.  the u.s.a. left n. africa for no reason or clue?  who had the last north pole where the great lakes are today.   what country has always kept israel under its wing (shadow).   Ez. 6, 15-16. colored people outdoors into sun  and work with the eye ball picking birds.  whites stay indoors with the baking-wine making-no cloths- medicines… don’t these separate us from animals?  who else lives in the small towns like in a comfort zone.  what did chuck manson say about the war between the blacks and whites? or the coloreds.  whom blonde-blue heads came from the north pole last pre-ice age? 
    the late great plant earth 
    before the computers of W W W-lll.
    republicans tax – get to or for the now non-taxable ones…democrats rob retirement savings for the non-taxable ones… 
    hud-401- who goes to the foot front lines – who has the world history, smartest people, newest/fastest computers, or humans book of life history on how things will/should work-turn.

    we can only serve WHAT?, one party?

    yes, i do make myself sick.

  • Ed75

    I think he meant Iran’s route to the Mediterranean. The two candidates disagree on their approach, but they obviously know the situation. It’s remarkable how many serious and dangerous problems exist right now.

    • Shag_Wevera

      They still don’t share a border with Syria.

      • 1Brett1

        After Romney is elected, see, and we start up another war with Iraq, and we obliterate them, THEN they will! See, you may not think Romney was right, but, oh, he was right, he was right, he was right…he was….

        • Vandermeer

           Get the horses and battleships ready!

    • 1Brett1

      Yes, there are serious and dangerous problems there “right now”! And there always are serious and dangerous problems there, have been for a long time. If Romney is elected there’ll be more serious and dangerous problems there! There’ll be more serious and dangerous problems in a lot of places…

    • 1Brett1

      Yes, Ed, I think there’ll be a lot of “I think he meant” statements to Romney’s performance last night…

  • 1Brett1

    Romney said Syria is Iran’s only ally in the Arab world? That It’s their route to the sea? 

    When thrown off script, Romney has the geopolitical knowledge of today’s 8th grader: none!

  • 1Brett1

    Romney’s paper has been graded…

  • Potter

    For the third debate Romney looked shriveled and small again playing it safe by saying mostly “me too” for the 90 minutes. this me too meant that he was not saying what he HAD been saying yet again the chameleon. How do you argue with a person that changes colors so? He war-mongers  on the campaign trail and talks peace in the debate at the same time he wants more horses and bayonets. At the same time he wants to reduce your already reduced government services. Not only do his numbers not add up, his strategy does not add up. But trust him he knows how to create job jobs jobs.

    He talks about what should be done.But we never get a clue as to how HE would do better and do faster what Obama is doing right. I got the sense that he has no idea of the difficulties… even the difficulties of “working across the aisle” which he would magically do.

    Romney clung again to his well discredited accusation that Obama has apologized for this country when he has not, though I personally feel we could apologize for some things we have done. The peace that Romeny says he is now for despite needing us to show more military strength, for that peace Obama toured the Middle East and gave a major speech in Cairo. It was well received at the beginning of his term. he was offering a hand and asking for dialogue with the Muslim world. After the damage of George Bush’s wars, Romney would do what? 

    Romney said that the greatest threat to the US, to the world is Iran’s nuclear program. I think Obama said terrorism.
    The greatest threat to this country and the world is the environment and ignorance. At least Obama mentioned education several times last night, correctly tying that into the security and strength of this country.  

     Obama was strong last night. Nobody better on the ballot.

  • JGC

    Within a foreign policy discussion, Romney brought up his position on teachers, their unions and their profession.  Teachers are treated as a confounding, tumultuous and threatening foreign constituency to Gov. Romney, much like the way he views the Chinese and the Russians.  And all the 47% are foreign to Romney, judging by the words he spoke at the fundraiser in Florida. Where do you fit on the Romney spread sheet?  

    • Vandermeer

       As a teacher from MA, let me say that Mitt Romney did NOTHING to make test scores better. In fact, in order to balance the MA budget, he cut monies to cities and towns and schools had to lay off teachers and cut programs. That what he did. I hate when fat cat politicians take credit for the hard work that teachers and parents and students do!!!

      • Shag_Wevera

        Don’t move to Wisconsin then (my home)!!

      • Don_B1

        It is my understanding that Governor Deval Patrick had to rework the Education Department after winning the election in 2007, restoring the incentive programs, etc. and creating new areas for improving teaching, initially in science, mathematics and English.

        • Vandermeer

           Sorry Don, I was there and that didn’t happen… the MCAS testing was in place before he got in and his involvement was negligible. He was not for funding schools.

  • 1Brett1
  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Thrown off script, Romney demonstrated just how clueless he is. Then he began to swetttt. Like we need a president who can’t keep his cool under pressure in public.

    • JGC

      I cannot blame Romney if he suffers from some sort of flop sweat medical condition.  Maybe judicious use of Botox could have “frozen” his sweat glands. Or maybe that helpful supporter from one of his campaign events could have repeatedly mopped Romney’s face with a (dish?)cloth while the camera was trained on Obama.    

      • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

        I’m surprised his team didn’t insist that he have a continuous breeze wafting over him like some rock star in a music video!

  • Gregg Smith

    Another Romney win, look for the polls to widen. I loved the apology tour smack down.

    • adks12020

      Except that the “apology tour” lie has been completely debunked by all fact checking websites out there. It never happened. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/31/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-said-barack-obama-began-his-presidency/

      • OnPointComments

        Sometimes I feel as if we have truly fallen down the rabbit hole.  After weeks of putting form over substance by debating whether the word “terror” was mentioned in a speech (as if the word is what mattered), and avowing that nobody said it was about a video because they hedged their bets when they said it, CNN “fact checked” the apology tour and said it didn’t happen, because CNN had checked the transcripts, and the actual word “apology” wasn’t said, therefore the tour didn’t happen.  What’s next, finding out someone had their fingers crossed behind their back, so it doesn’t count?
         
        http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331115/obama-s-dubious-foreign-policy-record-editors 
         
        “In Trinidad President Obama lamented a “disengaged” United States that sought to “dictate . . . terms” in the hemisphere.”
         “At the National Archives he charged his predecessors with making foreign-policy decisions “based on fear rather than foresight” and “trimm[ing] facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.”

        • adks12020

          Admitting that previous policy isn’t correct and stating how you would do things differently isn’t the same as bowing down and giving an apology.  That is the characterization coming from the Romney camp…and it’s utterly false.

          What the President did is called diplomacy. Romney seems to think American exceptionalism means that we are never wrong. That’s not true and other countries often resent that arrogance. I, for one, want our president to be able to see what is wrong and fix it…not just say “Amurica…F…Yeah!!”

          • OnPointComments

            I’m sure many will see the irony of using the words “bowing down” when praising President Obama’s interactions with foreign countries.

          • adks12020

            Oh you mean because of the time he followed a custom as one should? Like when GW held hands with leaders in the middle east? Yeah that’s another bogus line of junk the right tries to use against Pres. Obama when in reality he did the right thing.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            This ain’t RedState. “Bowing down” ain’t a laugh line.

            Do I need to post 100 pix of everyone from Eisenhower to Shrub bowing down to foreign leaders?

        • Vandermeer

           And that is what the US did.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Ah, but Mr. Romney simply quoted Obama from his apology tour.  No faux fact checkers necessary.

        As Charles Krauthammer so eloquently stated:

        “And Romney’s response to quote Obama saying that, ‘we dictate to other nations,’ and Romney said, ‘we do not dictate to other nations, we liberate them.’ And Obama was utterly speechless.”

        • Vandermeer

           Romney may have had the line but for those who check facts, Romney also uses
          dishonest statements for… (to put it nicely) the “unaware voter”– his biggest fans.

        • Ray in VT

          Except for the fact that for much of the last century we have sought to dictate terms to other nations, and we have sought to do this with our economic, military, and covert operations might.  We have certainly acted to foster freedom and democracy in some countries, but in others we have supported dictators and oppression at the expense of popular opinion and elected governments.  Admitting that we have acted arrogantly, and at odds with our ideals, at times is not an apology.  It is an admission of historical fact.

          • Denis

            and, it seems, Mr. Romney would continue to dictate to the world how they should behave and what they should believe [at least in the current etcha sketch version].

          • Don_B1

            He will almost certainly TRY , but as Chas Freeman made clear in the first of the two linked speeches in his introductory paragraph in yesterday’s On Point hour, “Nobody’s Century,” that will not be a productive way to “win friends and influence enemies.”

            Romney was able to get Democrats to support his Romneycare in Massachusetts because there was a big problem they wanted to solve and Romney’s approach was an acceptable compromise and was not a “command solutions.” In foreign policy, it will need orders more subtlety and Romney, with his NeoCon entourage does not seem free to do that well.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             I find the apology tour divide fascinating.  There is clearly a divide.  It is clear that those on the left believe that it was long overdue and trumpet the apology tour as a huge win.  Many others find it offensive to have the sitting President go overseas and criticize their country.

            Some of Obama’s points might be valid but would only be appropriate as a counterweight to a speech trumpeting all of the good the US has done around the world.  The bigger problem is we don’t get credit for the good we do.  In many cases, they just take our money. 

            Here is a reminder of some of Obama’s early greatest apology hits:

            http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/03/morning-bell-president-obamas-top-ten-apologies/

            For instance, we can regret the deaths of Hiroshima but we shouldn’t apologize for it.  There were rumors that Obama planned to apologize for Hiroshima but backed off.

            But back to the big picture.  It isn’t clear that Obama’s Cairo speech or apology tour improved our standing in the world one iota. I know that statement is unprovable but I think recent events support it.

          • Ray in VT

            I also find the divide fascinating, as I don’t see anything wrong with publicly acknowledging the errors of our ways, either here or abroad.  I find it interesting, and quite frankly bewildering, that some find it offensive for the President to say “We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect.” (apology #2 from the Heritage blog).

            I think that your point regarding that we do not get the acknowledgement for the good that we also valid.  We have done a great deal on the AIDS front, and we have often provided humanitarian aid to people in need (such as with the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami).

            That having been said, though, many of our actions have overshadowed that good in some nations.  I wonder about how the people of Chile still feel about our support for the overthrow of their government in 1973 or how the Iranians felt about us in the 1970s due to our support of the Shah.  Now, of course, sometimes we are used as the great boogeyman by some regimes, like the present Iranian one, but are hands are far from clean in many parts of the world.  We had a pretty good record in Europe, although we supported Franco and Tito, but at least there we were mostly consistent in combating dictators and repression.

            Do we need to talk about rumors that Obama was thinking about apologizing about Hiroshima?  Let’s stick to stuff that he actually said.  Our use of the bomb was regrettable, and possibly avoidable (at least Nagasaki more so), but it was war.  We burned Tokyo and Dresden to the ground, but it was probably necessary.

            Are you as critical of George Bush’s record on apology?

            http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/09/george-w-bush-and-apology.html

            I don’t think that it is at all that the President’s Cairo speech or his non-apology tour statements have in any way made up less safe, secure or popular in the world.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I recall that Bush took some heat for the Koran apology.  However, contrast that  with Obama’s movie apology.  At least Bush was limiting his apology to actions by agents of the US Government.

            I think you do make some good points.  Some of the criticism of Obama is over the top.

            And yes, it isn’t right to criticize Obama for a rumor.

             

        • Yar

          We use the CIA to do it by killing elected leaders in Iran ( TPAJAX Project) and in the Congo(Patrice Émery Lumumba).  Never apologize, ruffle your feathers and show the world who’s boss. Never study history, for the future is certain, the present is debatable, and the past is unknown.  We have much to apologize for, we have set back democracy many times. Confessing sin is at the root of a Christian’s faith.  How does Mitt Romney’s faith guide his never apologize stance.  He has yet to apologize for saying 47 percent are takers.

    • Vandermeer

       There never has been an apology tour… that is just an expression that neo-cons use. Tell me, can you actually say that our country has never backed a dictator??
      Smack down, schmack down. Romnesia

    • Shag_Wevera

      I’ve been up since 0400, and you are the first person I’ve heard say Romney won #3.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Many are saying Obama won on debating points because he was more aggressive but lost the battle for the WH given the state of the race.

        Chuck Todd of all people was on TV this morning saying Romney will win unless something dramatically changes.

        • Don_B1

          That is not what Todd said. Unfortunately I do not have a transcript, but he was mostly saying that the race was close.

          And I didn’t hear him declare Ohio for Romney, which has long been his point that Romney would need it if he is to have an easy path to the presidency.

    • J__o__h__n

      Obama did smack down the apology tour nonsense.  There was no apology tour.  Mitt should apologize for lying about it.

    • brettearle

      Except for the difference between Obama’s visit to the Holocaust memorial in Israel as opposed to Romney’s fundraiser visit to that country.

      I just “loved” Obama’s smackdown to the “apology tour smack down.”

      Just loved it. 

      Romney bristled.

      Many fair pundits considered it a major score for the Incumbent.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The line of the night.

    Mitt about terrorism:
    Mr. President we can’t kill our way to victory.

    • Shag_Wevera

      Not so much.  I think bayonettes and horses beats that hooves down.

    • brettearle

      That’s NOT the line of the night.

      But rather, it is the line of the Right.

      A better line might be,

      “Mr. Romney, we can’t SHRILL our way to a November victory”

    • Yar

      The best line of the night.
      Obama to Romney: This is not a game of Battleship.http://bcove.me/dul5jtem

  • Ed75

    One significant foreign policy difference also is their treatment of abortion. President Obama repealed the Mexico City agreement, so US taxpayer money can now go to abortion providers in other countries. Also, aid is tied in places to their acceptance of ‘family planning services’, including abortion. The administration is also working to legalize abortion in other countries.

    Governor Romney would not support this.

    • adks12020

      Some of the incarnations of Mitt would’ve but you’re right, the current Mitt wouldn’t.  Now the Governor of Mass. Mitt or the one that ran for president before, that’s a different story.

    • brettearle

      The Helms Amendment is an EXISTING Federal Law that prevents US foreign aid for abortion.

      • Ed75

        Thanks, that’s good to know, like the Hyde Amendment was in effect inside the U.S. But as an example, the administration gives lots of money to the U.N. Population Bureau. This organization gives money, for example, and sends people, to China to support and help them carry out their barbaric one-child policy. So, they get around the law, and are exporting abortion around the world (also Kenya, where they lobbyied for a pro-abortion law with U.S. taxpayer money).

  • Yar

    How many of Mitt Romney’s twelve million jobs are dependent on increased military spending? Romney has said the government does not create jobs.  He also said that he would protect jobs for the military.  His tax plan does not add up, his foreign policy doesn’t add up, and his positions aren’t consistent. 
    Vote, even if you are the bluest voter in the reddest state. Vote, this election is about the unlikely voter.  Be that vote.

    • Vandermeer

      Vote for the person that has proven he backs the middle class and those who are struggling not the fat cat who has held other interests. Romney may make a good boss as far as a for-profit company is concerned  but not a good president for all the people.

    • MrNutso

      Well, there better not be any jobs dependent on increased military spending, because the government does not create jobs!

    • brettearle

      Your point about government’s relationship to creating jobs and the Military, is a good one.

      It shows up Romney’s notorious penchant for double standard, doesn’t it?

      • MrNutso

        The government doesn’t create jobs.  It just gives money to the job creationists to make things at 1,000,000% mark up.

        • brettearle

          OK…..let me get this straight….

          When Military Intelligence or the NSA  needs a code specialist for a proposed enemy outpost, on the South Sea Islands–who may have WMD, via an arcane technology–they don’t find such a technologist and hire one, do they?

          Of course, how silly of me, he becomes a volunteer!

          They don’t employ him.  They don’t pay him.  He does it out of the goodness of his heart.

          Just so Romney, and you, can say that the government doesn’t create jobs…..

          • MrNutso

            I was being facetious. ;)

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        There is also the “bang for the buck” criteria. Military spending is pretty low on that scale.

        But when Virginia, with its shipyards, is a swing state, Romney needed to say something about “umpty-leven additional ships for the Navy”.

    • paolocaru

      Yes,  47% of Americans are on government subsidy.  Another huge percentage have employment with city, state, county, or federal government. Another equally large percentage of people work for companies like Raytheon and Gen Dynamics, and thousands of little firms that enjoy federal contracts. 

      The rest I imagine are waiters, busboys, cooks, retail clerks.  US companies that actual produce goods that don’t kill people are in the precious minority. 

    • paolocaru

      Another trillion on the U.S. military?? 

      They still haven’t found the $2.3 trillion defense dollars that Don Rumsfeld announced was missing just weeks prior to 9/11.

  • pete18

    As a Romney supporter, I found Mitt full of rather vague platitudes and focus group talking points. Obama was small and petulant. Unimpressive debate all the way around.

    • Vandermeer

       The President was smart, versed in policy and experienced. Romney continues to suffer from Romnesia.

    • brettearle

      Romney’s presentation was, and is, thin, formulaic, glib, shiny–and dedicated to make you believe that he knows more than he actually knows.

      Obama was BIG and petulant.

    • jefe68

      As a Romney supporter, I found Mitt full of rather vague platitudes and focus group talking points.

      Funny how Mitt Romney is like this about all his domestic ideas, vague platitudes and bromides. If you take away foreign policy all you have left is the domestic, which is all smoke and mirrors. So not much substance there at all if you ask me.

  • paolocaru

    American presidential candidates spend so much time arguing over who loves Israel more.

    Israel has been a curse to US and western foreign policy.

    • brettearle

      What is it that you mean?

      That the Democratic Jewish state deserves no support from the US–when it is surrounded by enemies or would-be enemies?

      Your comment is cowardly.  Extremely so.

      You haven’t backed up your salacious comment with any facts, whatsoever.

      Why don’t you explain further–so that your obvious political bias can be exposed?

      • paolocaru

        Cowardly ??   You clearly are not able to discern the courageous and righteous from the squirming fawning compromised sycophants you so gratuitously defend with your hollow response. 

        The brand of democracy you defend is a perverse charade, and not of the people.

         

        • brettearle

          We’re still waiting for some facts, Mr. Fake Bluster….

          • paolocaru

            Facts?  Check out the ordeal of former Rep. Cynthia McKinney and you’ll understand my original statement…as if you don’t already.

    • MrNutso

      What it’s really about is who loves Netanyahu more.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

       It’s a policy that took on a life of it’s own – I remember when supporting Israel had much more to do with how lines were drawn in the Middle East during the Cold War than anything else.

  • WorriedfortheCountry
  • Michiganjf

    Romney says:

    “Mr. President, America DOESN’T dictate to other countries.”

    Meanwhile, Romney has been stomping around for over a year, blustering about how he’ll be “dictating” to China and Iran once he “becomes President!”

  • J__o__h__n

    It is a disgrace that the Kenyan socialist Muslim isn’t giving our sailors the bayonets they need.  There should be a new apology tour so he can explain how over the past four years Obama allowed a bayonet gap.  We need to stop taxing the bayonet creators.

    • brettearle

      When Willard becomes a Pentagon budget specialist–a necessary skill that, so far, is way beyond his ken–then maybe (but only maybe) will he understand the difference between bayonets and ships in Virginia–vessels that are either no longer seaworthy or else have become  obsolete.

  • jim_thompson

    Governor Romney looked unsteady, uncertain and confused, especially for the first 25 minutes.  Then he seemed to actually endorse President Obama the way he agreed with him almost all the time.  I did feel slightly bad for Mitt when he began to sweat ala Nixon…it’s tough trying to remember what you said in order to deny it and say something completely different.

  • JGC

    Obama administration policy on containment of Iran is working. The worldwide sanctions negotiated by the Obama administration and its State Department are working.  But one other part of Obama’s containment policy that he could not talk about was the joint effort by the U.S. and Israel to craft and release the stuxnet virus which destroyed  Iran’s uranium centrifuges, a huge setback to the Iranian uranium enrichment capabilities.  This was a program started in the Bush administration, and expanded and executed in the Obama administration. It is a prime example of how Obama directs a smart fight, rather than rushing in with binders full o’ bayonets.  

    There was a segment in last night’s debate when Romney was dismissing the sanction efforts, and implying Obama was soft and would let Iran get nuclear weapons.  I am sure I saw Obama secretly signal toward the camera, as in, “OK, Igor, release the stuxnet II !”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    Romney’s foreign policy seems to consist of unbridled defense spending and pounding on his desk loud enough to scare every country in the world into following US policy. Which will be great for military contractors, but otherwise ineffective.

    • JGC

      Or was that Old Severely Conservative Mitt?  Last night we saw New Severely Moderate Mitt, who threw in the word “Peace” so often that I think he was channelling the spirit of George McGovern…

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

        Note that I did not say Mitt would use any of these weapons – he would just spend even more than we are spending now on weapons we won’t use.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

        Romney is for peace through war.

        • MrNutso

          As Einstein said, “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.”

  • jefe68

    Mitt Romney was out of his depth and all he could muster were bromides and it’s clear that he has not strategy whatsoever in terms of foreign policy. Sounds a lot like what his plans are domestically. Oh wait, he has none.

    The amazing thing is how a huge portion of the American people are being taken in by all the flim-flam Romney and Ryan can dish out.

    I loved this line:“Mr. President, America doesn’t dictate to other countries.” Wait a minute, did not this same Mitt Romney not say he wanted to dictate terms to China and Iran just a week ago?

    Mitt Romney does not seem to be able to get his positions straight. One week he’s for what he was against the week before that. Amazing, and people are falling for this?

  • ttajtt

    on jobs, did the 9-11 cause or promote to our un employed job list?  a key that helped our global depression? did it come from bail outs? the war drive in “cash for clunkers”.   buy the e-book pads and then just to be unplugged.  47%, sen. J. McCain said 5 million dollars is rich, is that to have clear after all the bills are paid for? or to have just on hand?  why can’t we pipe pump water like oil-gas to drought crop areas? Washington DC quake to fracking?  

    remember they would collect the recycled glass whole.  now broken to recycle and we pay more for the less in the “re-making” of each of these and the water war$ were $tarted. 

  • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

    I was disappointed with the framework. There’s more to foreign policy than the Middle East and who we should or shouldn’t bomb.

    The success of failure of the Eurozone will have the largest short-term impact on the global economy. Didn’t come up. Latin America’s evolution economically and politically has opportunities and risks. Came up only in passing. Mexico, right at our doorstep, is roiling with cartel violence. Not a peep.

    • adks12020

      Absolutely right.  I was shocked Mexico never came up and I live in New York.  i can’t imagine what the people that live in border states thought.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

        Why would they bring Mexico up?

        They are getting cheap labor and oil from Mexico, exactly what they want.

    • MrNutso

      It’s about the oil, or safe access to the oil.

    • J__o__h__n

      And the first debate only focused on the economy.  Obviously it is extremely important but there are other issues. 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Second national LV poll has Romney at 50+%.

    Today’s Ras poll  R 50%   O 46%

    Pre final debate however.

  • SomMom

    Romney’s lies on Mass. schools:

    1. The John and Abigail Adams scholarship covers the $1,700 “tuition” charged by Mass public colleges, but their “Fees” bring up the tuition to over $13,000. (The figures differed under Romney, but still, it was NOT a great deal.)

    UMass/Amherst In-State Charges

    Tuition/Fees: $13,230Room/Board: $9,937Total: $23,167

    2. The schools were already high performing when he arrived as governor. He CUT funding to education, as well as cutting local aid, so there were massive lay-offs in Mass. schools during Romney’s time in office, and we only in the past few years crawled back up to where we were in 2001, thanks to Obama’s federal aid. There was actually an organization called STUDENTS AGAINST ROMNEY while he was governor.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Lie?  I guess MA schools aren’t as good as we thought if that is how you define lie.

      • SomMom

         He called it a “free ride” for 4 years. It was NOT free, even if a student lived at home, they’d still have had about $10K to pay out of pocket for the fees.

        As for another lie, read Joan Vennochi’s column in the Boston Globe entitled “No champion of women:
        Romney’s history in Massachusetts is anything but women-friendly” (10/21).Why do other people across America think we in Mass. do not support Romney???? He came in sounding OK, but he lied!! And he’s doing it again, by shifting positions on everything he’s said in the past few months. Be warned. He’s a slippery fish.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Are you aware of Obama’s record with women employees in the white house?  It has been described by ex-staffers as ‘a boys club’ and one felt as if ‘I was a a piece of meat’.  Read Ron Suskind’s book.  Suskind is not a right wing journalist.

          The record is clear.  Romney hired women senior staffers including LT. Gov and chief of staff.  As Gov. Romney factually stated they received an award from the U of Albany for promoting women in government.  Were they lying?  Maybe they are a like the Nobel Prize committee giving out the Peace Prize for nothing.

          I’m sorry but Ms. Vennochi and the globe have zero credibility.  They spin for all things Democrat.

          • SomMom

             As I wrote last week, Romney shoved aside Republican Acting Governor Jane Swift (after promising her he wouldn’t run) for the nomination, so he chose a female Lt Gov after the uproar that caused among women. Kerry Healey IS now taking his side, but he didn’t let her do much once in office, AND he didn’t help her when she ran for governor.

            Also, as others have pointed out, it was a Mass. women’s group that approached Romney with the binders of women’s resumes — he DID NOT ask for them.

            Most importantly, Romney is lying on his record and courting the women’s vote because (1) he has no public position on equal pay for women (the Lilly Ledbetter Act), and is most likely against it; and (2) he’s anti-choice and has a shaky record on contraception, and he chose Paul Ryan as his running mate, which tells women a lot about where the future for women would lie if they’re voted in.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Shoved aside Jane Swift?  I read your comment last week and was a little bemused.

            It was clear to me that Swift was a weak candidate.  I know she felt sour grapes but the issue has nothing to do with gender.  ‘Swifty’ was a laughing stock with her helicopter trips back and forth to Western MA.  She seems like a nice person but…

            Romney did support Kerry Healey in her run in 2006 and she seems to have a great relationship with Romney now too.

            I hope Romney is firmly against the Lily Ledbetter act.  It is a sop for the trial lawyers.  We already have protections for equal pay in the law.

            Shaky record on contraception? 

            I have problems with both sides on the abortion issue.  Abortion should be safe, legal and RARE.  I would have no problem with making abortion illegal after the fetus approaches viability – perhaps 5 months– unless the life of the mother is at risk.

          • SomMom

             I agree that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare — in the sense that women will have easy access to good contraceptives, and men will use contraceptives too, and so the instances of unwanted pregnancies would drop.

            But if you just want abortion to be “rare,” then do vote for Romney and Ryan.
            …. and if they win, I’ll take on your name, and be Worried for the Country!

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I don’t believe abortion law will change with Romney/Ryan.  Perhaps PP loses federal funding but they won’t go away.  They can easily be supported with private fundraising.

            Remember, George W. Bush?  Many feared that he was strongly pro life and would eliminate abortion.  It never happened.  He did stop federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.  I disagreed with this position.  In fact, I was very upset with it.  However, look what happened.  Stem cell research INCREASED via private funding and state funding.  Also, non-embryonic stem cell Federal funded research led to some breakthroughs that weren’t anticipated.

            For me, this election is all about economic growth, jobs and the debt.

          • SomMom

            My point is that you cannot trust Mitt Romney’s words.

               If the election for you is all about economic growth, jobs, and the debt, please read the Ryan budget. I know it’s not Romney’s plan, but his plan is vague and what he has said about it doesn’t add up.

                I know from my experience in Massachusetts that Romney will slash public programs that will directly affect the daily lives of ordinary Americans (the 99%)– education, transportation, etc. — while pumping money into the military and into the pockets of the rich.  While he was governor in Mass., our schools were decimated. State aid to cities and towns was decimated. As a result, property taxes and fees rose, further squeezing us all. Just over the past few years we’ve been able to climb out from the problems caused by his cuts, and HEY, we have a Democratic governor and a Democratic president! Studies of history have shown that the middle class actually prospers under Democrats, not under Republicans.

               I think Romney should stay in the private sector and create jobs there, if he’s so into creating jobs. He could use his money and private-sector experience IN the private sector … I just don’t want a shape-shifting lying guy as our president.  I was so happy when he left our state, and hoped that was the end of him for me!
              

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           On the free tuition Romney was entirely factual.  Maybe you could argue that was misleading because of the high fees at UMass.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

       I remember when Romney was governor here – there wasn’t a fee (which, according to him was not tax and open to increase) he didn’t like

  • Coastghost

    As NPR just hightlighted from last night’s debate, Obama claims Iran is strategically weaker now than it’s been in some time. Someone pass this word to the Syrians and the Lebanese.

  • NewtonWhale

    All manner of pundits have been saying that “Romney did what he had to do” last night to show voters he would not be a dangerous commander in chief. That is not only a useless bit of speculation but highly insulting.

    It’s useless because it does nothing at all to help voters decide whose stewardship of foreign policy would be better, and rewards the cynical lying and shape-shifting of Mitt Romney.

    It’s insulting because it assumes that voters are stupid, easily manipulated, and do not place any value on truthfulness.
    It’s also damn rude.

    Hello! We can HEAR you talk about us. You don’t even bother to go behind closed doors to peddle your cynical view that voters are ignorant sheeple easily distracted by trivia and zingers. You do it on live TV where we can see you. At least those of us who bother to tune in. 

    Now I get it. You’re more self aware than I thought. You actually realize that virtually no one tunes in, so your pitiful cable shows are the next best thing to privacy. God knows you’re doing your best to keep it that way.

    • MrNutso

      It’s a set up for more Neocon shenanigans.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Where was the question about Romney and his FIVE SONS not serving in the military?

    Both him and his sons were prime age during times America was at war.

    When Obama was that age there was no war.

    • JGC

      Now wait a minute there, Cowboy.  Obama was clearly old enough to have served in Reagan’s Invasion of Grenada.  It was amongst America’s proudest military moments; only to be potentially surpassed by Romney’s secretly planned Invasion of the Caymans…

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Why are those who went through the Republican primary process not concerned about the “wholesale Etch-a-Sketch Romney”?

    • MrNutso

      Because having a Republican in the White House is paramount.  Once he’s there, the real power brokers will keep him in line.

      Just like Bush’s second tax cut, when Cheyney told him to stick with the program.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      They made the Right swallow Romney.

      And they will.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       We want jobs and economic growth and a balanced budget.  We don’t want war either.  Never did.

  • AFrN

    Wasn’t peacenick Romney saying he would bomb Iran, just a few weeks ago in the gop debates?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    Campaigning with an etch-a-sketch is typical. Running a country with an etch-a-sketch would be disastrous.

  • TinaWrites

    Mr. Meacham,

    Romney is NOT a “data-driven man”, he is an “ambition-driven man”!!!!!  What he did in Massachusetts he did and did just long enough to get it on his resume for running for the Presidency!  He’s just doing the same right now!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

    an adaptive president is good but Mitt is just a “yes man”

    A “yes man” is not a leader!

    So if 60% of Americans want all french born Americans moved to Alaska would Mitt be for it just because it is popular? We need a president that can make the tough decisions even if they are unpopular!

  • JGC

    Meacham says Romney is data driven, and moves with the way the data shows he should move.  He is also dollar driven, and the data he is shown will be that conveniently provided by his Koch and Adelson and Trump and Wall Street bazillionaire buddies.  

    • Don_B1

      Driven by data that enhances whose bottom line? It is unlikely that he will enhance the bottom line of those who are “takers” but who who don’t take responsibility for their lives.

      But how much do you have to try to take responsibility to get any credit?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Romney wins the CBS ‘undecided’ Ohio focus group 6-2.

    The look on Charlie Rose’s face is priceless.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6URuvgL2CKA&feature=youtu.be
     

    • Don_B1

      Steubenville, where the focus group was from, is right on the West Virginia border, maybe 60 miles south of Youngstown, OH, and in the coal-mining area of Ohio.

      It is remarkable that there were 2 Obama voters.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Can someone explain about Ahmedinajad’s being hauled up by Romney before the International Court of Justice?  I thought the consensus of specialists is that Ahmedinejad answers to Ayatollah Khamenei, so it would seem to me that Romney should be going after the actual authority.

  • Hoshiar abdollah

    Please judge Romney not by what he said but his most close advisers. Do forgot that John Bolton, Senor and Liz Cheney among others

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Romney has “revealed himself” two weeks before the election? This is the real Romney? Guess it’s just a coincidence the version you like must be the genuine article. The only thing Genuine about Mr. Romney is the Made In China sticker stuck to the bottom side of his Bank Accounts.

    • MrNutso

      Ever see Zelig?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      Romney’s entire fortune was made laying off workers and stealing their pensions and sending companies to China so woman can work for 46 cents an hour and pocketing the profit.

      Stupid Americans who believe Romney is going to create “12 million good paying jobs in America” deserve the hell that is their future under Romney and his criminal elite friends.

  • Coastghost

    Obama, while I don’t recall hearing “al Qaeda on the run” from his lips, remains (by virtue of his incessant claims since early May 2011) tied to his conceit that jihadi ire against the US has become dissipated. Secretary Clinton and UN Ambassador Rice need to convey these assurances to the Jordanians, who are no less concerned about Salafist-jihadist intrigues today than they were eighteen months ago.

    • Don_B1

      From last night, a President Romney will do even more drone attacks.

      I think Obama has been claiming that al Qaida’s capabilities have been diminished, not necessarily the dedication of some or all of its members.

  • RolloMartins

    Note to Meachem: Romney’s “real politik” doesn’t apply when he is tacking to polling, not real life situations. 

  • Ellen Dibble

    Romney was making a lot of Massachusetts being number one in math and English, I believe it was, among its schoolchildren during his administration, and Obama came back saying that those stats existed ten years before Romney became governor.  Then he said that Romney had reduced funding for the schools actually during his administration.  And something else Romney claimed and Obama said that too was ten years pre Romney.  Romney said,  “Check it.”  Obama said, “They will.”  So?  

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       They won’t.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    The person who would do the most as President of the USA for the Middle East is the one who would tell Israel to get out of the West bank. That person does not exist. The most hardcore anyone gets when a new illegal settlement goes in is “tsk, tsk”.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Romney wants to spend 2 TRILLION MORE on the military that has already drained this country of trillions and trillions and trillions in wealth.

    Get ready for living even a lower lifestyle Americans.

  • TinaWrites

    Ms. Bumiller, Please don’t say that domestic matters “ALWAYS” take on more importance than foreign affairs.  Many of us are not even sixty yet, and yet we remember being very motivated by the Vietnam War.  The generations that fought against/for that War, are still a large part to the current electorate and will be for awhile!  I’m sorry, but that was an extremely shortsighted statement on your part.

  • AFrN

    Wasn’t peacenick romney saying he’d bomb Iran, just a few weeks ago in the gop debates?

    I agree entirely with DrewInGeorgia

  • OMA_OPINES

    The only data that “data-driven” Romney reacts to is polling data during election season and bottom-line earnings as a businessman. To respond intelligently to facts and, perhaps, change course is wisdom. The way Romney does it is nothing but pandering.

  • bacterial_sizzle

    These candidates have the same foreign policy plan: imperialism forever. They have the same economic plan: unfettered capitalism forever. I refuse to cast a vote for any candidate who refuses to mention climate change, despite all scientific evidence that this is the gravest threat humanity is facing. 

    • Don_B1

      Down-level Democratic candidates are raising the climate change issue and benefiting from doing so.

      While Obama did not raise it in the debates, Romney would never raise it except to deny it (unless he goes etch-a-sketch again and make all his fossil fuel money backers more than unhappy). Obama probably did not raise it because of the strong coal mining support for Romney in eastern Ohio. As they say, if saying something prevents you from ever doing anything about it, it would not be productive to say it.

      While Obama has not advocated CO2 mitigation nearly enough, he has spent stimulus and other money to create jobs and do research and development toward sustainable energy, which Romney has said he will stop.

      The start-stop-restart “progress” over the last 15 years in clean energy is what has kept American preeminence from appearing. The American people agree that climate change is happening due to human actions by up to 71% in some polls. In two years of an Obama second term, they will demand action from their members of Congress, as Climate Change effects become even more obvious.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Something has to be done about activism in new democracies.  For that matter, something has to be done about activism in our own democracy.  Romney thought Obama should have jumped in four-square when the election was challenged in Teheran.  Any nascent revolution where we have a tense relationship with the administration, we America should take sides and burn our bridges with that administration?  The more difficult the relationship, the more provocative we should be?  Somehow in the United States we have a tradition of getting things done via activism, sit-ins, million-man marches, moratoriums, various things that don’t escalate into burning the buildings of the “culprits.”  We might “occupy” them, but the idea is to be within the law and nonviolent.  Where is Gandhi when, for instance, jihad needs him?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    All that really matters here is what those few people on the fence that will actually go vote think. For the rest of us, the debates were irrelevant since we went into them knowing how we are going vote regardless of how they went.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      The few people on the fence don’t think.

      Our future is being decided by idiots.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

        I disagree – Obama turned out to be much further to the right than much of his support wanted, Romney will be much further to the left than much of his support wants. Not quite 6 of one, half a dozen of the other, but it comes pretty close.

        There are plenty of idiots – but I think they are pretty evenly spread across the spectrum, although I think they tend to clump more on the ends than in the middle.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

          The bases don’t waver. It’s the middle that does.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

            So do the candidates. Or anyone looking for what might work vs. blank support of a particular ideology.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

        Well, the far Right isn’t happy with Romney and the far left isn’t happy with Obama.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Fortunate Son’s don’t go to war like Joe Biden’s son or John Kerry have. Romney bicycled around France on a mission for God.

    • Ray in VT

      Well, at least he didn’t have some ill-defined “other priorities” or cyst on his butt.

  • Keith Antul

    I remain shocked that the Republican Party agreed to having the final debate topic be foreign policy. Certainly not what Romney wanted to be closing his argument with.  I’m not entirely sure Romney even has his own opinion on the subject, as he struggled to articulate some kind of policy that is substantively different from the current course.

    • Thinkin5

      Mitt is outsourcing foreign policy to his Bush neocon advisors. Whatever they think is fine with him.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Romney must have gotten some push-back about his idea of sort of provoking a trade war with China.  So he was offering up that there is as much potential in Latin America as there is in China, and there, the language is the same (similar), and the time zone is the same (similar).  Is that so?  Hello, Amazon basin?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

      Population of ALL of Latin America: 596 Million
      Population of China: 1.35 BILLION

      Yep, I can see that there is equal potential.

    • JGC

      The Latin America nod might have been to Hispanic voters who would like to vote Republican, but have been turned off by the iteration of Severely Conservative Mitt’s immigration/self-deportations comments.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Jack Beatty mentions a segment of Americans who were polled supporting attacking Iran if they “don’t back down” (cue the Tom Petty).

    First, the same media who couldn’t stop lauging at Hans (I got Iraq right) Blix is still in the business of telling us what is happening in Iran.

    Second, I’m curious if anyone is polling working-class people about attacking Iran, or families of our all-volunteer armed forces on this subject.

    • MrNutso

      Or people with 401k’s waiting for the inevitable stock market crash.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Mitt and Obama keep promising we are beside you but know this Israel, Americans are not going to send our kids to be blown to bits for you.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       If only I were sure that was the case. Sadly, I’m not. Put the wrong people in charge and we will ship our men and women to Iran in support of our “we’ll stand by you no matter what stupid and illegal acts you commit” friend.

  • Etta1890

    How about paying attention to the concise , knowledge ,experience filled comments by Obama. Measure Romney’s empty buckshot approach last night….you on the show are letting Romney off the hook and it is so frustrating for your listeners. 

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Hard to let a worm off the hook when they’re so slimy you never manage to get em’ on there in the first place.

  • Yar

    The unlikely voter overwhelmingly supports President Obama.  This is why the polls look the way they do. Why is this?  Does race and class distort the way “news” is covered?  The polls should at least report the percentages they expect to vote in this election.  If 100 percent voted, President Obama would have a decisive win. His reelection becomes unsure if voting drops to 50 percent.
    Be that unlikely voter!
    Vote!

    • Don_B1

      More of the poor favor Obama but are less likely to vote for a myriad of poor reasons, at least in terms of how the wealthy think of voting: they don’t think voting is worth the effort, they have to work (why early and weekend voting is important), difficulty getting tothe polls, etc.

  • MrNutso

    Nah, nah, na nah, nah you skipped Israel.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Romney has reiterated a few times that our withdrawing certain Cold War missile defenses from Poland has antagonized that ally in some way.  Is this true?  I hear both sides.  It seems to me that is another case of needing to trade up from horses and bayonets (from missiles in this case) to, in this case, probably cyber potential and intel cooperation.

  • Thinkin5

    I am perplexed by Romney’s feeling that he shouldn’t be “attacked” but it’s perfectly OK for him to attack and ridicule the President. Is he that delicate and elite that he’s untouchable?

    • DrewInGeorgia

      Yes.

    • Potter

      The Boston Herald was screaming on its cover “Snark Attack”. If there were a comparable left leaning yellow rag it would have in bold : WHINER!

    • Don_B1

      Read Chrystia Freeland’s book, “Plutocrats,” where the wealthy really feel they have done nothing wrong; each feel that “others” are the “bad” plutocrats. They are the “job creators” who are unrewarded, comparing themselves to “battered housewives,” no less!

  • J__o__h__n

    When is Mitt’s apology tour to the Republican primary voters that he lied to about being a severe consevative?  Or is he lying now?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       And if he is elected (please no) -all the countries he has targeted with his “I am strong on foreign policy and security” gaffs?

    • Don_B1

      Remember the title of his recent book, “Never Apologize.” He will demand everyone apologize to him, as subtlely as he can (?).

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Obama should have drawn that moment regarding Romney and his rich Jewish-American donors like billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson going to Israel.

    Romney is nothing but a money whore.

    That’s his life. 

    Money, how he can steal it, how he can steal more of it.

    How he can get others who have stolen it to give it to him.

  • burroak

    Tom, practical, how about original, and data driven, how about geniune ideas and convictions.

  • Yar

    Defense spending is the majority of our debt!  No defense cuts, and lower taxes, means greater debt.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       No, no. You haven’t been paying attention  AGAIN!  ;)

      You cut taxes on the rich and they will then create good paying jobs for every one of the entitled victims in the 47% who will then pay off the debt with their taxes. Following that, we change the Constitution and elect Romney “President for life plus 5 years”.

  • Ellen Dibble

    I suspect the defense budget is really about the eastern part of Virginia, and the votes there.  Do they build ships there by any chance?  Versus the newer needs?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      Yes, it’s so easy to buy the votes of the serfs.

      Promise them jobs above minimum wage and you got their vote.

  • TinaWrites

    A liar and shapeshifter like Romney is NOT ELIGIBLE for the Presidency!!!  The President was NOT being “aggressive”, he was defending himself against a man who will say ANYTHING to catch up with his Own Ambition!  Finally the President was defending himself:  he should have been doing it since about a month after he first took office and was accused of being “an elite”.  

    PLEASE REMEMBER:  No matter WHAT Romney says, a Republican in the White House is a hand that can sign all the bills and acts and laws that the super-Conservatives will push thru Congress!  Every other issue, topic, etc., that Romney seems to care “deeply” about, is just a front to make it look like “politics as usual”.  It is NOT!!!  

    • Mike_Card

      Grover Norquist:  “All I need in the White House is a warm hand to sign legislation.”

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Sir, you are lying!

        Saint Grover never said anything about a warm hand.

        Why am I being picayune about that adjective? Because I think Republican scientists are working to reanimate Reagan, and Zombie Reagan will run in the next primary.

        • Mike_Card

          Mea culpa; mea magna culpa.  I stand corrected, good sir.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       And I imagine the President had to use a lot more brain cells last night than did Romney. Romney can spew out anything he likes. The President has to hold back all the knowledge of things that are “in the works”. He can’t say: “You know Mitt, next week we are going to do this in Syria and we have ‘N’ Special Ops forces already there doing ‘Y’ and we’ve had this undercover program going in Iran for the past 3 years.”  

      • TinaWrites

        You are SO RIGHT!!!  AND, related to your point:  I find this so strange:  I have not heard ONE SINGLE JOURNALIST mention the necessity of the President doing this kind of “double thinking” so that he does NOT disclose national security secrets during the debates!

        AND (different topic), THIS year I really saw “pundits” differently:  so many of them seemed to be walking around with a suitcase filled with talking points. In previous years, I’d thought they all had their particular side that they took, but this year, it seems like they all were coached in the several points that could be made — most of which were based on polling more than anything else, and most of which sounded more like judging a ballgame rather than thinking deeply about our national affairs. Sadly, NPR was often no better!!!  

  • MrNutso

    Elisabeth, why are they draconian cuts?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      That’s the word the MIC told her to use.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1741643803 Charlie McNamee

    Any man who tries to dialogue with the opposition is often labeled as weak and an appeaser by a man speaks without thinking, deliberating, refusing wise counsel and one who strives to cultivate the affection of the audience (get their votes). He a puppet who reverses his directions as the exterior winds change. Please give us four more years of the wisdom choosing dialogue as the first resort and war only as the last one. Wanting badly to be president should not be a primary prerequisite of qualification.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      “Wanting badly to be president should not be a primary prerequisite of qualification.”

      Neither should being wealthy but they both are.

  • Ellen Dibble

    In terms of defense, it would probably be a mistake to outline exactly where we are going with that.  I’d suspect it has to more to do with protecting our food supply, upgrading our approaches to bio attack, protecting infrastructure from cyber attack (that’s what Leon Panetta was saying is actually likely, soon).  I suppose that’s costly, but not the same as building ships.

  • politis11

    Being “data driven” is one thing, being willing to change your mind at the drop of a hat just in order to be elected is another.
    It seems downright dangerous to me since we have no idea what the candidate’s core convictions are and what he would do in a serious situation. 

    • Mike_Card

      Romney only relies on “data” obtained from focus groups of possible voters.

      • politis11

        Aha. That’s what I was afraid of. Wouldn’t it be nice to have presidential candidates who have a clear vision of what’s needed, unrelated to what their potential voters want to hear? President Obama seems to come much closer to that.

      • BHA_in_Vermont

         And Super PACs

  • Yar

    The fiscal cliff is a double down by the republicans not to work with this president.  The house had 174 republican votes for the bill.  the Democrats were evenly split 95 for 95 against.  The sequester is a republican product. 

  • Denis

    Tom, 

    How can you and your guests say Romney was “presidential?”

    At a time when journalism was acctually doing journalism the story would have been Romneys total lack of knowledge, claiming Iran needs Syria to access the seas.  This is as major as Fords comments on Poland in his debate!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Tom: “Everybody thought (sequestration) would never happen”, that it wouldn’t come to this.

    Really? A bunch of us lefties have been predicting that the most intransigent, obstructionist Congress ever would disown the sequestration stuff, throw another fit about things, and the last thing the media would narrativize is that “The GOP is disowning the sequestration they agreed to months ago.”

    I’m a bit impressed that Elisabeth Bumiller mentioned it. Now if it can only be part of every above-the-fold NYT headline on our “upcoming crisis”.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

      Sequestration is just another set up for another last minute “we have no choice but to do this” and ramming through a bunch of stuff that would never be pushed through using the normal process.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

        Paul Ryan is on a DENIAL TOUR that he voted for it.

        Lying hypocrite as usual.

  • Terrence_P

    Has anyone mentioned that Romney doesn’t know where Iran is? According to what he said last night, he thinks it’s a land-locked country that borders on Syria. Daily Mail says he’s made that same mistake six times before in this campaign.

  • jefe68

    We did not have aircraft carriers in WW1, we now have 11 in service.

    By the way, how do does any president and congress deal with the budget when they wont deal with the reality of military spending?  Simpson/ Bowles report called for enacting the $100 billion in defense spending cuts that Secretary of Defense Gates identified. Mitt Romney has said he would follow this report as a guideline, or so he has said, or has he changed his position on this. It sometimes seems Romney changes his positions on everything as much as the sun sets. 

  • Thinkin5

    If Mitt equates spending more money with “strength”, then why cut education, health care, and infrastructure budgets? Does he want to weaken them?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Because by his middle school thinking, strength is the ability to beat someone up, not the ability to think your way out of a situation.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    We can’t survive without cutting the defense budget – we just can’t afford it anymore.

  • Terrence_P

    Has anyone mentioned that Romney doesn’t know where Iran is? According to what he said last night, he thinks it’s a land-locked country that borders Syria. The Daily Mail says that he’s made that same gaffe six times before in this campaign.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Well, you know, its over there… somewhere…. you know, where they have deserts and camels and such.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Romney
    Tumult
    War
    Peace
    Israel
    Iran
    Threat
    Muslim Brotherhood
    2 Trillion More for Military
    12 million good paying jobs
    Iran
    I’m white
    I’m Republican
    I’m rich

  • MrNutso

    Don’t fear the fiscal cliff.  “Republicans hate the fiscal cliff because it eliminates the deficit in ways they hate — mostly by ending all of the Bush tax cuts, along with some spending cuts that take a huge bite out of the Pentagon.”

    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/bank-ceos-fear-dont-understand-fiscal-cliff.html

  • Trajman

    The key question is: Do we want a president that change his
    position based on the prevailing wind or president that fight for our values?

     

  • http://twitter.com/fabredhead Fabulous Redhead

    Our armed forces are superior in firepower, if not bodies, to any other in the world. Our total defense budget is larger than the next ten largest defense budgets combined and is almost equal to the defense budgets of the rest of the world combined. Yet Romney seems to believe that this level of force projection is insufficient and would add $2 trillion over the next decade. Just what are Romney’s foreign policy objectives for which he finds our existing force levels insufficient?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    I love when Romney quotes Admiral Mike Mullen: Debt is still biggest threat to U.S. security

    Well he would know. Since the Military is the MAIN CAUSE OF OUR 16 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT.

    His statement and Romney’s quote of it is disconnect that borders on crazy.

  • fionnmaccumhailus

    The last I looked we spent 11 times more on defense than all the countries of the world added together (that’s allies and opponents). Spending some money at home will improve our world posture more than buying a few more planes.

  • Trajman

     

    The key question is: Do we want a president that change his
    position based on the prevailing wind or president that fight for our values?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Hey caller who is going to vote for Romney because we are not better off then 4 years ago, Romney is going to crush the middle class.

    Hope you are rich.

  • fionnmaccumhailus

    The last time I checked we spent 11 times more than all the rest of the world (allies and opponents). Spending money here at home will improve our place in the world more than spending more on a few planes.

  • ThirdWayForward

    The panel is way, way too gullible re: Romney’s stated reasons for an armaments buildup. It’s military Keynesianism — Romney will need a big spending boost to revive the economy, and he thinks he can do it under the cover of increased military spending.

    Romney and the conservatives are incredibly cynical — they run on cutting public sector spending, but when they attain power, they spend and borrow more than the Democrats. It would be bad enough for our economy, but their campaigns are based fundamentally on deception.

  • politis11

    Being “data driven” is one thing, being willing to change your mind at any given moment because you are catering to specific voter groups is another. It seems to be pretty cynical. And it could also be downright dangerous: How are we to know how this candidate is would react in a serious situation which demands spontaneous action?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       “being willing to change your mind at any given moment because you are catering to specific voter groups”

      Isn’t that the definition of a politician? The higher the office, the more pandering.

  • burroak

    An analogy: you have two cardio surgeons consulting you about open-heart surgury. This requires a steady hand, a keen, trained eye and the sound mind that life threatening, difficult, sometimes unpopular decisions will be made.  President Obama exemplified this approach last night. His answers were thoughtful, direct, informative, congruent, and consistent. This matters.  Governor Romney was obscure, uncertain, repetitive and concurring.

    • Coastghost

      As Meacham pointed out, though, Obama was also notably incommensurate and over-the-top. If he’d held his tongue with his “horses and bayonets” quip, the point he’d just made would have been made effectively: that he continued plowing with his professorial disquisition on aircraft carriers and submarines suggested petulance and insecurity, if we care to indulge in the psycho-politics that so many of Obama’s defenders in this forum are eager to indulge in.

  • terry7

    I would like to see an issue by issue list of Romney’s changing positions, showing him to be the chameleon he is.  “Practical & flexible” he isn’t.  He has no principles;  he’ll say whatever he thinks will gain him votes.

    • anon

      Someone above posted this: http://www.mittvmitt.com/

      • terry7

        Great link!! I would urge others to watch it.  Thanks!  I hope that the Obama campaign is aware of it and is using it.

  • http://twitter.com/fabredhead Fabulous Redhead

    Today the U.S. Navy’s capital fleet (aircraft carriers) is today equal to the fleets of the next FIFTEEN navies combined. In addition looking at total naval tonnage, the U.S. Navy is equal to the THIRTEEN largest navies combined. And most of those countries are our allies. Does Romney really believe the U.S. Navy is a hollowed out force incapable of protecting this country?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Apparently he can only count “units” and not the “impact PER unit”.

      • hennorama

        Well … if you’re a Bain Business Consultant, with no experience in the field, armed only with theory, one “widget” looks pretty much the same as another.

  • Bugsyboo

    Romney is an embarrassment.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Those who hear Romney, do you want four more years of this, have apparently not considered how deep was the hole, internationally in our reputation, and nationally in terms of the state of bankers’ outrageous deals and gambles, all falling back upon the American people right on his watch.  If anyone was so lucky as not to have to look at that abyss — vote for Romney and you may get a chance to revisit that abyss in another decade, not on Romney’s watch, but on the next Democrat, I suppose.

  • Kathy

    Oh PULEEZE. We do not use horses or bayonets. Get a life.

    • Steve__T

       Sure we do. In Military parades, Military color guard, Military burial detail etc. The thing is they don’t fit on assault weapons, that are more in use today.  

  • Denis

    Your phone guest is so wrong… we are in fact [statistically proven] better off today.  Your phone guest can call red blue but it does not make it blue.  That, as the President says, does not mean we are where we need to be. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

    Elizabeth is a paid shill for the Military Industrial COmplex.

    We get it Elizabeth.

    I’m sure you are paid very well.

    But when the society breaks down because no one has a job and the country is broke do you really think the military you shilled for is assigning a man to protect you?

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Did not the Pres say ‘fewer’ bayonets and horses? So what is this obfuscation all about?… Just more Republican smear and fear mongering.

  • MatthewNashville

    The middle east has been in turmoil for centuries.  How much of an impact can we truly have?
     

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      I know. From listening to these people you would think it all started this last four years.

      These people have fought for centuries and they will fight until global warming takes all their water away (Jordan soon) and they live in an oven (most of them already).

      Then they will too busy fleeing the hell they caused.

      • MatthewNashville

        All I think we can hope to accomplish is to show the people what kind of world they could live in and decide for themselves what they want.  We’ve seen this in the “Arab Spring” but obviously that hasn’t had the impact anyone has expected.  Until a country as a whole decides, like we did 200+ years ago, that they want a different way of life it will remain as it always has and no outside influence can make that happen for them.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

          The Egyptians did not get the freedom and democracy they wanted. And the U.S. is fine with that.

          Do you really believe the powers in the U.S. want people to have freedom?

          You have to be a child to believe that.

          • MatthewNashville

             What we “the U.S. powers” want to happen isn’t what I said, it’s what they want.

            Fortunately, all conspiracy theories aside, we, as a country of free speaking people, can act outside our “powers” and have an influence regardless.

            It has taken the children of each generation to rise up against the ideas of their parents, so you’re right, it is a childish belief.

    • OnPointComments

      “They can hold all the peace talks they want, but there will never be peace in the Middle East. Billions of years from now, when Earth is hurtling toward the Sun and there is nothing left alive on the planet except a few microorganisms, the microorganisms living in the Middle East will be bitter enemies.”
        — Dave Berry, “25 Things I Have Learned in 50 Years”

  • Yar

    Not as many bayonets.  We don’t use as many body-bags either.
    That is a good thing.  My grandfather’s job in WW1 was to put gas masks on horses.  It was not that long ago, think about how the world has changed.

    • Ray in VT

      Even in World War II the Wehrmacht relied heavily on horses, and the U.S. used mules extensively in Italy.  That was supposed to have been a modern, mechanized war, but old methods still persisted.

      • WorriedfortheCountry
        • Ray in VT

          That doesn’t surprise me.  There are certainly places where wheeled or tracked vehicles can’t go, but we aren’t likely to be shipping boatloads of them overseas like we did in 1917.  Sometimes a bayonet, or even a pointy stick, is still quite useful, but I wouldn’t want to build my military around them, or even the old battle wagons that I think we rolled out during the Persian Gulf War.  The carrier pretty much made them obsolete too.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             The military expenditure debate warrants further discussion.  I do want to hear more from Romney on this. I agree with Obama that simply using the 1916 benchmark just doesn’t cut it.

            However, Romney made a good point  about scaling back the 2 front defense posture.  I recall that we were stretched to the tipping point in Iraq and barely able to execute Afghanistan.  The repeat tours of duty were unfair to the troops.  This issue warrants serious discussion too.

            I would love to see the defense budget cut but I also buy into the peace through strength argument.  Hopefully, whoever is President can accomplish both of these goals simultaneously.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        In Italy? It doesn’t surprise me, given much of the terrain.

        The state of Italian motoring c. ~1940 also doesn’t suggest there were lots of wide, easy rights of way to drive those big Army trucks on.

        The original Fiat 500 was that small for a reason.

        • Ray in VT

          I read Rick Atkinson’s Day of Battle a couple of years back, and he, as any other thorough author should, talked about it. 

          You’re right.  The terrain was harsh in places, the roads weren’t great, and the retreating Nazis were ripping up as much infrastructure as they could as they pulled back up the peninsula.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            You’re one up on me there: I haven’t read any books about the Italian theater.

            But it’s getting to be near war on Christmas season, and “Dominic the Christmas Donkey” is stuck in my head, with the lyric about the hills of Italy being too steep for Santa’s sleigh.

            (My mind is a steel trap when it comes to music, a feature with its downsides.)

          • Ray in VT

            I would definitely recommend checking out Rick Atkinson’s first two books of his “Liberation Trilogy”.  It’s well trodden ground, but I quite enjoyed them.  They are weighty, and the way that he cited his sources was annoying, but they were very much worth it.

            I had not heard about Dominic the Christmas Donkey until earlier this year, so it’s kind of funny that you should mention it.  That also makes me think of the old SNL skit Hannukah Harry.  That was a pretty good one.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            “Dominic” is a song recorded before I was born, and it lay fallow for decades.

            During the “all holiday all the time season” some radio station dusted it off, and now it’s everywhere.

            I lived quite happily not knowing it existed until about six years ago.

            (And Atkinson is on my “to read” list. Thanks!)

          • Ray in VT

            Oh, and for the heck of it I read John Gibson’s “War on Christmas” book 5 or 6 years back.  What a crock of bull.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      wow, interesting.

      I don’t believe I ever saw photos of that.

      • Ray in VT

        Yeah, I’ve heard about them.  One of my former co-workers had a grandfather who was in the artillery in WWI.  He said that his grandfather’s first duty in a gas attack was to put his mask on, and his second was to shoot his horses.  The sound of horses screaming during a poison gas attack is probably pretty horrible.  I think that Remarque described it in All Quiet on the Western Front.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       This will become a Republican cry that the President is out of touch, even though he is right. Grab an example and make it an issue. I don’t believe the President said “we don’t use ANY horses or bayonets”. I think he said “we use FAR FEWER”. Use the technique that works the best. Horses and mules sometimes do a far better job in narrow mountain passes than do troop carriers.

  • Cabanator

    I am very surprised that Obama and his campaign have not focused more on Romney’s record in Massachusetts. It is telling that Obama is expected to beat Mitt Romney by a margin of 20 points in the state Romney governed. Why is that? The Obama campaign should be running ads about Romney’s record in Massachusetts, featuring statements from MA residents about why Romney is now so unpopular here. Throughout this presidential campaign, it has been difficult to figure out who the “real” Mitt Romney is. Massachusetts has seen him in action, and we weren’t impressed. 

    For a great treatment of this topic, please see Jason Schwartz’s excellent in-depth article in the October issue of Boston Magazine. http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/2012/09/mass-revolt-mitt-romney-campaign-in-massachusetts/

    I wish this story would be picked up by the national media. 

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       And the “Massachusetts Romney” is apparently more centrist than the “I am more conservative than these guys “Republican primary Romney”. If that “more centrist” Romney is not popular in MA, I don’t see how he appeals to anyone. I guess it comes down to “I’ll vote for my party even though the candidate is undesirable and untrustworthy”. I’m sure there are Democrats who do the same. Then there are those who vote for whoever their priest says they should.

    • JGC

      Did Governor Romney have any dealings with the compounding pharmaceutical at the heart of the fungal meningitis breakout, during his years as governor?  Just curious.

  • Thinkin5

    Jack is right, the “idea that we can control” the world is absurd. Certainly no president can, Rep. or Dem. The right harbors delusions of ‘control’. They don’t have it and never have. Mitt’s Mormon training isn’t going to convert any terrorist in the Middle East.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Besides “delusions”, and contrary to Romney’s thinking, we do not have the right to “control” other countries.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    It was funny watching Lord R trying to debate with a mix of talking points and etchasketching. Geez, does he have ANY core besides grabbing more for himself and his fellow oligarchs? The level of unconcern about lying is impressive. He flipflops, he lies – whatever. Best line, even better then the one about horses and so true:

    “you want our foreign policy from the ’80s, social policy of the ’50s and the economic policies of the 20s”

    I would have like to hear about Sensata when Lord R the Offshorer started his China script.

    It’s disturbing that they both love drone strikes so much. This is going to be a HUGE problem when every other nation has weaponized drones and can use our own logic to justify sending them anywhere they want.

  • TinaWrites

    Thank you to caller Darryl!  ‘Romney IS reckless, and will bring us to war’ … I think that is what you said.  If I heard you correctly, I absolutely agree with you!!!  

    Has Meacham possibly been watching too much Faux News?  How could a man of his qualifications seem to do that?  Yet, the words out of his mouth seem to come from that font.  Yikes!  I wonderful if he is able to face the racism in Jefferson in a proportionate enough way — for the weight of the Founder’s racism is still with us to this day.  How does Meacham handle it in his new book?  I’ll have to read it and see.  

    Thanks!

  • ttajtt

    i don’t believe reagan economics was his. he was shot to change and ear words not to care.  the republicans are running with the feed the war since their – countrys pre-history.   

  • http://twitter.com/fabredhead Fabulous Redhead

    Also, I’m baffled by the people who looked at Romney up on the stage last night and saw someone presidential. I saw someone who behaved like a yapping dog nipping at Obama’s heels. He spoke so quickly and breathlessly the whole time, like he was trying to cram as many lies into as few minutes as possible. Tell enough of them, and some of them will get through. (That’s where Biden excelled at shutting down Ryan in their debate. Obama did a pretty good job, but he doesn’t speak quickly enough to refute all the crap coming out of Romney’s piehole.)

  • terry7

    I would like to see the Obama campaign list of ALL of Romney’s shifting positions, start to finish, on ALL the important issues, showing him to be the chameleon he is.  “Practical and flexible” he isn’t.  He has no principles.  He’ll say whatever will get him more votes.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

      Why bother?

      The Obama campaign should run ads for the next two weeks that Romney is shipping a profitable American company to China right now.

      That’s his plan for the whole country and he’s been doing it for decades now. That’s what his fortune is from.

      When he says he will create 12 million new good paying jobs he means in China.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Dam right. If I was running the campaign it would be Sensata, Sensata, Sensata. Only Lord No Core could talk tough on china while Bane is shipping those jobs to china. Wake up, people.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

          Watch the 47% video when Romney tells his rich friends how much women will work for in China (pennies per hour).

          It’s what you call a tell.

          He’s passing on secrets for them to get richer.

          That’s what these rich people do.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      “No core”. They crucified Kerry as a “flipflopper” and he is a rock compared to Lord R. I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s not just the morphing and lying, its the shamelessness about it. Doesn’t bother him a bit. “I lied, whatever.” “I had a different position yesterday, so what?”

      Listing his shifting positions would be a challenge, maybe some innovative 3D graphic would be necessary, or maybe even higher dimensional :)

      • Sarah and Jason Hibbeler

        I was put off by Jon Meacham’s characterization of Romney as data-driven. As someone else rightly pointed out, he is POLL-data-driven…aka a panderer.  There’s a big difference between that and so-called flexible leadership.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          That is funny, sorts like Ryan is “serious” even tho his arithmetic doesn’t compute.

      • hennorama

        This is an oldie, but still a goodie:

        http://www.mittvmitt.com/

        • terry7

          Thanks. Great link!!  I would urge others to watch it.  I hope that the Obama campaign is aware of it and is using it.

  • ttajtt

    why doe romney look so much larger then obama?  or is it pictures that don’t lie? 

  • Steve__T

    I know most here have made up their minds about who they will vote for. but just to let you know their are two others running that have been squeezed out, they were allowed to debate the same questions given to the two candidates last night I thought it was very informative. No other news organization recognize them, or give them a word much like they did Ron Paul. If you are interested you can watch it here.

     http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2012/10/23/watch_full_expanding_the_debate_special_from_oct_22_featuring_jill_stein_rocky_anderson

    There is a stark difference and some very interesting answers with some actual substance.

    • hypocracy1

      Ron Paul is a nut and the only reason he is in Congress is because he runs as a Republican.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

        Ron Paul is what you call controlled opposition.

        Suck up the energy of the dissatisfied and disillusioned and make sure their energy goes into supporting someone who will do nothing.

        Ron Paul’s funding came from the same people that his followers hate.

        • Steve__T

           I guess that’s why they almost had a riot at the RNC when they changed the rules and took his delegates off the floor.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

            Ron Paul was there to take voters to the right of Romney in the primaries so another candidate didn’t win.

          • Steve__T

            If you go back to the primaries you won’t even see Ron Paul. Even though he won the straw pole, you would have to search to find the information. In several news groups they put Obama’s picture over his. When I saw that I though wow I didn’t know Obama was a Republican. You don’t realize that the Republican party is dysfunctional and corrupt. I say power corrupts but Big Money corrupts absolutely.

      • Steve__T

         Out of my post the only thing you could come up with was the mention of one person, thanks for reading, but I didn’t ask for your opinion on Ron Paul.

        Good name BTW

        • hypocracy1

          They don’t get recognized because, like Ron Paul, they aren’t relevant… 

          • Steve__T

             OK when you vote for either one Dem or Rep with out looking at other options you become irrelevant
            they are one and the same. But that’s OK fair and balanced must seem Hypocritical to you.

          • hypocracy1

            Those parties aren’t even options at state or local levels.  Why would anybody vote for them as President? 

          • Steve__T

            This is what you don’t know there are at least more than 50 people running
            2012 Presidential General Election Nationwide Candidates
            http://votesmart.org/election/2012/P/NA/2012-presidential#.UIbgHoaz58E

    • JGC

      It would make for healthier debate to have strong third and fourth party candidates involved side by side with  Republicans and Democrats.  It would help all sides to check their most outrageous and pandering assertions.

      • hypocracy1

        And thanks to Citizens United that will never happen..

  • L_R_Dunn

    I find it interesting that, on nearly every call in show, we hear self identified Republican callers who “were going to vote for President Obama” but have now see the light, after hearing the latest iteration of whoever Romney says he is at the moment.

    Conspiracy?
    Naw, Just more noise.

    • Mike_Card

      The phone trolls are better paid than the troll platoon that floods this discussion board.

      • DrewInGeorgia

        They’re closer to a Squad but with all the noise they generate you’d think they were a Battalion.

        • Mike_Card

          Probably a sub-TO & E fire team, but plenty of camo.

  • hennorama

    Two surprises from last night:

    1. Mr. Romney did not use the very first question, on Libya, to criticize Pres. Obama.

    2.  Pres. Obama did not use Mr. Romney’s remark on lack of bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to remind viewers about Mr. Romney’s remarks on the topic that Mr. Romney made, right there in good ol’ Boca, during “the 47%” remarks.  (ROMNEY: “You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that it’s going to remain an unsolved problem.”)

    I was not surprised that Mr. Romney said “I agree” and “you’re right Mr. President” for what seemed like a hundred times.  Mr. Romney has virtually nothing different to say on foreign policy other than “Well … I would have done that sooner and more strongly.”  His basic agreement with Pres. Obama on virtually every topic will likely result in some blowback from the neocons and other “severely conservative” pundits.

    Pres. Obama’s most effective remarks for women were when he talked about the young woman who was four years old when 9/11 happened, and how ending Osama bin Laden gave her some degree of closure on her father’s death on 9/11.  If you were watching CNN, you would have seen the focus group graph for women hit the top of the chart.

    Of course, the “horses and bayonets” and “this isn’t a game of Battleship” smackdowns were probably the most memorable and also highly effective.

    The Pres.’s most popular line probably was the one about “… months of campaigning and way too many TV commercials.”

    Mr. Romney’s most effective remarks overall were “we can’t kill our way out of this mess” and “Mr. President, America doesn’t dictate to other nations; we have freed other nations from dictators.”

    His repeated use of “Iran’s 4 years closer to a nuclear weapon … 4 years closer … 4 years closer…” reminded  me of his “Mr. President – have you checked your pension … checked your pension … checked your pension” remarks from the 2nd debate.

    My view – Pres. Obama won the debate, and Romney accomplished what he most needed to do – appear presidential and reasonable.

    • JGC

      Appear presidential and Reaganable.

    • burroak

      like the analogy; furthermore, Mitt have you checked your manners, Mitt have you checked your etiquette, Mitt have you checked your civility. If you watch the 3 presidential debates again, you can clearly distinguish the two personas, and Governor Romney was not fluent in any aforementioned. That is a snapshot of how he would treat foreign heads-of-state, dignitaries, ambassordors, etc.

  • Coastghost

    The pattern I heard emerge from last night’s debate: just as Obama has been boasting since May 2011 that “al Qaeda’s on the run”–his soothing implication being that jihadi lethality has been sufficiently overcome–his claim last night that Iran is now weaker strategically than it’s been in years (by virtue of sanctions, etc.) downplays the threat that Iran continues to pose and the force it continues to exercise. Assad’s continuing survival in Syria is in no small measure a direct expression of the power and force that Iran is wielding and projecting right now, and as Obama spins his assurances and reassurances, Iran has begun projecting/continues to project its strategic strength into Lebanon as well. Obama thus demonstrates a CONSISTENCY in downplaying perceived threats. Romney, to his credit, when asked the chief security challenge faced by the US for the interim, did not hesitate to name Iran.

    • hypocracy1

      So it isn’t Russia!??

      Romney is very CONSISTANT at changing his position don’t you think?

      • Coastghost

        The outcomes resulting from Obama’s consistency I find troubling and disheartening. His public comments downplaying threats posed by Iran and al Qaeda and its affiliates, while they may reassure American voters, certainly do not seem to be inhibiting America’s most virulent adversaries. The misperception (?) engendered is that Obama actually underestimates the threats posed.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Russia is propping up Syria and Assad too.  Russia has been instrumental in weakening the sanctions against Iran.

      • 1Brett1

        Syria is the only way Russia can get to sea!

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Very funny.

  • Yar

    Would Barack Obama ever had a chance at being President with the past of Mitt Romney?  The Car Crash in France is just one example.  The first date with Ann could have resulted in charges of statutory rape if Mitt was a black man.  Race changes expectations. Look at the story or Brian Banks.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      “Would Barack Obama ever had a chance at being President with the past of Mitt Romney?”

      No.

      Something I’ve been kicking around the past few days is this: Would Mitt Romney have ever had a chance of being a Presidential Candidate if Barack Obama weren’t President? Would President Obama have ever been elected if The Evil Emperor and his DunceCap of Notre Dame hadn’t taken a huge dump on the founding principles of Our Nation? Would DunceCap W have ever been elected if Clinton hadn’t gotten caught playing Hanky Panky? And on it goes…Damn you Causality!

  • Bruce94

    Last night we saw a President communicating in clear and consistent terms as a confident Commander-in-Chief vs. a would-be cowardly Chameleon-in-Chief who failed to acknowledge much less defend foreign policy positions he had espoused as recently as a few weeks ago.  Romney’s performance reminded me of his first debate when he took pains to distance himself from his own $5 trillion tax cut and its ramifications.

    You can add Romney’s obfuscation on Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Iran and Egypt to the long list of stances that he has changed for the purposes of political expediency including abortion rights, gay rights, stem-cell research, gun control, individual insurance mandates, immigration reform, global warming, cap and trade, and no-tax pledges.

    Apparently, the closer to the election we get, the more acute the case of Romnesia we need to defend ourselves against. 

    During last night’s debate, we saw Romney channeling George McGovern in a futile effort to conceal his Neo-Con proclivities, which he expressed with such fervor during the GOP primary debates–you recall, the debates that resembled a rerun of the Wizard of Oz where the Tin Man (Newt Gingrich) in search of a heart, the Scare Crow (Rick Perry) in search of a brain, and the Lion (Mitt Romney) in search of courage could be seen dancing down the Yellow Brick Road sucking up to an eccentric billionaire benefactor (the Wizard) to get an infusion of the right stuff.  We know how the journey ended for the Tin Man and the Scare Crow–electoral failure. 

    It’s hard to imagine that the candidate with no convictions (Mitt Romney) could be seen now as evidencing any courage, earning anyone’s trust, or avoiding a similar fate of defeat at the polls.

  • NewtonWhale

    Romney demonstrates his mastery of the calendar:

    “Our Air Force is older and smaller than at any time since it was founded in 1947.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/presidential-debate-full-transcript/story?id=17538888&singlePage=true#.UIa9RSropp4

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      . . .

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      That doesn’t scare me.

      But I am a bit worried by FoxNation reports that if Obama is
      reelected the Air Force will consist of nothing but inverted Curtiss
      Jennys by 2016.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Good news for the Philippines.

    Subic Bay Naval Station will reopen to accomodate US Navy ships and personnel.

    As you know there is a growing intention between China and the Philippines regarding surrounding islands in the South China Sea.

  • 1Brett1

    It seemed both candidates were trying way too hard to flaunt their Jew cred. last night…Obama was like, “when I was a candidate I visited Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Museum in Israel!” And Romney was all, “oh yeah, but I did Mormon missionary work with most of the 270 kibbutzim in Israel!”  JEESH! …I think Romney took it way too far, however, when he pulled out a sackbut and bet Obama ten thousand dollars he couldn’t sing Hava Nagila!  

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    There are 430 or more ships in the US navy.

    F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been even full implemented yet.

    We are already complaining that we need more Arsenal.

    PLEASE!!!!

  • ttajtt

    man power is the only thing NOT obsolete in war!! what is romney’s tuff words, his kids?.  

  • NewtonWhale

    Paul Ryan this morning:

    “To compare modern American battleships and Navy with bayonets, I just don’t understand that comparison,”

    Maybe that’s because your thinking is 20 years out of date:

    “The last battleship on active duty was USS Missouri (BB 63) decommissioned Mar. 31, 1992. In the 21st century, there are no battleships in the United States Navy.”

    http://www.navy.mil/navydata/ships/battleships/bbhistory.asp

    • Mike_Card

      Good catch.  Another explanation is that Ryan is fundamentally a psychopath who melts down into a quivering pile of goo when forced to confront the truth.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/operations/231257-philippines-re-opens-military-bases-to-us-forces-

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      Welcome Back U.S. personnel in the Philippines!!!!

  • JGC

    President Romney Puzzler #1:  In the event of WWI 2.0, would a President Romney institute a draft on our horses? And if so, would Rafalca be given a deferment to carry young Mormon missionaries on proselytizing assignments in the Swiss Alps? 

    • hennorama

      “Draft draft horses who haul draft!  Clydesdales for Romney!”

      Budweiser may object, but who cares – they’re not an American company anymore, really.  I doubt Belgium-based InBev would squawk very loudly.

      These people would no doubt protest such a move though:

      http://www.gentlegiantsdrafthorserescue.com/

      • Steve__T

         You know that just made me think, how many American companies and businesses have we lost to foreign based corporations?

        • DrewInGeorgia

          Not nearly as many as we have lost to American Based Corporations. Might not make much sense when taken at face value but kick it around a bit.

  • myblusky

    I’m sincerely confused how we are going to get out of debt under Romney’s Five Point Plan which entails increasing the military and decreasing taxes. Where is the money coming from? A magic printing press?

    I cannot fathom the idea of increasing the military. We have enough “stuff” and if we need more – then we can manufacture it in the blink of an eye. War time has been one of the greatest innovators for mass production of objects in a short amount of time. There is no point making a bunch of crap that’s going to sit around and rust.

    I’m really disturbed by Romney wanting to increase the military as if he is paranoid we are going to be attacked.

    The only thing attacking us right now is the brutal economy.

    For the sake of disclosure I have been on the fence between Obama or voting Independent. I was angry with the way the Obama admin shut down all discussions of what happened during Fast and Furious operations after promising us a transparent government.

    • ttajtt

      it is not to be paid off. reaganomics don’t work that way.  ask little bush or obama.  do you think clinton “paid” it off for this?   

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      It is all about economic growth.  Romney believes his reforms (tax and regulatory) will add .5-1% additional economic growth which will add good jobs and result in new tax revenues.  Frankly, I think that is the only way out of this mess. IF he achieves his goals then we can balance the budget within 8 to 10 years.

      Any additional defense expenditures (or cuts for that matter) need to be justified and I haven’t heard Romney make that case specifically on the Navy’s ships.

      However, Romney did make one good point on defense and that is the clear change in Obama’s budget in supporting a military that can only handle one war.  As I recall, we were stretched so thin between Iraq and Afghanistan and repeated tours of duty that we don’t really meet that standard now.

      Personally, I would like to hear more on defense and Pentagon waste.

      • hypocracy1

        How in the hell is having a defense budget capable of supporting a military so it can handle more than one war a good point? 

        Also how is Romney going to balance the budget within 8 to 10 years when his running mates proposed budget doesn’t for 30 years?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Simple.  Romney has a different plan than Ryan.  btw – even though Ryan’s plan didn’t balanced for 30 years it did bend the curve so the debt was an acceptable percentage of GDP.  With Obama’s budget proposal the debt exploded and when Guitner was grilled by Congress he pleaded guilty.  It was pathetic.

          Regarding the two front defense posture, maybe it isn’t a good idea but it is worthy of debate.  My overall point is we were exposed as UNABLE to support two wars when we were in Iraq and Afghanistan.

          • Steve__T

            There is nothing simple about it or he would have used specifics in describing how. Which we are still waiting to hear.

          • Mike_Card

            Oh, sure.  Their plans are different TODAY; but what about tomorrow?

      • TomK_in_Boston

        At least you said “believes”. There is no evidence for the voodoo argument. It’s bizarre that it keeps coming up if you think we’re having a real discussion about what’s best for the USA, it makes perfect sense if you think the real agenda is transferring even more wealth and income to the top.

      • hennorama

        Pretty sure Mr. Romney is counting on GDP growth of a minimum of 4%, which is more than triple the most recently reported rate.  It’s quite a stretch to think his proposals, even if enacted in full and unchanged, will have such an outcome, especially in the near term.

        Here is the supply-side equation: Lower marginal tax rates = higher economic growth = higher GDP = bigger tax base = higher tax revenues at the lower tax rates.

        As President Clinton said, “He thinks we’re DUMB?”

    • Fredlinskip

      Name me one GOP administration that has decreased the national debt since Eisenhower.
      GOP is all about “Voodoo economics” to the detriment of all but a few.

      • Gregg Smith

        Name any President who decreased the debt since Eisenhower.

        • jefe68

          William Jefferson Clinton. Between 1998-2000, the national debt was reduced by $363 billion.

        • hennorama

          I realize this is not what was meant, but for brief periods, the Federal debt did actually decline under Pres. Clinton:

          01/20/1993 $ 4,188,092,107,183.6002/12/1993 $ 4,175,915,249,528.46

          09/02/1997 $ 5,424,368,836,901.0809/18/1997 $ 5,374,488,603,408.56

          12/31/1997 $ 5,502,388,012,375.9502/09/1998 $ 5,468,966,737,716.36

          04/07/1998 $ 5,549,130,557,811.3205/07/1998 $ 5,484,428,466,805.99

          12/02/1999 $ 5,718,267,953,052.4208/03/2000 $ 5,640,950,837,276.55

          There are other examples, as one would expect when doing a daily comparison.

          Same thing for Pres. Bush II & Pres. Obama, and probably every President since Ike.

          source:http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

          • hennorama

            ACK!  Apologies to the board for this horrid formatting problem.  DISQUS’d again…can’t even edit the bloody thing!

        • Mike_Card

          If it’s an impossible mission, what is the bitching and moaning all about?  It’s coming from the teabaggers, not the liberals.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      The right doesn’t care about the debt. Since Obama is president now they use the debt to attack him, but when bush was president cheney said “deficits don’t matter”. Romney’s “plan” has nothing to do with reducing the debt. It follows the long-term righty agenda of attacking the safety net and redistributing more wealth and income to the top, with concern about the debt as camouflage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Where did you get that tattoo soldier? Subic Bay Philippines Sir!!!! (script from the movie “An Officer and a Gentleman”).

  • AC

    my Disqus page is not working; anyone else having issues?

    • hennorama

      Ditto.  It’s been at least 12 hours for me so far.

      • Steve__T

         I was wondering where you were sorry you two are having problems, Its usually me.

  • Fredlinskip

    The best thing for our country at this point would be to elect Romney.   It’s clear that a large segment of Americans still believe that policies that promote huge income disparity is great for the economy. These were the beliefs held before Great Depression.   Should Obama win, the economy and employment will likely slowly improve, but not enough to prevent a total GOP lunatic from being elected in ’16 and all the gains will be erased- similar as Bush wiped out all the gains of the Clinton years.

    Bring on Romney.
    Bring on 2nd Great Depression.
    It’s what’s best for America long term.
     

    • ttajtt

      what is the difference between a “depression” and a “leveling off”?  this where i say mother earth has no more to give!  so do we take it off some where else? dig up the ocean trash?  where is the old growth trees? new mine holes, not the open pit tributaries of old lake beds found by satellites and digger football field sized machines for a oz.  

    • TomK_in_Boston

      I understand what you’re saying. There is now amazing passivity by sheep-like citizens saying “Yes, cut my medicare and SS so you don’t have to pay more tax”. Why? What will it take to open their eyes? Where’s the rage that will force Lord R et al to run for the walls of their gated estates?

      • anon

        Many of my friends here in the Middle East think that the US needs their own ‘Arab Spring’.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          I agree.

  • miltonhanzel

    the battleship picture depicts the box that both Obama and Romney were thinking in last night, namely that foreign policy equals defense policy.  It does NOT.

    • jefe68

      The picture is of the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, not a battleship. We don’t really have to many battleships anymore. 

    • anon

      Especially when ‘defense’ really means ‘offense’.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    The United States military needs to be trained in Urban Warfare,Counter Insurgency and Terrorism.

    Front Line assaults are no longer being use in the 21st Century warfare. Like we saw during the invasion of Iraq when hundreds of Iraqis were engaged with house to house fighting against US Marines.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    The Ka-Bar (Bayonet) use by the US Marines is very helpful opening cans, jungle warfare,hand to hand combat etc etc.

  • Gregg Smith

    I’m thinking as much trouble as Obama is in, we’ll get to see those Osama pictures after all.

    • 1Brett1

      What? I thought they didn’t exist?! I thought Bin Laden was living with Elvis and Hitler down in Argentina?!?!

      • Steve__T

        LOL Thanks I needed that.

  • Steve__T

    I am not religious in the sense of going to a church and such, but I have read the Bible and this just came to mind, from the book of Proverbs

    Wisdom will save you from the ways of wicked men,from men whose words are perverse,
    who have left the straight paths
    to walk in dark ways, who delight in doing wrong
    and rejoice in the perverseness of evil,whose paths are crookedand who are devious in their ways.

    So be as wise as you can when you vote.
    and know that you have more than the two choices you’ve been given.

    When the election is over whoever wins is OUR president and we the people, will need to stand behind him/her as a nation a United States of America. Bickering and partisanship will divide us, and divided we fall.

  • hennorama

    The nature of warfare, and of our military, has changed drastically over the past 35 years.

    We’ve relied on volunteers in the US military since the middle of 1973.  Consequently, we have far fewer actual combat-ready personnel.  Today, we have about 1.5 million vs. over 3 million in 1970.  This is a good thing.

    source:http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004598.html

    Ground warfare is increasingly becoming obsolete, especially large-scale ground warfare.  American military power is unchallenged on every practical level.  No one would think of challenging the US to any sort of war.  So we have adapted, relying increasingly on smaller quick-strike forces requiring far fewer personnel and other resources.

    Our capabilities are also much more lethally efficient.  Armed UAVs (“drones”) are vastly less expensive and require far fewer personnel, with much greater safety.  This “war by remote control” trend is true for all of our services, with the exception of the quick-strike teams who remain “up close and personal,” as was made clear by Seal Team Six’s dispatch of Osama bin Laden.

    Additionally, the global security threats have greatly diminished, especially in light of the demise of the USSR.  Democracy has increased, and global interconnectivity and the resultant global calm, have increased as well.  One is much less inclined to go to war with someone one does business with, or is connected with personally, via social media for example.

    Yes, Google, Twitter, Facebook et al, and their predecessors, are forces of democracy and peace worldwide.

    As an aside:  The irony of the Middle East and Northern Africa situations, and the turmoil Mr. Romney speaks of so critically, is that this dynamic situation comes largely as a result of the “spread of democracy” that the GOP, neocons and their ilk said was one of the goals of the invasion of and war in Iraq.  The “Arab spring” and other events have toppled dictators, resulting in several new democracies.  Rather than praising these outcomes, many of those who called for new democracies are in effect saying “Well … we wanted democracy, but not THIS kind of democracy.”

    Note to neocons: you can’t control everyone in the world!

    So, with the vastly reduced threats and increased democracy and freedom, we need far fewer active-duty military personnel. The likelihood of needing to fight 2 large-scale ground wars simultaneously has largely dissipated.

    Therefore, we don’t need massive increases to our defense budget, especially if the military aren’t asking for such increases.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      As one who grew up with the fear of a global thermonuclear holocaust, I have to laugh when I hear that the world is now so unsafe because of the terrorists.

      • Ray in VT

        We didn’t do any bomb drills when I was a kid during the latter days of the Cold War, but the specter of the U.S.S.R. was pretty prevelant.

        I think that there were some cultural exchange attempts during that time.  We had Russian pen pals, and we had a troupe of Russian kids visit and they performed some traditional dances and such.  The adults freaked out for a while when a couple of the kids disappeared (this was probably 1988 or 1989).

        It turns out they went up the street to the store in town and got some candy.  They came back, but they gave those in charge a bit of a scare.

      • hennorama

        At the time, that fear was quite valid, as the threat was credible.  We came within a whisker of global annihilation during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

        I have vivid memories of the preposterous “duck and cover” drills.  I also recall being lined up in the school parking lot, and being asked by the nuns whether I would renouce religion or instead become a martyr if the Russians invaded.

        Remember all the Civil Defense Fallout Shelter signs?  And the movie “The Russians Are Coming the Russians Are Coming?”

        What a difference half a century makes.

        see:https://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/civildefense/sheltersign.htm

        • Ray in VT

          The old city post office just up the street from my high school had one of those old fall out shelter signs right out front, still visible in the 1990s.  There was an article in one of the papers up here a few years ago about the old missile silos in northern Vermont and New York, and I was shocked to learn that I drove by 3 or 4 of them every time I went to my brother’s place.  You can still see some of the old buildings from the main road, although now it’s a town garage.

          One of my former co-workers told me about how he was in the service during the Missile Crisis.  He said that he and the other guys in his unit were out drinking one night, and the trucks pulled up and whisked them away to the base, where they started prepping for what might have been an invasion of Cuba.  Scary stuff.

        • Steve__T

           Yes Duck and cover I remember well, also the Air Raid sirens that went off like clockwork for testing every Friday at 10:00am

        • anon

          Schoolchildren need ‘duck and cover’ drills now to prepare them for the next school shooting (which probably will not be done by brown men from overseas).

    • Coastghost

      A distinct pity you don’t make actual use of the internet except to post such sanguine drivel. While the global security threats specific to the Cold War are all but gone, new global security threats have emerged and continue to emerge. The threats posed by Iran’s continuing nuclear program show no signs whatsoever of diminishing, whether Obama engages the Iranians in talks or not. That nuclear-armed Pakistan is beset with intense jihadi unrest and a formal al Qaeda presence (plus remnants of the Taliban and its Haqqani allies) in no way lessens the threat levels in south Asia. You crow about “increases of democracy and freedom” and laud the power of our beloved internet to foster world peace; yet Baidu is now the leading search engine in China, having knocked Google China aside exactly because of disputes concerning social and political control. Your fevered proclamations about the spread of democracy also merit at least as much skepticism as credence, since you cite little to support your view. Thus I direct your attention to the tentative nature of democracy in the world today with the metrics provided by the Economist Intelligence Unit, which has been putting out its Democracy Index report about every other year since 2006. In 2006, 13% of the world’s population (among 16.8% of the world’s nations) were deemed to reside in “full democracies”; as of Dec 2011, 11.3% of the world’s pop. (among 15% of its nations) were deemed resident in “full democracies”. (You can USE Google to look up their metrics and methodology yourself when you’re not typing your sunny assessments.) You say nothing about world population growth, food and water shortages that could emerge any given year, actual threats of pandemics that could erupt any season. Nor do you seem cognizant in the least that progressive/liberal sputtering about “multiculturalism” is viewed with suspicion or disdain around the world (China doesn’t care for Google’s openness, Russia has little use for promoting Western-style democracy, conservative Muslims don’t much agree with Western feminism, sub-Saharan Africans have abiding disdain for homosexualism): Western progressivism fails to respect cultural differences at least as much as onerous Western capitalism, as far as many non-Westerners are concerned. If you want to be sanguine, you can deem the next few decades as a period of dangerous transition, because what lies on the other side of even the coming decade is anybody’s guess. Your glib assurances that sweetness and light are breaking out all over the planet defy belief.  

      • hennorama

        Thank you for your response.  I respect your views, and your impressive vocabulary and command of language.

        I am of course well aware of the circumstances you describe, and do not view the world as though evil and oppression and threats do not exist.  Examples abound, and they are pointed out daily for all to see.

        Human nature is still the same as it has always been, and man’s capacity for imhumanity to man stares us in the face every second of every day, as we continue to see in Syria and elsewhere.

        My point is not that problems and threats do not exist, but rather that humanity and its institutions continue to change and evolve away from violence and tribalism and tyranny and toward peace and diversity and democracy.

        Threats exist and we need to defend ourselves against them.  Problems exist and we need to work to solve them.  The potential for plagues and famine exist and we need to prepare for those possibilities.

        But I do recognize a sunny day when I see one.

        In spite of all the negativity they face, humans around the world live lives that are vastly superior to the lives of those a mere generation ago, and the progress of humankind continues apace.

        No citations of evidence are needed, as this is readily apparent to all.

        • Coastghost

          What grandmotherly utopian froth.

          • hennorama

            Thank you for your well-reasoned, incisive and non-judgmental response.

      • anon

        “The threats posed by Iran’s continuing nuclear program show no signs whatsoever of diminishing, whether Obama engages the Iranians in talks or not.”
        What threats are those specifically? And to whom?

        • Coastghost

          The threats are multiple: to the Israelis, to all Sunni Arab states, and to all international shipping in the Persian Gulf and through the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman. Plus, the prospect of Iranian acquisition of deployable nuclear weaponry already threatens to launch a nuclear arms race in the region, raising stakes still higher. It’s worth keeping in mind that the Iranians see their Shi’a Republic and Revolution as the avant-garde of Islamic radicalism; al Qaeda and its affiliates, being Sunni radicals, see the Iranians as their chief competitors for the glory of striking America and other Western “infidels”. Arguments that global security threats are receding (as advanced by hennorama, et al.) are not credible in the least.

          • anon

            But in fact, Iran hasn’t attacked anyone in a loooong time. They have signed and abide by the relevant treaties are have regular inspections, and intelligence reports indicate that they are not making weapons or even planning to.

            On the other hand, we have one country in the Middle East that DOES have nuclear weapons; it has not signed the treaty, does not have any inspections, attacks its neighbors, threatens to attack others (including Iran) constantly, is an apartheid state… So how is Iran seen as the big threat? And how do Americans become convinced that it’s a threat to them?

            I am a Sunni Muslim (and as such, not a fan of Iran at all), and I live on the Persian Gulf (called the Arabian Gulf on this side), but I don’t feel under threat from Iran.

            As for the ‘Sunni radicals’, they don’t like Iran either, but it’s not because of a competition in striking America and the West.

          • Coastghost

            Past performance is no reliable guide to future outcomes. That said, uranium enrichment is yielding more refined product all the time, according to the last analysis I heard or read about (an enrichment threshold that begins to exceed what the Iranians claim they need for nuclear medicine and energy production purposes); and Iranian possession of nuclear weaponry WOULD give Iran hegemonic capability it does not possess without such arms. Israel’s undeclared possession of nuclear weapons goes back decades and in itself did nothing to provoke a regional nuclear arms race, unless you take present-day circumstance as a latter-day outcome. The Iranian regime has been hostile to the US since its inception, and by extension, to US ally Israel. Again, my sense is that, with success of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Shi’a Muslims proclaimed their radical Islamic credentials in shaking off American domination; radicalized Sunni Arabs have been playing catch-up ever since, since their conception of Muslim piety and fidelity leads them to look askance at Persian Shi’a accomplishments and also engenders no greater love for American interests in the region around the Arabian Gulf and the Persian Gulf.  

  • TomK_in_Boston

    I guess a short summary of the debate wd be “The Commander in Chief vs a smirking spoiled child”. Hard to believe Lord R is a viable candidate.

    It is disturbing that they are both so in favor of aggressive policy and especially drones, however. Obviously BHO knows questioning the mil-indu complex is political suicide, even if he would like to do it, and Lord R is probably all for it. Good source of profits.

    • William

       Obama’s performance was not “optimal” these last four years and were a “bump in the road” towards our economic recover.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        “You didn’t clean up our mess fast enough, so let us do more of what caused it.” 

    • john__riley

       Drone warfare encapsulates our failures as a democratic republic.

  • 1Brett1

    It’s pretty clear why Ann Romney is training all those horses in dressage: in a Romney presidency, we’ll have dancing horses for our military! 

    • Steve__T

       Question is will he be brave enough to get on one and lead the charge as Commander in Chief. Doubt it.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Nah, I think Mitt could totally fill the shoes of Captain Parmenter, a la Ken Berry in “F Troop”.

  • Dab200

    Romney proved in all debates that he has not the right temperament for diplomacy. He is a bully and that is not how President should govern and negotiate with our friends and enemies.

    • 1Brett1

      But that’s just it…the neocons want a chest-beating, tough talker.

  • 1Brett1

    Did anyone else notice Mitt’s Nixonesque “flop sweat” last night? Where was his trusty handkerchief when he needed it last night? 

    • hennorama

      That was nothing like Nixon’s pallid, sweaty, 5 o’clock shadowy disaster in 1960.  I discount it completely.

      But his frequent beatific “I’m just a l’il ol’ angel” smile is another matter.  At least twice that I recall last night, Mr. Romney, wearing a serious expression, was nodding in agreement with Pres. Obama’s remarks.  Then his programming kicked back in, and he snapped back to the smile I described above.

      The poor pious man keeps forgetting to properly present his “presidential profile” during public presentations .

      • hennorama

        Pious potential President’s previously practiced polished public persona poorly presented per “peaceful” public policy proposal performance.

        • hennorama

          ‘pologies please, pardners!

      • 1Brett1

        I was talking about Romney’s upper lip sweating a bit at times when he was put on the spot.

        • hennorama

          Right.  Saw it.  Didn’t give it much import.  Proves he’s human, at least.

          • Ray in VT

            Are you sure?  Certainly someone smart enough to build that accurate of an android would think to put in a couple of “pores” and a fluid sack in order to better fool the ugly bags of mostly water.

          • DrewInGeorgia

            lol

            I almost posted the exact same comment when I read that last night but couldn’t quite think of how to word it.

          • hennorama

            I actually had it as “Shows he’s not a robot” before changing it.  I get enough flack as it is without suggesting Mr. Romney might not be human.

          • Ray in VT

            I thought that someone might give me some blow back over that, but I don’t really care.  Also, I don’t think that he’s a robot.  I think that it is more likely that he is one of the lizard people from Dimension X, as chronicled here:

            http://www.amazon.com/Children-Matrix-Interdimensional-Controlled-Years-/dp/0953881016/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1351165647&sr=8-1&keywords=children+of+the+matrix

            I used to see this in the book store that I worked at, and we sold a fair number of them, and all that I could think of was “who would read this nonsense?”

  • johnhow

    Two things leapt out at me during the debate:  why were “foreign affairs” not about the activities of the State Department instead of just the military posture of the nation?  And where’d they get all those old grey men in the audience?

  • Mike_Card

    So, just as Nixon proclaimed that he “Kept us out of Northern Ireland,” Willard can insist that “No American troopers will die in Syriah.”  A foreign policy position we can all support…

  • JGC

    Uh oh…Zynga is in financial difficulty.  Romney wants Bain to extend a “helping hand”, Romneystyle, to lay off excess workers in Austin, Boston and Chicago, sell off assets and otherwise let investors “save” the company.  And Obama wants to give agricultural subsidies to Farmville.   

  • Brandon Russell

    Mitt Romney came off as uneducated and just plain ignorant about world events in general and how to handle foreign diplomacy.

    I don’t understand why Romney doesn’t get more grief from the press when he changes positions and then fails to acknowledge that he ever held a different position in the first place. It’s dishonest and un-Presidential to be unable to make credible decisions without polling them first. A Presidential candidate is expected to be able to make executive decisions, (as well as knowing where Iran is on a map after studying for a foreign policy debate maybe?)

    Romney was wrong on Iraq, wrong on setting a timetable for Afghanistan (before he changed his mind last night), wrong on Libya, and wrong about how to go after Bin Laden. 

    Furthermore, from what we have heard from intelligence on the Benghazi situation, the events were at least partially based on outrage from the video, and the “extra security” that was requested was for the embassy in Tripoli, and would not have prevented the attacks in Benghazi at all.

  • Ray in VT

    Funniest statement of the day:

    “the ocean hasn’t shrunk.” – Paul Ryan, regarding size and strength of the Navy.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I thought Mr. Obama promised to shrink the oceans.  Another broken promise.  :)

      • Ray in VT

        I thought that he only did that by implication, as he promised to grow the land.  What a flip-flopper.

    • hennorama

      Speaking of comedy about large bodies of water – here’s my current favorite image site for the Romneygaffe “Syria is Iran’s only ally in the Arab world.  It’s their route to the sea”:

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/23/1148689/-Attention-DNC-I-want-my-Romney-Iran-Syria-Map-video

      Speaking of US Navy ships circa 1916 – here are some other US Navy vessels from the Inland China Fleet (remember the Steve McQueen movie “The Sand Pebbles?) during the early part on the last century:

      http://www.cityofart.net/bship/sand_pebbles.html

      • Ray in VT

        Those are both pretty funny.  I asked my 8 year old this morning if he knew where Iran was, and he wasn’t totally sure.  He knew it was in Asia, but he didn’t know if it bordered Syria or had sea access.  He did tell me, though, that the expected life of the Sun is another 5 billion years.

        What liberal pansy gave up on the Inland China Fleet, and I don’t remember the McQueen movie.  If only we had kept those paddle-wheelers and such, then Truman might not have lost China.  I’d take one aegis cruiser over that entire flotilla.

  • artforever

    After listening to the Onpoint analysis  of last nights Presidential debate, once again I was struck by a growing trend of the Commentators on NPR having a totally off base reaction to the content and dynamics of what happened. It seems more and more there is a reluctance to discredit Mr. Romneys flip flop and unrealistic 5 point agenda that has no specifics. I always regard good journalism as being willing to speak the truth about what is real and not just repeating bogus talking points that have been discredited time and again, yet you persist in giving credence to Romneys lack of details,  unworkable solutions,  and obvious pandering to any audience to get elected. You instead criticize President Obama for his aggressive style of debating without talking about how he is offering real solutions to the difficult problems he has faced. It’s time you stopped worrying about your funding being cut ( which would possibly be  liberating) and get back to being the thoughtful analysis you pursued before this namby pamby middle of the road stuff you are doing now.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       What do you think about Obama’s 20 page closing argument glossy ‘agenda’?  Have you seen it?

      CNN.  Yes CNN took it apart tonight as a shallow dishonest sham of a proposal.  No specifics.  Doesn’t add up and nothing new.  They had Senator Boxer on trying to defend it and she looked like a dear in the headlights.  “Oh Erin, don’t talk to me about numbers, but make sure you call me Senator, I earned that title.”

  • Gregg Smith

    “In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America’s shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”-Obama apology tour 4/3/09
    Strasbourg, France

    • 1Brett1

      “‘…there have been times where America’s shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.’”

      Sounds like it accurately describes W…I doubt that the French people would see this statement as inaccurate, weak, unduly apologetic or however else you want this to conform to the perpetuation of your narrative. But, I don’t know, all those French terrorists might just start to bully us over this…

      • 1Brett1

        Yeah, Gregg, but in the very next sentence of the same speech, Obama called out the Europeans for an “anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what’s bad.”

        He then goes on to talk about forging “common solutions to our common problems.” 

        “America cannot confront the challenges of this century alone, but that Europe cannot confront them without America. So I’ve come to Europe this week to renew our partnership, one in which America listens and learns from our friends and allies, but where our friends and allies bear their share of the burden. Together, we must forge common solutions to our common problems.”

      • Coastghost

        Sounds evenly as if Obama was being self-referential again. In speaking that way to a foreign audience, he was not speaking for much more than the portion of Americans that voted for him; the outcome of the vote in 2008 gave him no more of a mandate to say such things than it gave him to shove the PPACTA through without any Republican participation. And it’s not as if Obama’s practice of unilateralism is any less pernicious than that accorded to any of his predecessors: the “Obama Doctrine” he enunciated in August 2007, his gutsy speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center (the speech that even Joe Biden took him to task over: whatever happened to Joe’s spine, I wonder?), is his guide to violate nations’ territorial integrity and national sovereignty at will.

    • Steve__T

       After Gaffe-Filled Foreign Tour, Europe Asks: ‘Is Mitt Romney a Loser?’

      Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/07/31/after-gaffe-filled-foreign-tour-europe-asks-is-mitt-romney-a-loser/#ixzz2ADrCSX1w

  • 1Brett1

    Yeah, we should probably go with someone who’ll garner the world respect and preference of a W.

    • Gregg Smith

      You forgot Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Syria and Russia.

  • Jorja753

    President Obama continues to illustrate his deep understanding of people, their needs, and their hopes.
    The Federal government is here to keep America uniform. Whether we live in the boot hill of Missouri or the mountains in Colorado we should all receive the same services, we should all enjoy the same rights. 
     Mr. Romney states turn health care over to the States, we would have so many disparities from one state to another, it would seem as though we live in different countries.
    On a lighter note, Romney’s huge lapel flag pin is symbolic of his need to tower over the peons, the 47%, me.  Plus, Mitt just talks too fast, he sounds like a hustler.
    And how long must we refer to him as Governor?  Many of your program members, disrespect the President by referring to him as, Obama, only.
    And finally, in the 3rd debate, Romney illustrated with his whinning, “don’t attack me,” that he can dish it but not take it. Chump.

  • http://twitter.com/tunnelman3 jason keedy

    We always talk of the so-called “liberal media,” but it is plain as day that Romney has made this “miraculous” comeback due to the heavy, “come-from-behind” spin that the media is feeding the weary public. Romney has said nothing new. He has not given us details that would help grow the economy. What magic loophole will take care of the $7 trillion in cuts and military spending? Do we really believe that has women’s interest’s at heart? Does he really look at foreign policy as being a game of Battleship?
    The media has completely failed in their mission to expose the lunacy and lies that have marked Romney’s campaign.

    • DrewInGeorgia

      But the media has completely succeeded in their mission to sustain a “dead heat”, boost ratings, generate additional advertising revenue, and keep the masses frothing at the mouth. Go figure.

      • Steve__T

         That’s because they are the ones backing Romney all ahead full, if they can’t spin it then just lie. Rinse repete.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Actually, Sen. Portman (R-IN) called it a “dead heat” too.

        Funny predictablility about that: All the media requires of Republicans is to win; the narrative of “resonating with voters” blahblahblah will be constructed around it later.

        So when a Republican calls a race a tie, you can bet that they’re behind.

  • hennorama

    FoxNews already has Sarah Palin and various talking heads shouting breathlessly about this, as if it was news:

    “State Department emails from day of Libya attack show al-Qaeda-tied group on radar”

    By Chad Pergram  Published October 23, 2012  FoxNews.com

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/23/state-dept-emails-from-day-libya-attack-show-al-qaeda-tied-group-on-radar/

    The problem is, there’s nothing new in this article.

    Or in this video: “Could the Americans killed in Benghazi have been saved?”

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1920570372001/could-the-americans-killed-in-benghazi-been-saved/?playlist_id=903226511001

    And S. Palin’s shrill shouting, starting about 4:25 into this clip and later patting her employer on the back “I’m proud of Fox News for bustin’ the story out anyway.”

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1920503077001/palin-on-the-final-debate-and-white-house-race-homestretch/?playlist_id=903226511001

    Nothing but accusatory 20/20 hindsight.

    • Gregg Smith
      • Ray in VT

        State knew about a claim of responsibility, which is vastly different from knowing facts.  Accounts of events on the ground differed.

        • Gregg Smith

          There were no facts to suggest it was a video. 

          • Ray in VT

            At the time there were also no facts showing that it had been a terrorist group.  Facts had yet to be established, so the State Department didn’t “know”.

            According to the CIA account, “The currently available information
            suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired
            by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct
            assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are
            indications that extremists participated in the violent
            demonstrations.”

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/benghazi-attack-becomes-political-ammunition/2012/10/19/e1ad82ae-1a2d-11e2-bd10-5ff056538b7c_story.html

          • Gregg Smith

            There was no protest. There was no gathering mob. There’s video to prove it. They watched it in real time. There was no evidence it was inspired by the movie. The CIA station chief in Libya cabled the White House that it was militants. They knew. 

            The Ignatious piece along with the LA Times story were leaked and released on the same day weeks after the fact to run cover.

          • Ray in VT

            You’re correct, there was no protest or gathering mob, and that was proved by video that was retrieved from the Consulate some 10 days after the attack.  The CIA station chief did indeed report that it was militants, and that was in contradiction to other accounts gathered on the scene, so they did not KNOW.  Knowledge requires facts and certainty, which did not exist at the time.

            Ah yes, so the media is also complicit in the vast Obama administration conspiracy.  Must be the CIA was too, as their reports to the administration and to Congress continued to suggest the protest link for some 5-7 days.

            http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/10/19/cia-libya/1643443/

            I’m sure that this was all done on marching orders from the White House for some reason.

          • hennorama

            Yes, there were.

            Early reporting from the Wash. Post
            Posted by Melissa Bell on September 12, 2012 at 12:30 pm:

            “One man who said he witnessed part of the incident, Libyan televisionjournalist Firas Abdelhakim, said that a group of several dozen attackers mounted an assault on the consulate.
            Abdelhakim said that he was about three miles from consulate when he saw a group of cars – 20 to 30 of them – driving toward the consulate  shortly before 9:30 p.m.

            When he got to the consulate, he saw a group of about 50 armed mengathering. They weren’t carrying banners, nor were they chanting
            slogans.  When asked who they were, they said: “we are Muslims defending
            the Prophet,” “we are defending the Prophet, we are defending Islam,”
            and “we are a group of Muslim youth.”

            source:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/liveblog/wp/2012/09/12/us-ambassador-libya-john-christopher-stevens-three-other-americans-killed-live-blog/

            In effect, this journalist’s eyewitness account confirms BOTH some level of planning of the attack AND that the attackers were angry over “the video.”

            A large group drove to the compound.  They were armed.  They weren’t protesting.  They said  “We are Muslims defending the Prophet” etc.  They attacked the compound.

            So, yes, there are facts that show at least SOME connection to “the video” i.e. “we are defending the Prophet.”

          • Gregg Smith

            “Defending the prophet” means killing infidels. All the evidence said it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

  • Gregg Smith

    “Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.”

    -Obama apology your
    6/4/09 Cairo

    • Coastghost

      Here, we hear Sub-Messiah Obama proclaim with unilateral fiat: “THIS SHALL BE! I HAVE ORDERED IT!” “Early next year” would have been no later than 31 March 2010. But two-and-a-half years later, he still hasn’t convinced New Yorkers that their fair city should host civil trials for the Gitmo detainees. The “political realism” on display is not much different from hennorama’s detached utopianism. Barack Obama: Floating Apex.

    • Brandon Russell

      Funny, no word of apologize or I’m sorry in there.

      I think that it’s the responsible thing to note policies of the former President that (without a doubt) hurt our standing in the world and say how this Administration will be different.
      As a veteran I was appalled by the idea of authorizing torture and especially for the purpose of extracting reasons to go to war.
      It’s important that we show our country can learn from its mistakes.

      • Gregg Smith

        There is no way on God’s green earth Obama could have killed Osama without intel from enhanced interrogation which is not torture.

        • Brandon Russell

          I beg to differ.

          Torture has never worked to gain reliable intel.
          http://www.politicususa.com/senate-concludes-bin-laden-intel-did-not-come-from-torture.html

          • Brandon Russell

            And this http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/03/osama-bin-laden-was-not-caught-because-of-torture-but-in-spite-of-it.html

            “The truth, however, is that KSM lied to his interrogators and told them that Abu Ahmed, the nom de guerre of bin Laden’s courier, had retired when in fact he was still active. That lie cost us almost a decade in the hunt for Bin Laden.”

        • Ray in VT

          Then why did we call it torture when we executed Japanese officers for having done it to Allied servicemen during World War II?  Is it only torture when someone does it to us?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Are you serious?  How can you equate what the Japanese did to enhanced interrogation? 

            We water board and sleep deprive our own service members during training.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            Every time I think I understand how far out there our righties are, I’m proved wrong.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             So you equate enhanced interrogation to what the Japanese did in WWII too?

            Just for the record.

          • Gregg Smith

            It makes no sense. It’s an emotional talking point that in reality saved lives and killed Bin Laden.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            Sure, let’s be clear, Worried. First, you have no idea what we actually do. It’s shocking how the “gvt is bad” faction is so trusting of gvt when they spin a phony WMD story, or in this case a story about how restrained we are with our torture. It’s a sure bet we’ve done much worse than anything that has been revealed.

            Second, the Japs did lots of things. I’m not saying we’re equivalent to them at their worst. However, what we did or are doing -who knows? – is as bad as some things we once called war crimes.

          • Ray in VT

            I can equate us using waterboarding to the Japanese using waterboarding because it is apples and apples.  It did not say that we were doing everything that they did.  If you would like a more contemporary example, then how about the Texas sheriff who got jail time in the 1980s for using it on suspects?  4 years in prison.

            I do not think that the analogy to our servicemen works, because they have volunteered to serve, and I’m guessing that they don’t get grabbed out of their beds in the middle of the night and subjected to it, but I don’t know.  That would certainly be “better” if one was trying to simulate a real world situation.

          • Gregg Smith

            We executed the Japanese officers because they were mass murderers. Also, the techniques they used included submersion in tanks and brutal beatings. The 3 we nasal rinsed (nothing brutal just brutally terrifying) gave up intel that saved thousands. It also led to Bin Laden. If Obama wants to thump his chest he should thank Bush.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUl3iBN4PjI

          • Ray in VT

            Not according to excerpts from a letter from Leon Panetta to John McCain, which contradicts other statements that he has made:

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/exclusive-private-letter-from-cia-chief-undercuts-claim-torture-was-key-to-killing-bin-laden/2011/03/03/AFLFF04G_blog.html

          • Gregg Smith

            I am aware of that report. It does not say they could have gotten Bin Laden without EI. I did not claim EI gave the name of the courier but it sure led to it.

      • Coastghost

        But exactly how responsible is it for a President to make promises he’s in NO position to keep? Obama seems not to have even consulted the New York Congressional delegation concerning his plans and their political viability. –so after leaving Cairo, Obama looks very much the detached President who leads no one, not America, not even some of the notable Democrats who helped propel him to office. Barack Obama: Nobel Naif.

        • jimino

          He didn’t anticipate that the big-talking congressional members, so anxious to send someone else far off to do their bidding at the risk of death, would actually be so cowardly that they wouldn’t entertain the thought of housing the Guantanamo prisoners in any of their own states. 

          He didn’t anticipate that telling Americans that they were too incompetent to handle the confinement of enemy combatants would be such a selling point to people like you. 

          Being a low-down, lily-livered, weakling used to be looked down on.  Now its something so-called conservatives brag about.

          • Coastghost

            Not at all: Obama let his idealism speak without consulting anyone on the matter, not even his political allies from every appearance. Your beef is first with the residents of New York City and the New York state Congressional delegation, along with other key elements of the Democratic Party, who utterly failed to accommodate Obama’s rash political grandiosity. 

          • Steve__T

             How about the American people who elected him? Rash political grandiosity? So if he had gotten it done you would have cried Foul I did not want it closed. If so why are you blabbering you got what you wanted.

    • Steve__T

      Mr. Romney sought to close his tour in Poland — and preen
      Reagan-era feathers — by meeting Solidarity leaders who helped topple
      communist rule. But Romney wound up being rebuked by the union’s current leadership. Far from the warm endorsement he got from iconic Solidarity co-founder Lech Walesa, Solidarity itself issued a statement criticizing Romney
      and the GOP for their offensive against collective-bargaining
      agreements in several states that it called “attacks on trade unions and
      employees’ rights.” So much for being buddies with the world’s most
      avidly anticommunist, pro-market, pro-American labor unionRead more: http://world.time.com/2012/07/31/after-gaffe-filled-foreign-tour-europe-asks-is-mitt-romney-a-loser/#ixzz2ADsoHNxa

    • OnPointComments
  • TinaWrites

    Too many of today’s panel seemed to be listening to Etch-A-Sketch Romney as if he could be taken at face value once everyone  considered him a “pragmatist”.  Not true!!!!  As my mom, used to say, he’s a “snare and a delusion”!!!!!

     

     

    • TomK_in_Boston

      Any discussion of plastic man should be time stamped, eg “Lord R’s position (10/23/12 8:15:30AM) was that he wanted more wealth for himself.”

      • TinaWrites

        Hilarious, while Oh So Tragic for the rest of us!

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Obama fans who complain about the lack of ‘details’ in Romney’s plan need to see this.

    Obama released a ‘new’ plan for his second term.  According to CNN, yes CNN, the plan has NOTHING new AND doesn’t add up.  This report is devastating.

     http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/24/cnn_not_only_is_obamas_plan_old_but_it_doesnt_add_up.html

    This clip cut out the part where the Obama surrogate, Sen. Barbara Boxer, tried to defend the plan.  Whenever the reporter asked her about the math she looked like a deer in the headlights.  “Erin don’t talk to me about numbers but please make sure you call me Senator, I earned that title.”

    • Steve__T

      Re-post rinse repeat re-post rinse repeat. Learn that from FOUX News?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         This isn’t a repost.  I just found the video.

        I guess you don’t like the content because it is an inconvenient truth.

        It always seems hard for liberals to deal with facts.

        Mmmmm Mmmmmm Mmmmm

        • Steve__T

           Not a lib not a Dem Not a Rep not left not right. I am American I vote for the best person for the job I give a %&*(! what party, If you are Honest Truthful Caring you may get my vote I don’t care what party line. If you really show care for all the people you represent you get my vote. If you are about money and prestige don’t follow thru reasonably I don’t have time for you. I do research on everybody on the ballot from local Judges to Senators and vote for what I believe is in the best interest for my city, county, state, and America. I have defended this Country and will until my last breath. I have served under Presidents I did not totally agree with
          but would give my life to save theirs without question or hesitation. That is who I am, That is what I believe. Because I am American first above all else.

          • rogger2

            Amen!
            Nothing is more unpatriotic then blindly voting on party lines. 

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             I’m an independent and am critical of both parties.  I voted for Perot in ’92.

            However, this year holds a promise of real reform with Romney.  Yes, he isn’t perfect but he will be able to do about 80% of what Johnson would want to do.  There is a real reform wave in the GOP now.

          • Steve__T

             Are you sure your not an IndependRepublicant I have not seen any thing from you but Romney this Romney that hes gonna do this hes gonna do that
            I have yet to hear any thing from him but BS you’ve been more informative of what hes doing than he has. And as far as I know your not running, unless its for brown noeser of the year.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Hey, that sounds good.  Glad to hear it.

      • rogger2

        Don’t even bother. 

        I’ve already pointed out that if this clown was truly “WorriedfortheCounty” then he/she should support one of the thrid party candidates.  

        Bush=Obama=Romney
        I don’t see any real difference between any of them.   

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          So are you voting for Jill Stein?

          Also, there is huge difference between Romney, Bush and Obama.

          Just because Obama keeps saying Romney wants to implement Bush policies doesn’t make it true. Everyone who has followed Romney (not Obama commercials) understands this.

          • rogger2

            I’m sorry, I’m just don’t see the “huge” difference b/t Bush, Obama and Romney. 
             
            I’m voting Gary Johnson b/c I’m fed up with the current system. 

            If more people had the courage to vote against the current system then maybe we would see some real change.

            Instead we’ll continue with more of the same… the left blindly following the folks at MSNBC and right blindly following the folks at Fox News and status quo continues.  

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Hey, I respect your decision.

            However, I believe that Romney will be able to reform the government and that is why I am voting for him.

            Remember, he took over a corrupt and bankrupt Olympics and was able to turnaround that situation.

            What is interesting is Gary Johnson and Romney agree on most issues.  Just because Gary Johnson says he will balance the budget in year one doesn’t mean it would happen.  You don’t elect a king.

            Romney has the strongest resume of any Presidential candidate to run in my lifetime and the unique skills to turn this thing around.

            Cut, cap and balance (Romney’s plan)  is a reasonable and achievable path to a balanced budget.

            The problem with Romney is he isn’t a natural politician.  He is a doer and problem solver.  I believe he truly cares about his legacy and will work hard to get the budget balanced and get the economy growing again.

          • Steve__T

             No I don’t remember tell us again for the 40th time we want to hear it again and again and again

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             And I will be disappointed IF Romney doesn’t deliver.

            What amazes me is that some Obama supporters aren’t disappointed at Obama’s incompetence.  His lack of getting a budget passed.  His ignoring Simpson-Bowles.  His total lack of leadership.

          • rogger2

            I’m with you but near the end of Bush’s 2nd term the right sounded a lot like the left does now.  

            Both parties are the problem. 

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Yes, but there was a huge reform wave in 2010 and much of the get along and go along GOP was cleaned out.  The wave continues in 2012.  I believe there are now enough reformers if we have a leader in the WH it can effect change.

            Notice that there is no reform wave on the Dem side.

          • TinaWrites

            The President was up against the Norquist pledge about taxes.  WHEN DID ANY OF US ELECT GROVER NORQUIST????!!!!

    • OnPointComments

      Senator Boxer is always vying for first place in the “Most Despicable Person In The Senate” contest, against stiff competition.
       
      I watched a clip that was highlighted next to the one you referenced, 

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/24/sen_boxer_i_was_so_touched_and_moved__almost_teary-eyed_by_obamas_debate_performance_.html 
       
      with SENATOR ‘I worked so hard to get that title’ Boxer on the Joy Behar show (an appropriate pairing for Halloween if ever there was one), and I’ve decided that Boxer has won the contest.

  • rogger2

    Hey Tom,
    Seeing as Romney and Obama agreed on nearly every issue on Monday night how about you discuss the third party debate from last night? 

    This is where I see real chocie and the potential for real change. 

    It would be nice to let citizens know that if you are fed up with the current system and if neither of Romney or Obama are resonating with you then you do have another choice for president.   

  • Steve__T

    Romney’s   five point plan

    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      Ha ha, but I think it’s

      1. Redistribute more wealth and income to the top.
      2. Redistribute more wealth and income to the top.
      3. Redistribute more wealth and income to the top.
      4. Redistribute more wealth and income to the top.
      5. Redistribute more wealth and income to the top.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Good to see the nasty Ken doll Scott Brown down 5 in the latest poll. His nice guy camo sure has been stripped away. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       LOL.  So Scott is 10 points AHEAD of where he was in 2010 since he was down 15 points with 10 days to go.

      The facade of Elizabeth Warren has been stripped away when her record of defending the insurance industry and coal industry AGAINST the little guy was exposed.

      Too bad her Grandfather actually shot an Indian instead of her being an Indian.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        You are a complete catalog of talking points, but Senator Elizabeth Warren will work for you anyway.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Don’t let the facts get in the way of  a good myth.  LOL.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            If I do say so myself, I think “Nasty Ken Doll” is a perfect description of soon-to-be-ex Senator Brown. 

          • Steve__T

             That seems to be your Idealism. But I’m sure you believe in the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you Romney.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       So we now know you are envious of Senator Brown’s looks.  Problems with women Tom?

      Warren might win.  I doubt it.

      Does it bother you that Warren sold her BMW a month before she filed her papers to run and bought a Ford?

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Hahaha, I knew you were overdue for “envy”.

        I ignore the nonsense. What I care about is that Warren is crystal clear that our #1 issue is fighting back against the class warfare of Lord R et al.

        If you’re a “Ken” fan, Worried, you should be Worried. This lady ain’t no martha coakley:

        http://elizabethwarren.com/momentumvideo?source=20121024em

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          The intellectual ‘founder’ of Occupy Wall Street can stay in her Cambridge manse and the faculty lounge.

          • jefe68

            This comment does a lot to frame you’re inanity, on everything.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             What’s your problem? She DID claim that she was the intellectual founder of the OWS movement.

            She DID build that.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            Wow, that’s almost as relevant and interesting in the real world as the native American talking point.

            And, Wall st could use an occupation, or maybe an exorcism. Future Senator Warren is a strong proponent of RE-regulating the financial fraudsters, con men, and other romney types who have trashed the USA. That’s the main reason I’ve given her an amount of $ that would make you very envious. If that inspired OWS, all I can say is THANK YOU Future Senator Warren and say goodbye, “Ken”.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    So we now know from the newly leaked emails that the Admin knew that an Al Qaeda group claimed credit for the attack within hours.

    Why did the admin hide this information from the American people?

    • Coastghost

      A. Because Obama is running for re-election and he’d just spent sixteen months assuring Americans “al Qaeda’s on the run”
      B. Because Obama is running for re-election and he’d just spent sixteen months assuring Americans “al Qaeda’s on the run”
      C. Because Obama is running for re-election and he’d just spent sixteen months assuring Americans “al Qaeda’s on the run”
      D. Because Obama is running for re-election and he’d just spent sixteen months assuring Americans “al Qaeda’s on the run”
      E. Because Obama is running for re-election and he’d just spent sixteen months assuring Americans “al Qaeda’s on the run”

      One of those looks likely, I can’t decide which, though.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         He also spent the prior week at the Dem convention spiking the football on Bin Laden.

        If Bush did that and the following week the Al Qaeda flag was raised at  US embassy the MSM would be replaying that scene on an endless loop.

        They were chanting:  “Obama, we are all Osama”

        • Ray in VT

          Yeah, I forgot that no one saw the “silly” video that was on the Internet and the Egyptian TV ran two days prior to the attack, but they all tuning to the DNC, or as it is called in the Muslim world, Must See TV.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             My critique is with the media.  I remember seeing countless prime time loops of Bush with the silly ‘mission accomplished’ banner on the aircraft carrier.

          • Ray in VT

            Point taken, and my counter wasn’t necessarily a direct response to your comment.  I almost did include a photo of the mission accomplished moment.

          • http://twitter.com/tunnelman3 jason keedy

            The media hasn’t given Obama anywhere near the breaks it has given Romney.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             This is the most humorous comment I’ve read in quite some time.

          • TinaWrites

            I absolutely agree!

    • Steve__T

       Link please. Sorry if I don’t take your word for it. But you twist better than Chubby Checker.

    • Ray in VT

      It doesn’t seem that their claim of responsibility was that secret, as they put it out on Facebook and Twitter.  That fact seems to have been reported in the press on September 13.

    • anon

      It’s very possible that no one actually knew what had actually happened – and maybe they still don’t. People were protesting at the Egyptian Embassy because of the video, and it’s not a stretch to assume that Libyans might have protested at the US consulate in Benghazi, too. Even if someone claimed responsibility, it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t triggered by the protests.

    • hennorama

      Yes, the admin was hiding the info, apparently in plain sight:

      Amb. Susan Rice’s comments on Sept. 16, 2012 on Face The Nation on CBS:

      SUSAN RICE: But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy–
      BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm
      SUSAN RICE: –sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that– in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.
      BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?
      SUSAN RICE: We do not– we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.
      BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?
      SUSAN RICE: Well, we’ll have to find out that out. I mean I think it’s clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we’ll have to determine.

      See how she was hiding the possible al Qaeda connection?  It’s sooooooooo obvious.

      The “him” Mr. Schieffer was referring to is the president of Libya’s National Congress, Mohamed Magariaf.  Earlier in the segment, Mr. Magariaf had discussed the arrest of about 50 people, some of whom were foreigners, some of whom are connected to al Qaeda and “…affiliates and maybe sympathizers.”  They then had this exchange:

      BOB SCHIEFFER: And you believe that this was the work of al Qaeda and you believe that it was led by foreigners. Is that– is that what you are telling us?
      MOHAMED YOUSEF EL-MAGARIAF: It was planned– definitely, it was planned by foreigners, by people who– who entered the country a few months ago, and they were planning this criminal act since their– since their arrival.

      source:http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57513819/face-the-nation-transcripts-september-16-2012-libyan-pres-magariaf-amb-rice-and-sen-mccain/

  • hennorama

    Anyone interested in Pres. Obama’s “glossy new brochure” can access then view it here:

    http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/480869/jobs-plan-booklet.pdf

    It’s also contained in full viewable form on this website:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82773.html

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       And here CNN exposes this brochure as a fraud.

      Nothing new and the math doesn’t add up.

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/24/cnn_not_only_is_obamas_plan_old_but_it_doesnt_add_up.html

      • Ray in VT

        I know, he’s promised to cover everything by closing undisclosed loopholes and deductions.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Yes, that points to the hypocrisy in the criticism of Romney.  However, the biggest fraud is the $4T of cuts are fictitious  — double counting, fuzzy math etc.

          This is emblematic of the entire administration.  They’ve offered no serious government reform, no plan to balance the budget, no entitlement reform proposal, etc.  It is like they gave up after the 2010 election.  Everything they have proposed has been about electioneering.

          Even if I wasn’t a big Romney supporter I would still say Obama deserves to be fired.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          Hahaha….and all the non-brainwashed know that he will find it easy to cut his taxes, right away, but somehow, try as he might, he just won’t be able to find those undisclosed loopholes and deductions. Sorry about that.

          Meanwhile, the loonies continue to say BHO has no plan to deal with health care costs, while simultaneously demonizing the ACA.

          • Coastghost

            Or: ACTA, the Affordable Care Tax Act.

      • hennorama

        While my intention in posting the links to the campaign brochure was simply to make it easily available to those on the board, I find myself unable to leave it at that.

        “Nothing new and the math doesn’t add up….points to the hypocrisy in the criticism of Romney…. the $4T of cuts are fictitious  — double counting, fuzzy math etc.

        If you say so.

        The (presumably unintended) irony of your remarks and your attack on the number $4 trillion is that there is an actual number for you to attack, in marked contrast to the bulk of Mr. Romney’s plans.

        BTW the “$4T of cuts” you refer to from the brochure (“Cutting The Deficit By More Than $4 Trillion”) includes both spending cuts and revenue increases.

        I do understand the “double counting, fuzzy math” argument and see how one could make those claims.  But the numbers do “add up,” based on the baselines and calculations used.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Take it up with CNN.

          Apparently they unwilling to put up with the fuzzy math — something many of us have known for some time.

          Also, they got away with fuzzy accounting to ‘score’ Obamacare as deficit neutral. 10 years of revenues to pay for 6 years of benefits. That has now been exposed. Also, the costs keep going up, up, up so it will implode even sooner.

          • hennorama

            As I said, I understand the arguments.  There are arguments on both sides.  For example – Mr. Romney says he will appeal Obamacare yet does not account for the loss of revenue from doing so.

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-12/the-final-word-on-mitt-romney-s-tax-plan.html
            Regardless, there are actual numbers available from Pres. Obama’s proposals for you to attack, again, in marked contrast to the bulk of Mr. Romney’s plans.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Repealing Obamacare saves money and will create jobs immediately — a huge net winner.

            Sure you’ll lose about 10,000 IRS jobs but that is also a net winner.

          • hennorama

            My response is “up top” due to its length.

    • Mike_Card

      Thanks.  If you happen to have one, it would be informative to hear more about the Mourdock defense of rape, and how it compares to the Atkin defense.

      Most of the top GOP teabaggers are running away from their running mates, except for the psychopath Ryan, who thinks there’s nothing about rape that can’t be theologically or at least philosposhically justified.

      Maybe I’m obsessed by this, or maybe I’m not:  I happen to have two daughters.  Romney, naturally, has sons.

      • Sickened_by_Politicos

        Am pretty sure that you couldn’t have a true grasp of the entire philosophical view of Murdock and Ryan, both of whom, I am sure, are good people.

        Everyone loves their children and wants no harm to come to anyone’s child.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Oh no.  Obama lover, David Letterman, expresses his disappointment that Obama lied in the debate on the auto bailout.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/24/letterman_obama_not_telling_the_truth_about_romney_and_auto_bailout.html

    • JGC

      Letterman ends the clip with: “And part of it is I just don’t know what I am talking about.”  Et tu, WftC?

  • hennorama

    It seems to me that the issues of the evolving administration accounts on Benghazi are well-described here, by Hannah Allam and Jonathan S. Landay of McClatchy here:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/10/18/171933/obama-administration-officials.html

    And the controversy is well-explained by Kevin Drum of Mother Jones, here:

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/10/cutting-through-fog-benghazi-brief-qa
    Last Saturday Oct. 20, 2012, Former Bush White House spokesperson Dana Perino, on Mike Huckabee’s Fox News show said she doesn’t think the administration deliberately made it their strategy to mislead or lie to the public:
    HUCKABEE: You understand better than anyone that I think we can
    bring on this show the inner workings of how a White House crafts its message, how it comes to the place where it says what it says.  That was your job in the Bush administration. Do you think the Obama admin crafted a strategy of deliberately misleading the American public as to what happened in Benghazi?

    PERINO: I actually don’t.  I think they stumbled upon this problem.  I
    do not think anyone intentionally went out and lied to the American
    people.  Um — I do think that we have — that maybe then they got
    caught up in it…. I don’t think they intentionally lied but certainly
    somebody was not talking to somebody else …
    She starts off reasonably, then falls into the “they used the excuse of the video” narrative.  I do give her credit for SOME reasonable remarks, however.  She at least had a modestly open mind on the topic.
    When I listened to this show on Saturday, I was quite surprised by Ms. Perino’s initial remarks.  I then tried to find the video, but it was VERY difficult to locate.  I couldn’t even find it on Fox’s Huckabee show website.  Try it yourself.
    source (scroll down to a bit — the video’s labelled “Huckabee Brings in Bushie Perino to Attack Obama on Libya):

    http://gocl.me/VqlmqR

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      You are shocked that Dana Perino gives the administration the benefit of doubt. 

      Just because she gives them the benefit of doubt doesn’t mean she is correct.  Time will tell because these initial emails went to 300 people — all over the government. 

      I don’t trust ANYTHING from the MSM these days. Someone went onto the NYTimes and searched for Benghazi and the first 20 hits were stories about Romney.

      • hennorama

        I said surprised, not shocked.  It takes a great deal to shock me.  The Taliban in Pakistan shooting 14-year old Malala Yousafzia in the head, for example.

        Given Ms. Perino’s numerous prior remarks on the topic, I expected the “they lied, they blamed the video” narrative right off the bat, especially given Huckabee’s very leading “fastball down the middle” setup question.  She reverted to that narrative later.

        Huckabee seemed surprised by her initial “off-message” comments.  He then folllowed up with “if they did not INTENTIONALLY mislead from the beginning – accept that then at its face value – there has to be some point at which they knew that this was not a video …”

        Of course his “question” contained a conclusion,
        which is a typical technique used on Fox News and other shows of this type, including some on MSNBC.  Fox couples this with their captioning “9/16: SUSAN RICE BLAMES VIDEO ON 5 SUNDAY NEWS SHOWS” then “CARNEY MENTIONED VIDEO ON AT LEAST 6 OCCASIONS” running under the video, thereby reinforcing the narrative.

        Most will be familiar with the term “leading the witness.”  This is yet another in the endless line of examples.

        “Fair and Balanced?”  You decide.

        In retrospect, it’s no surprise to me that the clip is virtually buried, given her off-message initial remarks.  In searching for the clip, I went so far as to go to her Facebook page.  I assure you, several of her “fans” were less than pleased.  Huckabee’s radio show site also has at least one comment of the “Why didn’t you challenge Dana Perino?” variety.

        The reason I mentioned Ms. Perino’s remarks at all is that she has the perspective of someone who was on the inside, and witnessed the way an administration’s communications to the public are put together.  She has the credibility of an insider.  That’s why her initial reaction is so important.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Well, we can agree that the Huckster is a partisan and a cheerleader.

          So Huckabee might be like a Rachel Maddow? I’ve only seen clips of Maddow so I’m not sure if that is a good comparison.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Regarding torture, unfortunately, both parties have basically decided the USA is above the law because….we’re the USA!

    Note that we’re responsible for not only what we do but for what the jailers we “outsourced” to do. Does anyone not understand why we turned prisoners over to the Egyptians, for example? Our buddy Hosni is gone now, but there are always some good dictators who know what a wink means when we say “now, no torturin’ this scumbag, see you in a few months”.  Too bad Reagan’s buddy Saddam isn’t available, he’d be perfect.

    Anyone wanna claim we don’t torture when the outsourcing is included?

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Lord R, the Earl of Etchasketch, talked very very tough on China during the debate. 

    Meanwhile, back in the USA: Lord R’s creation is not only shipping the Sensata jobs to China and made the Americans train their Chinese replacements, but they dam well don’t want any complaining about it! No protesting losing your jobs, stupid peasants!

    “Bain-owned Sensata Charged with Labor Violations for Threatening, Retaliating Against Employees

    NLRB Charges Filed as Company Threatens to Shut Down Plant Early if Protests Continue

    Unfair labor practice charges against Sensata Technologies were filed with the National Labor Relations Board this morning after the Bain-owned company threatened to shut their Freeport plant down immediately if its employees continued to organize to stop the outsourcing of their jobs to China.

    The Sensata workers were shocked to hear yesterday that Sensata management asked the Freeport Police to relay a message to employees that they would close the factory earlier than planned if employees continued to protest at the plant. The plant is scheduled to be shut down in December, with the jobs and equipment shipped to a new plant in China.

    “Not only are they shipping our jobs to China, they are also trying to take away our rights as American workers,” said Joanne Penniston. “We are not going to be intimidated. We are going to stand up for our rights and our jobs.””

    It makes on sense to vote for this card-carrying financial con man!

  • http://hammernews.com/ hammermann

    Romney as usual changed spots again, now the earnest reasonable peace-nik who could be trusted with the Button and the fates of our military. He did shockingly well, and Obama was too grim in attacking Romney’s breathtaking dishonesty, the most untethered shape-shifting BS artist I’ve ever seen. He actually sounded like he understood the world and problems, but it was all cramming, studying, rehearsed stuff- he doesn’t know diddly, except the countries that have his secret accounts. His top FP advisor is neocon Iraq War propaganda spokesman Dan Senior! $100 million in IRA accounts- secret accounts in 3 tax shelters???? These are crimes + if one good reporter got the brief to rip him up, he could be JAILED. Hopefully NYT has a Bush drunk driving story (some financial crime) waiting to hammer the Nitmitt and save us from becoming Nigeria.

       That half of America is close to electing this miserable cartoon plutocrat shows how lost we are… and pitifully stupid. Anyone who votes for Romney who doesn’t make $300K (and doesn’t care if he destroys the economy and our remaining rights)… is a fool. How can it be tied- the Repubs have alienated women, Hispanics, students, blacks, some evangelicals?!@#$^%&^

    See my articles on race (inc long Yahoo profile of the succession of Primary dwarfs w Howard Dean interview): http://hammernews.com
     

    • TomK_in_Boston

      “Don’t worry massa Romney, we’ll sacrifice to keep your taxes low.”

      The romney vote is the sheep vote.

  • donniethebrasco

    Stop embarrassing the president and his administration with all of these questions about Benghazi.  In order to find out what happened, reelect him so that he can investigate and find out who did this.

    If it is his fault, he will resign, like a good president.  There is no way that this will get buried to protect the guilty.

    • Gregg Smith

      Wow.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Or we can just fire Obama on Nov. 6th for doing a crappy job and save him the embarrassment of a resignation.  Much cleaner.

      Also, if Obama resigned we’d be stuck with the Joker, Biden.  Frightening!

  • hennorama

    To “Worried” -

    No employer “creates jobs” without a clear reason for doing so – increased demand for products/services, need admin. help, training new employees in anticipation of losing experienced ones, etc., etc.
    I’m repeating myself here, but employers are not in business for altruistic reasons – they are in it for profits.  Given the massive costs of human resources – wages, benefits, administration, taxes, insurance, etc., no employer takes on new people without a high expectation of resultant profits from the new worker’s efforts.

    Similarly, it’s quite rare for any employer to think “Yippee!  My taxes are lower – let me hire someone!”  Or “Yahoo!  That pesky regulation has been repealed – let me hire someone!  Jeeves – call the HR office!”

    It’s nonsense.

    What would really happen?  The employer would simply pocket the savings from the lowered taxes and/or lower regulatory costs.

    Here is the supply-side equation: Lower tax rates = higher economic growth = higher GDP = bigger tax base = higher tax revenues at the lower tax rates.

    So the contention is that lower income tax rates leaves more money in people’s hands, and that they will spend it.  This is also known as fiscal stimulus.  This increased spending will eventually lead to greater demand for goods and services, and businesses will eventually respond.  Some will hire new employees, but many won’t.

    This is exactly what part of the evil “Obama stimulus” did, resulting in the Great Recession coming to an end.  Some businesses hired, some stopped firing people, but many did not hire.

    One problem with fiscal stimulus is that people don’t necessarily spend the money.  That was one problem with the 2008 Bush stimulus that handed out tax “rebate” checks.  Remember those?  Many people were so concerned about the future, they simply held onto the money, put it in the bank,  or paid down debts. 

    That’s the main reason the 2009 stimulus under Pres. Obama didn’t sent out rebate checks, except to Social Security beneficiaries.  Workers instead got boosts to their tax-home pay though decreased Fed. income tax withholding.  These smaller less noticeable amounts were far more likely to be spent, and spent they were.  The same thing happened with the temporary payroll tax reductions in 2011 and extended through 2012.  These small amounts are spent by those living paycheck-to-paycheck, without a second thought, maintaining and increasing demand.

    The supply-side argument is far less immediate, especially for jobs.  Businesses may see some initial spike in demand, but they’re not going to hire until and unless this demand is sustained.  Same thing with regulations.  Businesses aren’t going to immediate run around hiring people.  They’ll just allow the lower regulatory costs to drop to the bottom line.

    The more immediate impact will be from lower tax revenues.  These come before the economic growth, remember?  See the equation above.  Mr. Romney contends that his plan won’t increase the deficit.  Is that believable?  He says his plans will increase GDP at a far higher rate.  Is that believable?  He says he will expand the (tax) base by lowering deductions, exemptions, credits, etc. so much that we’ll get the same revenue even after lowering rates 20% across the board.  Is that believable?

    Mr. Romney say “Don’t worry.  It’ll work because I said so.  Trust me.  Don’t worry your little heads over the details.  I’ll give those to you after I’m elected.”

    Is ANY of that believable?  From a man who has changed his positions so many times and on so many topics that most people have stopped even keeping track?

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Some much here and so little time.  I give you ‘A’ for effort.

      1) the Bush-Obama recession ended in June 2009; before the Obama stimulus had time to be implemented.  Of course, the announcement of the stimulus did have a positive effect but TARP and other EOB (end of Bush) actions stemmed the bleeding.

      2) We can debate about the effectiveness of the Obama stimulus -and the stimulative effect of Obama deficit spending.  There have been numerous studies showing that it was not effective and there have been studies showing that it was effective.

      3) Lowering the rates are important for a few reasons.  The top marginal rate needs to match the top marginal corporate tax rate because so many small businesses are taxed under the individual tax system.  The marginal rates must be competitive with the international taxes because we are now competing in a global market.

      4) I agree with you that spending and tax cuts are both forms of fiscal stimulus.  I content that the market is  much more efficient than the government picking winners and losers.  Of course there are exceptions.  We are still reaping the benefits of TVA and the Hoover Dam today.

      5) Lack of certainty is chilling the market today.  You could argue that if Obama’s plan was passed then we’d have certainty.  Yes.  Again, this highlights his lack of leadership in getting something passed (aka Simpson-Bowles)

      6) Corporate tax reform — this probably has a bigger impact than  income tax reform.

      7) Regulatory reform — I’ve pointed out the study that shows Obama added regulations have stifled $1.8T of GDP per year.  There are probably many more regulations that pre-existed the Obama admin.  SarBox is huge.  The tax code is 74,000 pages.  The effects of over-regulation are magnified in a weak economy.  This is why I believe there is huge opportunities right now.  Obamacare is a huge and growing regulatory burden.  It is the worst possible way to implement national health care.

      How fast will hiring pick up under Romney?  Great question.  It probably depends on the size of his mandate and the swiftness of implementation of his reforms.

      On a side note, I believe the payroll tax relief had a minor impact on our economy.  There were studies that showed it didn’t really work under Bush and I suspect it isn’t doing much now.  Jobs is a much bigger issue.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      “One problem with fiscal stimulus is that people don’t necessarily spend the money.”  That’s particularly true of people who already have more money than they know what to do with, ie our super rich. That’s why tax cuts for the oligarchs, who are already paying ultra-low rates, do NOTHING for the economy. Tax cuts at the top do one thing – redistribute more wealth and income to the top.

      Anyone who is interested in the economics, vs the ideology, of BHO’s stimulus, agrees that it saved a lot of jobs and stopped the slide into Great Depression II. It was crucial. The problem is that it was too small and was too much “fiscal stimulus” and not enough gvt projects. We really needed 1930s-style public works projects, not just extra take-home pay.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         That is one view — a la Paul Krugman.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Another excellent point from tomorrows WSJ — analysis some tidbits from the newly released meeting between Mr. Obama and the Des Moines Register editorial board:

      “If recessions following financial crises really are worse than normal, as the President also told the Iowa editors, then why didn’t he take special care to postpone legislation that would add new costs to business, undermine confidence and thus weaken the recovery?”

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578076841543944634.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop#articleTabs%3Darticle

    • Gregg Smith

      The employer says, “Yippee, I can expand, hire and make a boatload of money if the tax man doesn’t want it all”.

  • Coastghost

    From the “Glad-to-See-Someone’s-Paying-Attention Department”: Veronique de Rugy has been looking at
    the UK’s handling of taxation and spending and the effects on UK GDP growth.
    From her summary: “the evidence indicates that the U.K. has, at best, slowed
    down the growth of spending but it has not engaged in actual spending cuts . .
    . Spending cuts in the U.K. can’t be blamed for the weak growth path the
    country is on. On the other hand, tax increases can . . . The bottom line is
    that the U.K. is another case of private-sector austerity (i.e., tax hikes)
    without public-sector austerity (i.e., spending cuts).” Most US reporting on
    the European experience with “austerity” continues to ignore the basic argument
    that substantive spending cuts are NOT occurring, just as they ignore that tax increases
    are NOT promoting growth.

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/10/the-nature-of-uk-austerity.html

  • Aura Milena Osorio

    I’ve heard many times how Mitt is better for the economy and even if that were true I’m still not voting for him. I’ve read this article about the different ways he has done to avoid paying taxes or at a lower rate and how before 2010 some of those were not even reported. I also read about his “changed of mind about abortion” I’ve read how he changes his opinion about believes and things he supports. Now I also saw him changing his personality only because it was convenient to look more peaceful to gain more woman voters. Come on, how can you trust some one in power, someone who changes like a chameleon? I rather stay with Obama who’s been making changes slowly but surely

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      “I’ve read” “I’ve read” “I’ve read” Aura be very careful about what you ‘read’. There is a lot of propaganda out there during election season.

       Surely you are aware that Mr. Obama has recently changed positions far more often than Mr. Romney — most recently on gay marriage.  Every candidate has the right (and duty in some cases) to change positions as long as they are transparent.

      Regarding Mr. Romney’s  taxes do you have a link to the ‘article’.  There is zero evidence that Mr. Romney underpaid his taxes.  The IRS audit rate for his profile is very high.  Do you know ANYONE who pays more taxes than they owe?  I only know of one person.  That person is Mitt Romney.  He didn’t deduct all of his eligible charitable contributions for 2011 so he paid more taxes than he actually owed.

      • Aura Milena Osorio

        I wonder who could you be. You might as well work for Romney since you defend him so fiercely. The Rolling Stones magazine is from where I read the article about his tactics in taxes. Probably this system is not illegal but still it stops him from being trustworthy 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           I’m just a citizen voter.  No more no less.  Yes I am passionate because I truly worry for the country — mostly about the economy, job growth and our debt.  I feel like we are very near a tipping point.

          I have read several pieces in Rolling Stone about Mr. Romney including a recent piece by Matt Tiabbi.  I wouldn’t call Mr. Tiabbi a fair arbiter of the facts.  He is a bomb thrower.  His articles on Goldman Sachs were less political and I found them entertaining.

          However, I take issue with your premise.  How does Mr. Romney following the tax laws make him ‘untrustworthy’?  It sounds like you have an issue with the tax laws and not Mr. Romney.

          We can probably agree that the tax code needs massive reform.  The tax code is 74,000 pages and should be shredded.  What is interesting is Mr. Romney’s reform will probably remove many special exemptions and deductions for the wealthy.  However, Mr. Obama is only talking about tinkering with the rates so the super wealthy will continue with their current tax shelters.  We should all demand complete tax reform.

          Anyhow, thank you for the civil conversation.  Whatever happens with the election I truly hope our problems get solved ASAP.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           One other quick comment.  Politicians work for us — we the people; not the other way around.

        • JGC

          Rolling Stone is a good source. Is Matt Taibbi the author?  

  • Outside_of_the_Box

    We are finally waking up to the fact that the 2 party system is a sham, structured to serve the special interests, while maintaining the illusion of a functioning democracy with real choices of leadership which answers to the people. The presidents are largely puppets meant to distract the people from this reality. Do you think trillion dollar business would be left to the whims of the ignorant masses? Long before the elections, the powers that be have vetted potential candidates, received assurances that they are on board, and so when the time comes for a new administration, they are generally happy to work with a president from either party. Bank bailouts, useless wars, pork barrel spending, foreign aid, the MIC, mega corps, top lobby groups, and on and on. Do you think they would allow a freely democratic system, where in one deadly blow, all that they have put in place could be overturned by some ambitious anti-special interest president? Absolutely not. The only way the system will change, is if there is a revolution. And not a weak disorganised revolution that they can hijack and redirect to suit their needs. A revolution that will hit powerfully, unrelentingly, single-mindedly, at the very foundations of this corrupt system. But what are the chances of that? I honestly weep for this country.

    • TinaWrites

      The excerpt from Chrystia Freeland’s newest book (Plutocrats:  The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else) that was in the NY Times about two Sundays ago, explained the “End” of our democracy and our version of Capitalism in a different way.  She used evidence going back to late Medieval and early Renaissance Venice to back up her POVs.  Basically she says that the Hyper-Wealthy become SO rich, that instead of the democracy they live within being an All-Voters-Can-Invest-If-They-Choose-To set-up, that, the Wealthy Pull Up the Ladder, creating a Closed Investment and Economic System, with Membership in the Nobility being the operative concept to get to invest.  This Greed, on their part, is what Pulls Down the Economic AND Democratic Systems that the they and their fellow voters have become so accustomed to. I don’t remember if the excerpt mentions revolutions, but the Chaos that ensues is enough to Bring Down the government and the society.  I think Tom interviewed her a short while before the NY Times excerpted her piece, but I didn’t hear that show.  Basically, the Greedy bring Themselves down; unfortunately with us in tow.  

      • Outside_of_the_Box

        I think that is partly true, except for the assumption that we ever had an actual functioning democratic system and economic/financial system. I don’t think we have. The fact that the corrupt system breeds hyper-wealthy elites only speeds the rate of eventual decline. In short, it’s designed to take until there’s nothing left worth taking. But make no mistake, it is largely a closed system at the top. The masses have nothing to with the MIC, foreign policy, wars/conflicts/intel/aid, the Fed/banking system/Wall Street, mega corps, big lobby, MSM, etc THe masses are allowed to play with a little slice of the pie. As long as they are content to do so, the system works and the Elite are happy. The moment the system is questioned, and I hope we’re approaching that time, you will see just how brutal they can be to maintain that control. Take a look at recent G20 protests, multiply it by 100, and you’ll see the real police state prison you live in!

  • Sickened_by_Politicos

    Can totally relate to Outside of the Box. We, too, are sick of the ailment in our current, self-serving two-party system. Predicted two years ago that gas prices would fall immediately before the election. Feel totally used and as if politicians and ad-men think we are as dumb as dirt.

    Only caught the last five minutes of “On Point” from 13:55 through 1400 hours on WOSU and was disgusted by the pro-Obama pap flying out of those being interviewed. What happened to integrity? No wonder donations are down, between pap and the economy.

    Revolution does seem the only viable alternative. We need folks with backbone.

  • http://twitter.com/seylulleyl Ahmad Alhassan

    Politicians and diplomats worry about suppressing actual and perceived enemies.  They give no thought to how much damage they do to surrounding societies, the victims of intervention. If they do think about societies, they dream about creating internal or regional chaos to facilitate external control:   In Arabic
    Is Yemen a Banana Republic

    http://mudawwanatarabiyyah.blogspot.com/2012/11/blog-post_14.html

    Banana Republics and Political Facade

    http://mudawwanatarabiyyah.blogspot.com/2012/11/blog-post_11.html

ONPOINT
TODAY
Aug 22, 2014
Attorney General Eric Holder talks with Capt. Ron Johnson of the Missouri State Highway Patrol at Drake's Place Restaurant, Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2014, in Florrissant, Mo. (AP)

The National Guard and Eric Holder in Ferguson. ISIS beheads an American journalist. Texas Governor Rick Perry gets a mug shot. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Aug 22, 2014
In this image from video posted on Facebook, courtesy of the George W. Bush Presidential Center, former President George W. Bush participates in the ice bucket challenge with the help of his wife, Laura Bush, in Kennebunkport, Maine. (AP)

The Ice Bucket Challenge: ALS, viral fundraising and how we give in the age of social media.

RECENT
SHOWS
Aug 21, 2014
Jen Joyce, a community manager for the Uber rideshare service, works on a laptop before a meeting of the Seattle City Council, Monday, March 17, 2014, at City Hall in Seattle. (AP)

We’ll look at workers trying to live and make a living in the age of TaskRabbit and computer-driven work schedules.

 
Aug 21, 2014
In this November 2012, file photo, posted on the website freejamesfoley.org, shows American journalist James Foley while covering the civil war in Aleppo, Syria. In a horrifying act of revenge for U.S. airstrikes in northern Iraq, militants with the Islamic State extremist group have beheaded Foley — and are threatening to kill another hostage, U.S. officials say. (AP)

An American is beheaded. We’ll look at the ferocity of ISIS, and what to do about it.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Why Facebook And Twitter Had Different Priorities This Week
Friday, Aug 22, 2014

There’s no hidden agenda to the difference between most people’s Facebook and Twitter feeds this week. Just a hidden type of emotional content and case use. Digiday’s John McDermott explains.

More »
Comment
 
Our Week In The Web: August 22, 2014
Friday, Aug 22, 2014

On mixed media messaging, Spotify serendipity and a view of Earth from the International Space Station.

More »
Comment
 
Your (Weird? Wonderful? Wacky?) Roommate Stories
Tuesday, Aug 19, 2014

We asked, and you delivered: some of the best roommate stories from across our many listener input channels.

More »
2 Comments