90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Week In The News: Campaign Intensifies, Goldman Man To Jail, Rape Comments

The campaign down to its last dozen days.  God, rape, and Indiana.  An ex-Goldman board member sentenced to jail. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Republican vice presidential candidate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. speaks about upward mobility and the economy at a campaign rally at the Walter B. Waetjen Auditorium at Cleveland State University, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2012, in Cleveland. (AP)

Republican vice presidential candidate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. speaks about upward mobility and the economy at a campaign rally at the Walter B. Waetjen Auditorium at Cleveland State University, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2012, in Cleveland. (AP)

All the stops pulled out this week on the presidential campaign trail.  Mitt Romney talking big change and claiming big momentum.  Barack Obama saying we can’t let that happen, and getting out the vote.

Out of nowhere, rape is back.  And God’s intention for women to carry those pregnancies, says a Romney-backed Republican.  The campaign cost tops two billion.  Polls, neck and neck.  Foreign policy comes and goes.  Trump weighs in.

This hour, On Point:  a week in the news.  Our news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Molly Ball, staff writer covering national politics at The Atlantic.

Christina Bellantoni, politics editor at PBS NewsHour.

Jack BeattyOn Point news analyst.

From Tom’s Reading List

New York Times “Behold the coveted female swing voter of 2012. She has slipped a rung or two down the economic ladder from the soccer moms of the more prosperous 1990s, as indicated by her new nickname — waitress mom. Rather than ferrying children around the suburbs in minivans, she is spinning in the hamster wheel of a tight economy and not getting ahead.”

Wall Street Journal “The declaration differs sharply from those of several other business groups, which urge Washington to deal with the deficit and avoid across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases set for year-end—but avoid any stance on the politically charged issue of raising taxes.”

The Atlantic “A giant chalkboard takes up a wall in this unassuming office suite hung with Obama signs, one of more than 60 campaign offices for the president in this battleground state. On it is drawn a calendar of the final weeks before the election. Phone banks, canvasses, and campaign events are marked in color-coded chalk. And every Saturday through Nov. 6, in capital letters, is marked “DRY RUN” — a precision-timed Election Day simulation drill, where everything from data reporting to snacks is rehearsed down to the minute.”

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

    Rape comments?  You’ve got to be kidding.  That is national news?

      You have yet to cover Libya in depth.

    Let’s start with the gut wrenching comments the father of the Seal made yesterday about his conversation with both President Obama and Secretary Clinton at the memorial in the hanger.

    • Ray in VT

      “even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen.”

      How is repeating what a guy said, and a horribly disgusting comment at that from my perspective, a “gotcha comment”?  He said it.  What is the possible context there?

      I think that the context and the part that makes this a national news story is the fact that it comes on the heels of Todd Akin’s statement, and I think that it reflects poorly upon the horribly socially regressive views of some politicians and the people who support them.  I think that there might be a lot of women in these states, and in others as well, who do not want people who express these sorts of views writing laws that affect their reproductive lives.  On the other hand, I’m sure that some will agree with them.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Why is it national news?  I’m questioning the editorial decision.

        Mourdock is pro-life.  He believes abortion is only justified to protect the life of the mother.  His position is well known in Indiana.  There has been no change of his position. Many are trying to spin his statement that he somehow endorsing rape as ‘God’s will’.  That is what is being taken out of context.  Several outlets in the national news media are drumming this up right before the election and trying to hurt Romney with this.  Tom Ashbrook is part of the choir. 

        I guarantee you this would not be a story if Obama was not pushing this phony war on women business to distract from the dismal economy.

        I’m fed up with the media.  The Boston Globe is going out of business but they find the money to hire a lawyer to unseal the founder of Staples divorce records two weeks before the election?  Are you kidding?

      • Don_B1

        Not only did he say it, but he said it reflects his faith and beliefs.

    • jimino

      I read it.  Why weren’t the Seals where they were needed instead of a mile away?  Sounds like whoever made that decision ought to step up and take the blame.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         There are numerous questions that need answers.
        The fall into 3 categories — before, during and after.

        1) Why was the security gutted and requests from the ambassador ignored prior to the attack
        2) What happened the night of the attack?  Could support have be called in since the attack took 6 hours?
        3) Why was the administration not forthcoming with information and why did they put out misleading information?

        Unfortunately we won’t get any information unless the media demands it and they aren’t turning up the heat right now.

    • J__o__h__n

      The Republican party platform calls for a ban of all abortions without exceptions for rape and incest.  Was that a gotcha comment taken out of context too?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         I’m not a Republican but I believe your statement is incorrect.  The platform is simply ambiguous about exceptions.  So yes, you are taking the platform out of context.

        • J__o__h__n

          The lack of an explicit exception is a statement.

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    I was intrigued this week with an article that talked about another breakthrough in graphene research.

    http://www.kurzweilai.net/creating-instant-graphene-electronic-devices-on-demand?utm_source=KurzweilAI+Weekly+Newsletter+Plain+Text&utm_campaign=6e84fd2aed-UA-946742-1&utm_medium=email#!prettyPhoto

     
    The article said the discovery will allow electronic circuits “on demand”. These circuits can be controlled by light and because they are on a graphene substrate will be extremely fast. One hundred to one thousand times faster than silicon. Graphene also has the advantage of requiring less power to run and runs cooler. If this product pans out we may soon see computers that can actually understand human speech, as we do.

    Graphene is the thinnest material ever with the largest surface-to-volume ratio and it is the stiffest and strongest material known.

    I can see the day coming when you will be able print these circuits on your 3D printer or buy a general “graphene board” and wave a laser wand over it to configure your circuit to do something that is specific to your needs. I could be wrong ( it wouldn’t be the first time ) but this may be similar in scope to the transistor !

    This weekend I will be putting my pencils in a safe- deposit box :)

  • JGC

    Match the rape quote to the author:   1) On justification for prohibiting abortion after rape “I believe God controls the universe.  I don’t believe biology works in an uncontrolled fashion.”  Pregnancy caused by rape is “something God intended to happen.”   2) “Put yourself in a father’s position – rape and a child out of wedlock – it is similar.”  3) “If it is a legitimate rape, the female body has a way to shut that whole thing down.”   4) “Take a year off, get a job at Starbucks, and come back after (your rapist) has graduated.”   5) It is never medically necessary to perform an  abortion to save the mother’s life “Absolutely.”  6) “Rape comments? You’ve got to be kidding. That is national news?” 

    A) Tom Smith (for PA senator)   B)  Todd Akin (for Missouri senator)   C)  Richard Mourdock (for Indiana senator)  D)Worried for the Country   E) Amherst college administrator  F) Joe Walsh   

    • Coastghost

      Is rape a “national political issue” because 88,097 rapes and attempted rapes of females occur annually (2009 data and definition from the FBI)? or is rape a national political issue because 207,754 “sexual assaults” occur annually (ostensibly, 2012 data from the Rape Abuse Incest National Network, which while failing to specify victim gender also fails to specify the exact nature of sexual assault)? Clearly, we Americans cannot possibly know what we’re talking about if we deign to talk about rape, since no two of us agree what it is, who its victims are, who its perpetrators are, and what its incidence is. From other statistics I’ve seen on the extent of sexual predation in this country, RAINN’s virtual 208,000 figure could be an undercounting of just the number of sexual assaults undertaken annually by public school personnel. Nevertheless, it becomes a national political issue (crying for Federal solution, doubtlessly) when we are TOLD it has become a national political issue, and NPR is telling us plainly that it has become a national political issue, and who could fail to trust NPR with this scoop? We have a guest from PBS who presumably will also tell us that it is a national political issue, so in sum, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is telling us that rape has become a national political issue, because they are in fact telling us that such is the case. (“Headline-by-tautology”, you could call it.)

      • anamaria23

        It has become a national political issue because if those with the mindset of Mourdock and Akin could be in a position to influence the law of the land making  abortion  murder, inaccessable and if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant she should  fulfill God’s will and bear the child.   This is  pretty  heady stuff and should be a consideraton if Romney, who endorses these men,
        should become President. 
        Reversing RvsW will not stop abortion, just move the desperate into the back alleys.
        A better use of Mr. Mourdock’s time would be enabling the access to contraception on a grand scale.  There are those that prevent conception.
         
          

         

        • Coastghost

          Anamaria23: Your points I take, but I have to ask this: what if a Mourdock or an Akin are elected to office by like-minded voters? Should they be disqualified from office because they do in fact represent views held by their constituents? –which goes back to my replies to 1Brett1 and Ray in VT: not all Americans do or will ever subscribe to the latest iterations of avant-garde politics; but where is their legitimate representation in the political process? 

      • Ray in VT

        I think that at times it rears it’s head in the national political spotlight because it is a horrible, vile offense against a person, and, once in a while, some boneheaded politician makes some disgustingly offense comment regarding it.  For instance this one: “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it”.  Clayton Williams, GOP gubernatorial candidate, 1990 (she shared that one with me from Cosmo).

        • Gregg Smith

          “You better get some ice on that”, tops my list.

          • Ray in VT

            I don’t know that one, but I’m not surprised to see that it is a Clinton reference.  I think that it would be a horrible thing to say.  I assume that there’s some sort of concrete evidence of both the crime and the statement.

          • Gregg Smith

            It’s true Ray. My point is not that it’s a horrible thing to say. It’s a horrible thing to do. Akin and Mourdock just said stupid things.

          • Ray in VT

            It would be a horrible thing to do and say.  Without evidence, it is an allegation, like how he murdered Vince Foster or the Whitewater allegations, which went nowhere.  I would prefer to stay away from unsubstantiated allegations.

          • Gregg Smith

            No serious person thinks Vince Foster was murdered. No serious person does not believe Bill Clinton to be a serial abuser of women. As to Broderick, there are mountains of evidence. There is sworn testimony. There is Hillary Clinton throwing an ashtray at Bill when she learned. 60 minutes did a story and they never expressed doubt. It is far from an unsubstantiated allegation. It’s a substantiated one.

            BTW, Whitewater, The Rose law firm, Madison Guarantee, Billy Dale and the rest of it was awful. To dismiss it dishonors the memory of poor Vince who killed himself over it.

          • Ray in VT

            Careful, Gregg, Rush says you’ll end up in Fort Marcy Park if you cross the Clintons, so you better watch what you say here.  Who knows who may be reading.

            The allegation has been supported, but not proven, Gregg.  I do not think that it would be possible for there to be proof at this point without a confession.  You are certainly free to believe that it has been proven, but I think that you would be wrong.  Also, which version of the sworn statement do you believe?  The one that said that the allegations were untrue, or the later testimony that contradicted it?  I already know the answer to that, though.

          • Gregg Smith

            It IS proven that Bill Clinton is a serial abuser of women. He will not confess to rape but that’s all that’s left. OJ won’t admit to his crime either.

          • Ray in VT

            I’m not going to defend the President’s conduct in cases where his wrongdoing has been proven, but I’m also not going to dangle him from a tree for things that he hasn’t been convicted of.  I thought that conservatives were supposed to be all law and order, due process and such?  It sounds to me like you’re making an emotional argument.

            Newt also been proved to have been a proven serial adulterer and Rush is a serial purveyor of lies and distortions, but you seem to love those guys.  Pick your poison I guess.  I’d still take Willy over either of those two, Mourdock, Akin, Palin, Bachmann or just about anyone else who you say love.

        • Coastghost

          As in my reply to 1Bretti, Ray: the “national political issue” in this case is the disparagement or ridicule of anyone with a religious motivation undergirding a political belief; and again, this is quite a dangerous narrative to spin. And the current state of discourse has been invited, apparently, by journalists (not simply those of the CPB, PBS, or NPR, but these responsible parties have helped compose the self-same narrative, which does not make the narrative any less dangerous).

        • Mike_Card

          I’ve forgotten the particular context, but am pretty sure the first time I heard that reference was from a writing by Gloria Steinem in the 70′s; as I recall, she was holding that speaker up for severe ridicule.

      • Mike_Card

        By the standard of statistics, the deaths of 4 Americans in Libya is not even a blip, eh?

        • Coastghost

          In a hundred years, we’ll all be as dead as the anomalocaridids that’ve rested in the Burgess Shale for 400 million years: not more, perhaps, but certainly not less.

          • JGC

            And the Marcellus Shale! I never thought about that, that we are all destined to be the frackees of future civilizations…

      • 1Brett1

        “…the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is telling us that rape has become a national political issue, because they are in fact telling us that such is the case.”

        Where’s the link to the transcript where that quote exists? Actually, no, you won’t find it because they are not telling us that; they are telling us that Republicans are showing themselves to have an anachronistic, sexist view toward women.

        Your chauvinism, once again, shows through.

        • Coastghost

          Thank you for making one of my unstated points, 1Brett1: loyal listeners of NPR programming, I submit, routinely fail to appreciate that many Americans (I don’t dare say most), MANY Americans exhibit some kind, some version of “anachronistic thinking”. Quite frankly: why shouldn’t they? Must ALL Americans be compelled to subscribe to the latest iterations of progressive political thought? Don’t know where in this vast country you live, but several regions in this country (apart from the Vaunted Northeast Corridor [even here we would all be surprised to find representative pockets]) are home to many Americans–MILLIONS and TENS OF MILLIONS–sunk much lower, culturally or intellectually (if anyone seeks further grounds for casting aspersions), than even the deepest roots of modernity can reach. Self-styled intellectual avant-gardes, however, would tell us that any political views such people hold or express however poorly are automatically unworthy of serious consideration because their views interfere with the exercise of avant-garde politics. According to the discourse being shepherded by NPR, et al., ANYone expressing a religious motivation for his political views is an anachronistic kook, and these people merit no representation in the current political process. This is to play with fire in a gasoline shipping terminal. But far be it from our avant-gardes to exercise requisite amounts of patience: no, modernity and the political accommodation of it must unwind at the velocities dictated by the avant-gardes! Popular anachronism I would nominate as an actual national political issue (it most certainly bears upon our foreign policy even more acutely), but then I’m little more than an atavist myself. 

      • Mike_Card

        Do you ever wonder how everyone else is able to post more than one paragraph in their comments?  Please introduce yourself to Mr. Enter key–a very helpful fellow.

        • JGC

          Sometimes I send my post and it gets re-formatted later on by Disqus.  Is it just their way of saving space?

          • Mike_Card

            Disqus is a kluge-y piece of crap software package that BUR got a beta version of for cheap.  We are the rats that are being run.

      • JGC

        My best reply to this is “All politics is local”.  The sheer numbers (88,097 or 207,754 or whatever stats you want to apply) can obfuscate the clarity of the ultimate question, How does it affect Me and My Family?  That is why it is so easy to be numbed by the millions who go hungry in the world, but is is very easy and emotionally rewarding to sponsor one deprived child with a name in organizations like Save the Children or World Vision,etc.  So if some want to make it an intellectual exercise, fine, but ultimately, How does a policy affect Me and My Family? Now, please pass me that 2-foot long transvaginal ultrasound wand and the K-Y jelly…  

    • MrNutso

      1 – c
      2 – a
      3 – b
      4 – e guessing
      5 – f
      6 – d

      • JGC

        And you are the winner! 

  • Ed75

    Last week I made a comment on the idea of the anti-Christ, really a harmless speculation well within the bounds of Catholic theology, but I took quite a beating on this list. The only thing I’ll add, again in the spirit of theological speculation, is that if President Obama isn’t relected, he isn’t the anti-Christ, because he hasn’t done nearly the amount of damage this person will do. But if he is, he will win, and perhaps when it looked like he would lose.

    • jimino

      That’s the same standard once used to determine whether someone was a witch.  And just as foolish.

      How someone so defined by rigid religiosity to Roman Catholicism could entertain voting for a Mormon tells me all I need to know about your intellectual (sic) honesty.

      And it was obviously God’s will that Obama be our president, because it happened. Why do you believe it’s your call to overrule His choice?

    • 1Brett1

      So, then, if Romney wins, it will mean HE is the anti-Christ…that makes sense. Won’t you feel ashamed if Obama loses? It will mean he was not the anti-Christ and your vote for Romney has helped show the world Romney IS the anti-Christ! You’ll be very Satan-like in your alignment with evil…Man, you’ll have to go to Confession every day for….like ETERNITY!!!!! …in HELLL!!!!!

    • Gregg Smith

      I enjoy your comments Ed. It takes guts to come here and make yourself a target. I don’t know about the anti-Christ thing but Obama is certainly as dishonest as Satin. 

      • 1Brett1

        “Obama is certainly as dishonest as Satin.”

        Most satin is made from silk, which is from the honest work of little hard-working worms!

      • DrewInGeorgia

         Guts? I don’t know about that. Masochistic Tendencies are a more plausible explanation than ‘bravery’.

      • Ed75

        You’re right, the anti-Christ idea is just a speculation and not important. What is important is that the president is supporting all five non-negotiable issues for a Catholic:

        abortion
        embryonic stem cell research
        restriction of religious freedom
        same sex marriage
        euthanasia (he hasn’t had a chance to support this yet, but he will)

        It’s a truism that if one does evil, or if a society does evil, disaster hits that society. (After the discussion about the people who died in the falling of a tower, and people whose blood was mixed with Pilate’s sacrifices, Jesus said ‘Were they more guilty than the rest of the people in Judea? By no means. But the same thing will happen to you (us) if we do not repent’.)

        It seems to me that whenever a society takes a turn toward abortion or other serious evils – as what happened in the U.S. after 1973 – impeachment, only surrender, NYC almost bankcrupt and terrible crime – that if we re-elect someone who we now know supports all these evils, there will be a disaster and it will happen fast, probably by the end of the year.

        We might even see a preview of it with this huge storm heading to New York, which might disrupt the election.

    • J__o__h__n

      What damage has he actually done?  At best the criticism of him is that he hasn’t been able to recover from the mess he was left fast enough.  I don’t think the bible was warning about the anti-christ who was coming to make the economy not recover fast enough. 

    • JGC

      Disturbing Existential Question: suppose you are raped by the anti-Christ, and because of advances in fertility treatments, you are now pregnant with the child of Satan.  Do you save all of humanity by submitting to an abortion of Satan’s fetus, or do you believe all life is precious, including Satan Jr., and you will reluctantly give birth to and raise Baby Satan as you would your own?   

      • JGC

        And what if the anti-Christ wants visitation rights?

  • Ed75

    Mr. Mourdack’s rape comment - he didn’t mean that the rape was God’s will, of course, it’s quite the contrary. But that the conceived child was. Just simple theology, no child is conceived withouth the will (direct or permitted) and cooperation of God.

    Rape, incest, serious health threat to the mother account for less than 1% of abortions in the U.S. (George Weigel). We need to talk not about these first, but about the other 99%.

    • NewtonWhale

      Please, stop defending the indefensible.

      Someone needs to ask Mourdock if he would feel the same way if his wife or daughter were raped. How would he like to raise the rapist’s child, and stand by while the rapist enjoyed his visitation rights?

      Rapist Wants Visitation Rights With Child Conceived During Rape

      http://abcnews.go.com/US/massachusetts-rapist-seeks-visitation-victims-child/story?id=17349095#.UIp398WDHng

      • ttajtt

        why not say incest is a rape under 18 or less by todays standards too.  its our life style to training practices of being the best we can be in choice.   

        but it is this science that makes gay life style or marriage OK in todays life style of fast lane-ing.

        • NewtonWhale

          ummm…what?

          • 1Brett1

            This person’s comments have that digital glitch quality, like Direct TV in a thunder storm

          • ttajtt

            seen in the news. on those in the practice this insect life style, the law can not convict with both over 18 or was 21, its ok-ism.   teacher and daughter at a university.  birth control was in used, i think what it boiled down to.  

          • J__o__h__n

            How does one practice an insect lifestyle?  Isn’t it more of an orientation as you can’t chose to be one and have to be born that way?

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

          Your words didn’t make any sense, so I sorted them alphabetically for you:

          18 and and be being best but by can child choice did fast gay got if in in incest is is it its its lane-ing less life life life makes marriage not not not of of OK or or our payers practices problem rape say science standards style style style tax that the theirs they think this to todays todays too training under we why

    • 1Brett1

      Oh, I see, so God was sleeping, or having a pastrami sandwich, or just not paying attention, when the rape happened (D’oh!), but decided to make it all better as it was happening by willing the woman to become pregnant…yeah, that makes sense. Glad you know these things Ed, we’d be lost without your explanation…

      • ockraz

         So on your theory, if I have a friend whose parents only met because they were refugees from the holocaust (which I do), then if someone thinks that every human life was intended by god then that person also thinks god wanted the holocaust?  This isn’t a scandal about what Mourdock said.  It’s the problem of theodicy.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy

        • 1Brett1

          Oh, please…yeah, that’s exactly what I was saying, God wanted the Holocaust! 

          I wasn’t espousing a “theory.” I was saying that if God is all knowing, all seeing, all powerful, all controlling and present everywhere at the same time, then HE would have decided NOT to intervene during the rape, while intervening as the villain’s sperm was leaving his penis. 

          To put it into terms you can understand, if God intervenes in our lives on such an intimate level, than HE must’ve been one cruel bastard to let the Holocaust happen, even though he did not want it to happen.

          Are you saying Satan is more powerful than God? That Satan caused the Holocaust and all God could do was make two victims of the Holocaust fall in love after the fact?

          You religious people are so wacky superstitious crazy…

          • ockraz

            1Brett1, listen you slow witted jackass- I’m not one of those superstitious “religious people”.  I think that all religion is a bunch of baloney.  (That’s part of what my icon means.)  My point is that the problem of evil is a problem for anyone who believes in god.  There’s no legitimate reason to pounce on Mourdock over this.  If you vilify him because of this, then to be logically consistent you need to vilify everyone who believes in an omnipotent god. 

          • 1Brett1

            “slow-witted jackass”? 

            I WAS criticizing all of those who believe in an omnipotent God in the way Ed does. Theodicy is certainly an inherent part of that particular spiritual view. 

            But, aside from your absolutist way of arguing against the absurd parsing of good and evil as acts perpetuated by two separate super-entities (or that free will and Divine intervention coexist in some arbitrarily ridiculous protocol), your initial reply sounded as though you condemned my comment because my satirical way of criticizing Ed’s primitive views were not valid. I gleaned you were critical because I didn’t categorically condemn all religion and all religious believers, and that I hadn’t considered the concept of theodicy, which is hilariously ridiculous.

            You are the slow-witted one for not seeing that I was mocking you in my second comment (the reply to you). You are the slow-witted one for trying to use some silly logic about the Holocaust as a way to condemn all religion. 

            I can condemn Murdock’s comments (and comments of those who agree with him) without saying “all religion is baloney.” There are those who see religion as a community function, and religious mythology/Divine power as metaphorical. I don’t have a problem with that, just the fundamentalist, literal interpretation of those ideas.

            Murdock is the political candidate espousing those ridiculous views. He’s the one who potentially can bring some of those views into a power position. That’s in real time, here and now! It’s not some abstract, junkyard philosophical debate…Get it now? Maybe read this over several times in the next couple of days, and eventually you might get it. I’m hopeful you’ll catch on…eventually.

             

        • Ray in VT

          One could extrapolate Brett’s line of thought out to that, but I don’t think that that is what he meant.  If one does take the line, though, that God is actively involved in the events of the world and that things happen either because God wants it or God allows it, then one could say that God was fine with the Holocaust, or else would he have not stopped it, either directly or through earthly actors?

          • ockraz

            Exactly.  1Brett1 was making fun of the defense that Ed75 had for Mourdock’s comment.  My point was just that it’s ridiculous to point to  Mourdock or Ed75 and make fun of them as if what they said was so bizarre.  You’d have to make fun of every single person who believes in god or else you can just accept that this is a fundamental problem with religion that goes back millennia and stop letting people use it as a way to influence the outcome of a senate race in the state of Indiana.

          • Ray in VT

            I think that you can criticize comments like those of Mourdock or Ed without disparaging religious beliefs in general.  I have plenty of religious family members and friends, but I do not think that a single one of them thinks that God has to favor or accede to a particular conception.  They believe in biology.  I find it difficult to not be harsh on someone who believes that flooding is caused by the legal debate around abortion.  I think that such a view is downright medieval and irrational.  I’ll try to be respectful in my words to that person, but I’m under no obligation to respect the view, and I do not want people with such views making legislative decisions regarding my life, and thankfully non of my elected representatives in Congress do.

        • 1Brett1

          Wow! You have friends whose parents were  Holocaust survivors? Man, I’m sorry I said what I said, then, and feel guilty and ashamed. 

          Your association to persecution is admirable. 

    • 1Brett1

      So, because pregnancy by rape only accounts for such a small percentage of reasons women get abortions, Mourdack’s view that it should also be legal is a valid one?

      • Ed75

        As above, it would be a good idea if we concentrated on the 99+% that aren’t the result of rape or incest or the woman’s life in danger. All I can say about the rape case is that I’ve heard people speak who were conceived in rape, and they are very glad to be alive.

    • IsaacWalton

      God’s will and man’s will are separate things. The rape occurred because of man’s will—did God or did God NOT love us enough to give us FREE WILL? And so with this free will we do horrible and good things. Does God want good things to come from that will—YES he does. Whether that happens IS UP TO EACH ONE OF US….that’s where ultra right-wing Christian’s go wrong. They forget that I have a will and it is MINE not their’s to determine how it and what it does and when it does it. To paint your PERSONAL views of faith into law is wrong. But if you do it, then do it consistently. I’m tired of mainstream repub Christians taking a very narrow view on abortion and then supporting/fostering favorable gun laws. For them, it’s OKAY for a person using FREE WILL to decide whether to shoot someone with an automatic rifle, but it’s wrong for that same person to decide if they can have an abortion. What they KEEP FORGETTING is that the LAW of the land is EVERYONE’s and that includes Christians and non-Christians who do not HOLD THE SAME view of abortion as them.

      • Denis

        Theologically where does evil come into this equation? Isn’t rape “the devil’s work?” Then would it not follow the conception was “the devil’s work?”
         

        • 1Brett1

          Oh, no, Denis! Now “ockraz” is gonna blast you for not considering “theodicy”! :-)

      • Ed75

        Whether there should be stronger gun laws is a prudential judgement. Some argue that these laws only keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens trying to protect themselves. People of good will can disagree. (For myself, I couldn’t care less.)

        And it’s of course not OK even among gun rights advocates to shoot people with automatic rifles, that’s still illegal. (But that’s what happens in an abortion.)

        But there are issues that are not a matter of prudential judgement, but which are everywhere wrong. For example, murder, or stealing. Also, abortion.

    • Duras

      Nonetheless, the result of his desired policy would tell women who have lost control of their bodies, get pregnant, and then the government comes in and tells them that they still can’t have control of their own bodies. 

      That stance alone is ignorant.

    • Yar

      “We need to talk not about these first” because it shows the flaws in your logic.  If it is never acceptable to end life, then what?  Freeze bodies near death to keep them alive? Your theology is wrong, and your biology is worse.  Eggs and sperm are alive before they are joined. 

      • Ed75

        Just a note, eggs and sperm are alive before they are joined, but they only when they are joined do they form a third individual different in genetic makeup from the father or the mother.

    • Acnestes

      Isn’t everything God’s will Ed?  Isn’t he omnipotent?  All merciful?  Omniscient?  Good to know rape is OK in his book.  Does anyone wonder why Catholicism is on the skids anywhere in the civilized world?

  • NewtonWhale

    Mr. Mourdock cannot have it both ways. You cannot have the pregnancy without the rape, so if “God” intended the one, then “God” intended the other.

    This is the old theological dilemma of “why does ‘God’ let bad things happen to good people?”

    The traditional answer (cop out, really) is that “God” gave Man free will. Which, in the rape case, results in the perverse conclusion that both God and the rapist have free will, but the woman victim does not. She must bear the child that “God” gave her as a gift. Special delivery, courtesy of rape, no returns accepted.

    It’s a cop out because it is nothing but a theological ruse designed to perpetuate the myth of “God” and the entire power structure that belief in “God” propped up.

    What is insidious is that this focus on rape exceptions has obscured the broader issue: most unwanted pregnancies are not caused by rape, and women need to be guaranteed their right to control their own bodies. 

    I wonder if Republicans are deliberately pushing the Overton window far to the right so we will consider it a great victory if rape victims are allowed an exception to the new normal, where a woman no longer has a right to choose and must subject herself to a tribunal in order to “prove” that she was raped.

  • AC

    Attn stockbrokers/financial planners – you are about to be replaced: http://www.ehow.com/list_6694466_benefits-electronic-trading_.html
    course, it’s going to be a bit; algorithms can go rogue….

    on the plus side – this does have some kinda/sorta ‘neutral’ news, if you’re not getting hired, it’s because an algorithm finds you don’t fit with the more successful past hires for the company. Always research, (with serious attn!), the company your interviewing at!!
    http://singularityhub.com/2012/10/21/didnt-get-the-job-a-computer-may-be-to-blame/?utm_source=Saasy&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ba2185d268-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN

    • JGC

      My mind is going in lots of tangents on your post!  

      I do my own trading now- its so easy (and cheap) with self-directed online brokerage.  My mom used to be in a stock club with her lady friends back in the day.  How cumbersome for them to have to contact a broker to make their small transactions, and with such big fees relative to the money they were investing.  (My dad was in a twin stock club with his friends, and he was always amused and proud that “the ladies” routinely got a better return on their investments than the men.  Early proof of “The hour between dog and wolf”?)Concerning the democratization of investing, one product I am interested in is recently available through the Royal Bank of Canada, the RBC Target Corporate Bond Index ETF.  (There must be other companies offering these bond investments, because it is exactly what people need right now to maximize their return while preserving the safety.) What is potentially cool about this is it removes a barrier to buying and holding corporate bonds until their actual maturity date.  If you are just an individual retail investor, it is not easy to navigate the world of purchasing an investment-grade  corporate bond, which offer yields much higher than government bonds and not necessarily with much more risk.  And it is expensive, you need to pay a broker to locate these relatively rare issuances and you usually have to have a big bundle to invest.  And then the problem with regular bond mutual funds and bond ETFs is you never really own the bonds, so it is possible for your initial investment to decrease when the interest rates increase. But with these newer types of target maturity ETFs, “These ETFs actually act like a bond.  Investors get their money back at maturity.” (Mark Neill, head of RBC ETFs).  So maybe there will be less and less need for stock brokers as time rolls along, however independent financial planners may have somewhat more job security.

      • AC

        i’m not as familiar with the investment world and how it operates except on an intrigued/peripheral level – that being said, when i graduated college in 2005 w a BS in engineering and math minor, the biggest recruiter at our career fair was American Express-confused me at the time, but it’s starting to make more sense!

        every week i’m posting about where the ‘jobs’ are going because i am sick of the head-in-the-sand opinions on unemployment and policitians empty ‘i’ll create jobs’ speech points. I feel the urgency needs to be on creating programs/education available to the jobless to be ready for what are, ACTUALLY, the real available jobs!
        Otherwise, i don’t care who’s in office, the numbers will keep going up. i don’t know why people are afraid and hiding from this truth – we should be excited and planning to lead in this job market!!

        • Wm_James_from_Missouri

          There is an old book entitled “ Making it in the market” by Richard Nay, ( as I remember). It was very controversial at the time. He talks about the role of the “ Specialist” and “ Market Makers”, on the Floor of the Exchanges. The Specialists, buy and sell for their own account, thereby ensuring a trade. Of course in the process prices are affected. Once again, things are not as they seem !

        • Wm_James_from_Missouri

          AC,  ( Update )

          His name is Richard Ney.

          http://www.hermes-press.com/neyint.htm

           
          Note also :
          Wiki says he is the father of a former guitarist from Aerosmith, small world, isn’t it ? That is, it is a small world if you are lucky enough to “make it”.
          ——————
          Another wonderful and powerful book is

          “Fortune’s Formula”
          The Untold Story of the Scientific Betting System That Beat the Casinos and Wall Street
          By: William Poundstone

          http://us.macmillan.com/fortunesformula/WilliamPoundstone

          Ps. Thank you Mr. Ward Cunningham !

    • JGC

      And concerning your other link on resume searches being conducted by computer, I had heard something along the same line, people having difficulty getting their applications flagged for closer scrutiny by a real person employer, because the computer didn’t like the way they formatted their resume, or they were missing the right buzz words, etc. I am sure that this has opened up a new employment field to assist job hunters; expertise to target resumes to Company X as opposed to Company Y. Less stock brokers, more employment coaches…    

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      AC,

      About 70 % of the volume of trades in stocks in the US is done by preprogrammed, super fast machines and algorithms. It’s about 60 % in the UK. Average people are oblivious to the things that are happening around them. Somewhere, somehow, somebody dropped the ball in educating people. Too many of us can’t seem to use the power of abstraction and extrapolation. This is inhibiting our power to estimate or predict the future. What is really scary is that rich people and people who support their arguments can’t seem to see that they too will be challenged in the near future ! The 1 percent will someday be the ½ % , then, ¼ % , then 1/8 % , then …. I know this angers some people but the republicans are the worst. They are blind and living in the past. The democrats are better, but not by much.

      Maybe we need a course in “ Surviving the coming Singularity”, what do you think ?

      On a related note:
      There is a great article on the topic of algorithms, at Princeton, by Bernard Chazelle, that I feel may interest you. The man writes very well.

  • Gregg Smith

    President Obama said in the debate of sequestration, “It won’t happen”. Now we understand why he was refusing to allow his interview with The Des Moines Register to be on the record. He finally relented so we know he said this:

    “So when you combine the Bush tax cuts expiring, the sequester in place, the commitment of both myself and my opponent — at least Governor Romney claims that he wants to reduce the deficit — but we’re going to be in a position where I believe in the first six months we are going to solve that big piece of business.”

    • Gregg Smith

      It’s funny how no one wants to touch this.

      • Ray in VT

        Please, tell me what horrible thing you think that this statement means.  I read it, and to me is says that they’re going to get the situation resolved.  What is the hidden meaning?

        • Gregg Smith

          He lied at the debate. He said it wouldn’t happen. He tried to keep the directly contradicting statement off the record in the Register interview. This is of enormous consequence, what is his position? Does he want sequestration or not? It matters. The American people deserve an informed opinion.

          • Ray in VT

            I don’t think that you can say he lied, as it has yet to happen and may not happen.  I mean, it’s not like he voted for it and then said that he didn’t.  That is a lie.  The President’s statement is better described as an opinion or a belief.

            Does he want it to happen?  I don’t know.  Probably not is my guess.

          • Gregg Smith

            He signed sequestration into law and it was his idea but you’re right, he doesn’t get a vote. He supported it to the Register and the next day condemned it in the debate.

          • Gregg Smith

            He signed sequestration into law and it was his idea but you’re right, he doesn’t get a vote. He supported it to the Register and the next day condemned it in the debate.

          • Ray in VT

            So, do you have quotes other than the Des Moines quote or the “it won’t happen” from the debate to support your support/condemn positions, because textually your argument there is pretty weak.  Saying, for instance, that the Indianapolis Colts will not win the Super Bowl this year is not a condemnation.  It is an informed opinion.  I think that you are reading into these statements what you want to in order to reach a desired conclusion.

          • Gregg Smith
          • Ray in VT

            Nope.  I was working away from a machine where I could stream it.  I read the transcript, and it still isn’t what I would call a condemnation.

            I don’t see a date from when that middle clip was from.  Maybe it was recent, maybe it wasn’t.  I don’t think that that is an issue really.  Would he really veto it?  I don’t know.  Ultimately, I don’t think that the Congress and the White House will let it all hit the fan.  I think that they’ll probably do some other last minute deal.

  • Michiganjf

    Funny how repeating ANYTHING a Republican says is “taking it out of context!”

    Maybe Republicans should quit being honest about their beliefs… or at least, “think twice before they speak once.”

    • MrNutso

      They should just stop talking.

      • Gregg Smith

        That’s been Obama’s bipartisan suggestion.

  • Gregg Smith

    So now we are being told Republicans don’t really believe in rape. That makes sense because we already know they are in favor of bedroom raids to confiscate contraception. They want to jail women who get abortions which they will outlaw. It fits. Romney obviously wanted to kill GM and lose all those jobs, we know he loves firing people. He wants dirty air and water. And long as he can give a tax cut to the rich he does not care if autistic children suffer as he throws grandma over a cliff. He’s a “bullshitter’ as Obama has said. 

    Oh yea that’s it.

    • jimino

      To quote Lerner and Loewe, “by Jove, I think you’ve got it.”

      Of course, only some Republicans believe those things.  The others just do what their told.

      • Gregg Smith

        Alrighty then.

    • 1Brett1

      Wow, I didn’t realize Republicans were quite this bad! Thanks, Gregg for bringing clarity. People will be sure not to vote Republican now! 

      • Gregg Smith

        No probs. Also, don’t forget that Romney is a felon who lets employees die of cancer. 

    • J__o__h__n

      Republicans want to ban abortion with no exception for rape.  Republicans want to allow employers to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage for undefined moral reasons.  Romney advocated GM go bankrupt.  His support of reducing regulations would increase air and water polution. 

      • 1Brett1

        Now you’re just taking things out of context!

      • Gregg Smith

        I know, right? The man is the devil incarnate.

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

        And I hate to be the nitpicker, but “rape and incest exceptions” still treat women like non-sentient beings. It puts them in the position of “proving they deserve” to choose having an abortion.

  • J__o__h__n

    Does god intend this in all rapes or just legitimate ones?

    • ttajtt

      is it not our heart mind thought in choices of the gold rule.  take care of y our brother and sister

  • Duras

    The New Yorker and the Washington Post have endorsed President Obama.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       
      Did you read the WaPO endorsement?  It wasn’t a ringing endorsement.  They were  holding their nose.

      And the Detroit News and Orlando Sentinal both endorsed Romney.  Both surprises.

      • Duras

        Who did the Detroit Free Press endorse?   And no I didn’t read the Washington Post endorsement.  I read the New Yorker endorsement and the editors there are strongly supporting Obama and strongly denouncing Romney.  I almost decided to copy it on to this thread for all to see.

        I also saw that Mark Cuban said he’s “strongly leaning Obama” and Ted Turner said he’s voting for Obama.  Those guys along with Buffet and Gates are more successful businessmen than Romney but feel that Obama would do a better job.  Romney doesn’t like to explain his economic plans but says to trust him on the account that he’s a businessman.  I guess if one were to trust businessmen on the account of them being businessmen, you might as well go with more successful ones (especially the ones with better reputations and stronger concerns for humanity)…. 

        Do you see the Romney top surrogate, John Sununu reaction to the Colin Powel’s endorsement?  A classic case of a white conservative thinking that a black man is incapable to coming to his own decisions and choosing based on skin color (even though Powel explained why in detail he’s endorsing Obama).  Racist.  …And in chimes Gregg with the racism denial….

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/26/john-sununu-colin-powell-endorsement_n_2020735.html

        Watch the video.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Sununu apologized for his stupid remarks about Powell shortly after the interview with Morgan.

          “Colin Powell is a friend and I respect the endorsement decision he made
          and I do not doubt that it was based on anything but his support of the
          president’s policies. Piers Morgan’s question was whether Colin Powell
          should leave the party, and I don’t think he should,” Sununu said.

          • Duras

            I got news for you: those kind of thoughts that Sununu expressed don’t enter the mind of someone who is free of racism.

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

            Sununu apologized! That makes it all bettsfdjkl;aser.

            I can’t type that without laughing.

  • AC

    some of the comments today are funny, even if they are a little teeny bit snarky.
    but I do wonder how, in this day and age, people still have such odd sentiments? i’ve lamented how far behind we still are when the shooting of Malala occurred, but here it is that same backwardness in beliefs much closer.
    I’m ready to race to the future, but really, we’re still living in the dark ages…..:(

    • Gregg Smith

      I hear you AC but please be careful with the word “we”. Malala’s shooting is not indicative of America. It is an example of hate, oppression and brutal dictatorship. America stands in opposition to that. I honestly believe Democrats are trying to imply comments by Mourdock and Akin mean Republicans are just like the Taliban.

      • Denis

        In many ways some of the most vocal are.

      • J__o__h__n

        You left out religion and sexism. 

        Mourdock and Akin are not nearly as bad as the Taliban as they would only ban the rape victim from having an abortion and not require her to marry her rapist or be killed to satisy family honor.  The GOP can be proud that they can claim to be better than the Taliban (a very low bar).

      • JGC

        I cannot say it is only Democrats that are thinking this, if they think it at all.  My brother-in-law is a fiscally conservative, socially progressive Republican, and he is incensed over the takeover of “his” party by what he calls the “American al-Quaeda”.  I was shocked at his characterization. I was even disturbed that he does not plan to vote this year, although I told him he should at least put in votes for the other positions on the ballot if he is disgusted by the two at the top.

    • 1Brett1

      Why, “dark ages”! And here you are reading and writing when you should be cooking or cleaning something! :)

      • AC

        grrrrrr…….

  • adks12020

    There was a story the other day about a person that hired someone to slap him when he uses facebook when he is supposed to be working because it was effecting his work.  As John Stewart and Stephen Colbert pointed out, I think Republican candidates need someone to do that when they contemplate discussing their views on rape, which appears to be regularly. I’m glad we know what their views are, their digusting views, but I’m sure their campaign managers want to punch them every time they feel the need to wax poetic about rape.

    Do these guys really not understand how disgusting the things they are saying are? Also, even if they don’t think the comments are off base or offensive they must be completely oblivious morons to not realize many people will think they are.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Is anyone offended by the new Obama virgin voter ad?

    It turns out it is a ripoff of Putin ad from a few years ago and the liberal media (ABC and HuffPO) criticized the Putin ad as ‘creepy’ at the time.  Now the liberal media simply says the Obama ad ‘enrages conservatives’.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/25/obama_web_ad_your_first_time.html

    • 1Brett1

      Do you just peruse the Internet looking for anti-Obama stuff to put on this forum?

      • Gregg Smith

        It’s a campaign ad 12 days out. It’s supposed to be pro Obama. This is your desperate candidate, own it.

        • 1Brett1

          No, it was geared to young voters and used a humorous metaphor as the device. 

          Please, it’s almost funny that you pretend such outrage over nothing. At least Worried tried to counter his prudishness by saying he’s not a prude. You’re not even trying! 

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

            Right-wingers here faint to the sinking couch so readily I have no goddam idea to know when they’re not faking outrage. All the regular observations about “tone” apply.

            Tangent: I submit that the effectiveness of countering prudishness by declaiming “I’m not a prude” remains to be proved.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         I agree with Gregg’s comment.

        However, I am truly curious if Obama supporters also find this ad offensive.  I’m not a prude and this one seems over the top to me.

      • keltcrusader

        His name really should be “WorriedforRomney” :)

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Top of the morning to you.

          • keltcrusader

            Cad é mar atá tú, Worried?

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

       I think it’s much less offensive than Coulter tweeting that Obama is “a retard”.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         What office is Coulter running for?  She is trying to sell books, that’s all.

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

          You could ask what office are all the superPAC’s running for.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Huh?

            I don’t follow your logic. 
            If there is a SuperPAC ad you have an issue with then you should bring it up.

            Coulter made a crazy comment after the last debate.  Tune into MSNBC and you’ll find plenty of outrageous comments on the left.

            However, Obama owns this particular ad — no superpac to hide behind.

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

            I thought the ad was not in the least bit offensive – it appeared to be geared to young people who are constantly bombarded with ads like this to buy stuff.

    • OnPointComments

      As of the moment, the YouTube count is 3,565 likes, 5,112 dislikes.  I wonder how long the Obama campaign will wait until it pulls the ad.

  • kaltighanna

    Can we take a break from the radical partisanship and just look at the absurdity of those rape comments? Can we ask a Republican woman for her honest opinion? Does everyone stand by those views?

    It seems to me that no matter your political allegiance, if a person believes those absurd ideas, they’re not fit for office. Let’s just step back and look at what this country will become if people continue to be elected even though they’re plainly unbalanced. Do you want to live in a country where half the legislative is made up of religious fanatics willing to outlaw anything they don’t think it’s in harmony with their reading of the Bible?

    • Gregg Smith

      “Do you want to live in a country where half the legislative is made up of religious fanatics willing to outlaw anything they don’t think it’s in harmony with their reading of the Bible?”

      YES! That’s it exactly. That’s who we are, that’s what we want.  

      • Yar

        Gregg, do you really want to live in a theocracy? I don’t because I don’t trust religious fanatics interpretation of scripture. 

        • Gregg Smith

          I was being facetious, I find the charge ridiculously insane. 

          • Yar

            Good,
            Because some have that point of view. I live in as close to a theocracy that exists in the US. We just ended prohibition early this year. Our leaders put the ten commandments on the court house wall. If you lived where I do you would hear comments like you just made with
            total seriousness.

          • Gregg Smith

            You’re in Kentucky, right? I’m in western NC. There are folks in the NE who take the other extreme. In truth, people have opinions but the notion of a groundswell for theocracy is misguided.

          • sickofthechit

            For all its faults, I still love Kentucky.  Just embarrassaed a lot is all.

          • Yar

            Me too!

    • J__o__h__n

      How can you separate these absurd comments from radical partisanship?  Only one party is making them and their obsession with banning abortion is central to their agenda. 

    • ttajtt

      what does the statue of liberty say send us your what? 

  • Ray in VT

    I didn’t realize that the Haaj is presently happening.  Has On Point ever done a show on this event?

  • Denis

    Tom,
    Could you have your guests talk about the editorial endorsement of the Washington Post and the Salt Lake Utah paper [the name escapes me}. Both endorsed President Obama as they did not know which Mitt Romney to "evaluate."
    Why in the opinion of your guests does Mr. Romney get a free pass by so many people on his lack of any clear principle? Why did the press only cover the "style" issue in the first debate when Romney had pivoted from previous positions on nearly every issue discussed? I believe in my lifetime [I am 65 yrs. old] this is the first time a candidate has gone this far with absolutely no absolutes [accept I deserve to be president] in their policy.

  • OnPointComments

    Did Obama Watch While They Fought for their Lives?
     
    “Our President chose to let these four men fight for seven hours and die alone in that Benghazi compound.  How and why did Obama decide not to help them?”
     
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/they_fought_for_their_lives.html#ixzz2APe1Q4H5

    • OnPointComments

      Obama Knew.  Did ideological soft spot for Sharia keep U.S government from protecting Benghazi consulate?  The Obama Administration knew specifically “within hours” that the attack on the Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack.  For fourteen days the Obama Administration insisted this attack was all about an Internet video.  The emails make Carney and UN Ambassador Susan Rice, whom Carney was vociferously defending, into bald-face (or is that red-faced?) liars.  If Benghazi is not about incompetence or lying — it’s worse.  It’s about a U.S. government that is at its highest levels in some fashion simpatico with a totalitarian ideology.  That ideology is Sharia.
       
      http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/25/obama-knew/3

      • Gregg Smith

        You have no idea how much I’d like to refute your very sober analysis. I can’t.

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

    For anyone who will feel raped if Obama gets a second term, just remember it’s something God intended to happen. At least according to some people.

  • hennorama

    A Trickle Down Tale

    Picture two of those silver wire shelving units, each with 6 shelves and on wheels .  Each shelf is completely filled edge to edge with plastic nursery flats containing soil and plants.  The units are wrapped with clear plastic, so the plants don’t bounce out when they’re rolled around.  They have burlap attached at the very bottom to catch any soil or plants that may fall off.  Both units were left outside during a brief shower that left the flats on the top two shelves wet from the rain.

    There are 2 prospective employees at the nursery where these units are located.  As part of the job interview process, the owner of the nursery tells them to each water one shelf unit of plants.  He gives each a full watering can and a stepladder, but nothing to cut the plastic.

    The first guy climbs up the stepladder and empties his watering can, soaking the already wet top shelf of plants.  He watches as the water soaks through the saturated flats, noting that some water is dripping onto the already wet shelf below.  That shelf fills up eventually, but much less water soaks through to the shelf below that one, and so on.  He figures his job is not to worry about the bottom shelves, because he’s seen the water trickle down.  He’s not concerned about the very bottom because there’s a safety net there to catch the plants that may fall, and if it needs repair, he’ll fix it.  He’s done watering.

    The second guy watches what the other guy does, and realizes the plants on the bottom shelves are going to be pretty dry if he does the same thing.  He needs to find a better way.  He knows the top two shelves don’t really need any more water because they’re still wet from the rain shower, so pulls out his keys and uses them to make slits in the plastic around the lowest 4 shelves.  He starts at the bottom, sticking the spout of the watering can through the slits he’s made, and waters all four of the shelves where he’s made the slits.  He’s done watering.

    Who do you think should get the job?

    • Gregg Smith

      The black one.

      • hennorama

        What the [expletive deleted]? THAT’S your answer? Wow.

        • Gregg Smith

          Sorry, I can’t take your flawed analogy seriously. My reply is one of my better ones IMHO. It illustrates how far out in left field race is as a factor for anything. I love making that point. It would be a factor in today’s world.

          So, Romney has a plan to repeal Obamacare, reform the tax code and save entitlements. Obama is offering the same ol’ same ol’. So right off the bat, there’s that. The premise that Obama touts about the same mess that got us into this mess is a joke. It make more sense if you look at his policies. It was the banking crisis that killed the economy not tax cuts or wars. And the crisis was not from the generic meaningless phrase  “lack of regulations”. The whole thing is a farce but it has to be fact for your analogy. 

          Another flaw is the hideous notion that in America the “plants” are chained to their station. The analogy doesn’t even live up to liberal standards as the plants on top just prevent the ones on the bottom from getting water. They should be siphoning it from them. Are the seeds all of equal high quality? I hope so. How about take the shackles of government away (the plastic if you like) and let the plants grow outside the box to great heights? There’s water up there.

          • hennorama

            How you got to “The black one” from anything I posted escapes me completely, especially in light of the complete lack of any mention of race in my “Tale.”

            My allegorical “Tale” was intended as an illustration of how economic benefits are supposed to flow from cutting marginal tax rates.  I have been searching for another visualization for “trickle down” AKA “supply side” economics besides the memorable quote from New Zealand MP O’Connor.  He quite vividly described trickle-down economics as “the rich pissing on the poor”.

            That’s why I specified the six shelves.  They represent the six current Federal individual income tax rates, and also that wealth and economic gain can be seen as stratified.  The water represents wealth and/or economic gain.  The clear plastic is meant to represent a closed system; I needed a way to show that the economic benefit is supposed to flow down from above through this “trickle down” theory.  Making the plastic clear means each shelf can get the sunlight that’s also needed for growth.  The burlap represents the social safety net.

            I did not mean to imply that there is no opportunity for upward economic movement.  My intent was merely to provide a representation of “trickle down” theory that one could visualize, mostly due to my own frustration in failing to find a visual that I found satisfying.  Since I’m not much of an artist, I tried doing this using words.  Obviously one can’t represent every facet of economic theory in this one illustration, try as one might.

            Mr. Romney (the first guy in the Tale) proposes the largest income tax rate cuts for the highest brackets, reducing them as the rates drop.  35% turns into 28%, 33% into 26.4%, 28% into 22.4% and so on down the line, with lower rate point reductions the lower the current rate.  He “waters” the top income levels with the economic benefits from the largest tax rate cuts, even though these levels are already wet from the recent rain.  Mr. Romney claims tax rate cuts will result in all sorts of new jobs and increased prosperity, i.e. water soaking through and trickling down.  These marginal rate cuts are the main focus of his plans, and without them his theories do not hang together.  They have been described as the most important part of his proposals.

            This of course flies in the face of the fact that, according to one Bloomberg article from July “In the top two tax brackets, slightly more than one-third — 35.5 percent — were employers receiving business income, according to 2007 figures from the Treasury Department.”

            So much for the wealthy being “job creators.”

            source:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-20/top-2-not-job-creators-or-millionaires-in-tax-debate.html

            There’s also no proven correlation between cutting marginal tax rates and sustained GDP growth, as I’ve shown repeatedly.

            Mr. Romney also seems to have only one answer for everything – tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts, as if tax cuts have magical powers.  This single solution was alluded to in my Tale – pour the water on the top shelf (cut tax rates), and he’s done.  I realize his proposals also discuss regulations and code reform, but his main idea is cutting tax rates.

            Plus, I was able to get in some of Mr. Romney’s expressed views about “the 47%” – his job is “not to worry about” the bottom shelves – and the poorest among us – he’s “not concerned about the very [poor. We have] a safety net there.  If it needs repair, [I]‘ll fix it.”  These are partial quotes of Mr. Romney’s own words.

            Pres. Obama’s (the second guy in my Tale) view is that the wealthiest among us are already doing just fine, i.e the top two shelves are already wet from the rain.  His proposals give continued tax relief to 98% of U.S. taxpayers – he “waters” the other four shelves.  Increasing tax rates for the other 2% – the top two shelves – was implied by the lack of additional water.  Plus, the second guy is more flexible – the use of his keys showed this.  This represents the fact that Pres. Obama’s deficit cutting proposals include a mixture of both increased revenue and spending cuts.

            Again, my main point was to provide a representation of “trickle down” theory that one could visualize, combined with a contrast between Mr. Romney’s and Pres. Obama’s proposals.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    I’ve been very critical of the media  — maybe some of you have noticed :)

    However, I have to give kudos to CNN for their fact check of President Obama’s 20 page glossy plan. Their conclusion is there is nothing new and the math doesn’t add up. They did a report earlier this week and then received some push back from Team Obama.  Here is their followup.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/25/cnn_talks_with_obama_camp_and_says_obamas_math_still_doesnt_add_up.html

    • OnPointComments

      I hope that there is a news organization somewhere that will investigate the main stream media’s burial of the Benghazi story.  But I’m not optimistic.

  • toc1234

    The Atlantic, PBS and Lefty Jack… another Blue Ribbon Panel for the Friday roundtable…  which would be fine if this was paid for by NYT or NBC but it is not.

  • MrNutso

    How about that Frankenstorm?

  • TinaWrites

    Not only was Romney trying to morph into the President during the final debate this Monday by sounding like he’d long held the President’s plans and policies, but now he is grabbing the President’s 2008 campaign slogan, “Change”, with his “Big Change” slogan.  This all happens in front of strains of  Obama’s choice of “Signed, Sealed, Delivered”.  What is with this guy (Romney)??!  This is even weirder than being an Etch-a-Sketch!  Will he float a holograph (-gram?) of himself in front of the President in the Oval Office signing a humorous Halloween card to his friends!!?  

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      Do you think Romney will strap the White House dog to the top of Air Force 1 ? 

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Do you think Obama will put the dog on the menu?

        • TinaWrites

          No!  Our actual, real-live, current 
          President, named Barack Obama, would NOT do that!  

          To be self-centered about it, Wm. James’ image seems to have read into my piece enough to see how past-exasperated I am with Romney’s underlying characters: “Cute Little Bad Boy, The Liar”, and “Bad Boy, It Was All In Fun.  No Harm Meant” (which  goes straight into:  Making Money is Fun, Helping My Rich Friends is Fun, Balancing the Budget While Watching the 47% Squirm is Fun.  I Meant No Harm By It).  

      • TinaWrites

        Wish I’d thought of that!  (Altho it does “circle eight” around to the bottom side of the pattern I see.  Lately, Romney is imitating the parts of the President that he knows President Obama’s supporters like about him.  Your FABULOUS IMAGE does the opposite, polluting Obama’s image with Romney’s own shenanigans.  But, I’m SO tired of all this, that I say, let’s go with your HUMOR:  it’s fabulously wicked and very much needed!  Thanks!!!

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

      The only reason Mitt became governor of MA is that he basically ran as the “other” democrat.

      • TinaWrites

        Wow!  Interesting!  The current Mass. governor gave a great debunk-Romney speech at the DNC. You probably heard it.  Can you tell us whether HE is an effective governor?  He is always articulate when interviewed on WGBH.  Thanks!

    • SomMom

       Romney is a slippery fish, a shape-changer. No one should trust him. He was governor of my state, so I’ve watched him change on the issues over the years, but never as QUICKLY as he’s been changing his “stands” on the issues as he’s done in the past few weeks!

        We’re getting whiplash from watching him change positions: That’s the Big Change he’s talking about! HIS “big change” from “severely conservative” to “Moderate Mitt” to “progressive.”

         But the joke’s on us: WHAT has changed? The Republicans don’t seem to mind his changes, so they must think that these are just pretend “changes.”  Or they’re desperate, I guess.)

      • TinaWrites

        Another great reply!  Thanks so much!  I wish that “slippery fish” had gotten out there as an image months and months ago.  It’s powerful, and, altho I love fish, it is somewhat repulsive as an image and could have been effective.  

    • anamaria23

      The obvious “tactic”  by the the Romney campaign to appeal to the far right  to secure the nominaton then move to the center as more people become tuned in near the election is dispicable and an insult to the electorate.

      Watching the final debate, I was dumbfounded watching this  imposter  with a gleam in his eye defy every position he claimed  he stood for.
      This is what we have come to.   A chronic liar, inept but for the spreadsheet, ascends to the Presidency.     

      • TinaWrites

        Yes!  Romney is far worse than a “flip flopper”!  He IS a “chronic liar”!!!  I should think that would make him ineligible for the highest office in the land!  Thanks for your great reply!

  • MrNutso

    How about that Jack DeWitt of Request Foods telling his employees they should vote for Romney?  Did I mention Request foods received over $1B in stimulus funds that help them expand and hire 250+ people?

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

      Let me introduce you to US Code Title 18 Ch. 29 Sect. 594:

      “Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

      I guess IOKIYAR.

      • OnPointComments

        Amendment to US Code Title 18 Ch. 29 Sect. 594:  Unless you’re a Black Panther, then never mind.

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

          That Black Panther shite isn’t the laugh line in the real world you think it is.

  • Coastghost

    Then per President Obama: no schools of medicine should graduate male OB-GYNs, no men should work in pharmaceutical industries researching and manufacturing contraceptives. Nothing startling about these views.

    • SomMom

       No, the point is that those males should not be deciding whether women should have access to contraceptives or abortion.

      • Coastghost

        Is it President Obama’s position that such decisions are only to be made by females? Fathers would thus have no parental rights to exercise at all. 

        • Ray in VT

          That is a tough one.  On the one hand, if you put in half of the ingredients, then shouldn’t you get some say, but on the other hand, you’re not carrying for 9 months, and should you get some sort of veto over another person’s body.  I wouldn’t want to support the latter position, but I can have some sympathy for the former.

        • SomMom

           He was referring to males in political office, not to fathers.  Don’t jump to conclusions!

          • Coastghost

            President Obama has shown his skill as one who slaloms on slippery slopes: I’m reluctant to predict where his logic can take him.

        • keltcrusader

          As women do the 10-month long, heavy lifting, they should always have the final say.

    • anamaria23

      What an utterly asbsurd conclusion.  Pleaes reference “per President Obama”.

      • Coastghost

        Obama’s conceit is “abortion is a women’s issue”. It is not. Abortion is every bit as much a MALE issue as it is a FEMALE issue. I have said and I say again: I will fully support abortion-on-demand when women are capable of generating their own pregnancies. Until such time, abortion is a sad outcome resulting from a social interaction between a male and a female, and as such, it merits at least two perspectives (I’m aware of no statistics suggesting that most abortions are consequent to rape: most abortions performed in the US today are foisted on the poor to thin their ranks in yet some other socially acceptable fashion–how adroit to make the poor complicit in their own extermination).

  • Yar

    When Hurricane Sandy treks up the Chesapeake Bay and floods Washington D.C. is it a sign from God warning man about the sin of  Climate change?

    • Jasoturner

      Climate change?  What’s that?

  • Jack Acme

    (A narrow popular vote lead for Obama) + (Vote Stealing Computerized Voting) = Narrow win for Romeny

  • toc1234

    if obama wins, but romney wins the popular vote, I hope Tom has a couple people, who are still driving around with “defeat bush again” bumper stickers on their volvos, on the show to get their thoughts…

    • MrNutso

      Well, that depends on whether the Supreme Court halts the voting in the deciding state(s), and says the decision applies only to this case, and courts cannot rely on the decision in the future.

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

        For some reason if the situation were reversed I don’t think there will be a repeat of the “Brooks Brothers Riot”.

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

    “The campaign is all about momentum”? (Molly, I think.)

    “We’re nerds who are already talking about what happens in case of a tie.”

    I submit that the coverage of the campaign is all about momentum.

    I want to know if any of the “geeks” in the media will fess up to being suckers for the 2000 Bush II “confidence con”. Bush wasted days in NJ and CA to pretend he had momentum, and didn’t even win the popular vote.

  • skeptic150

    This view of abortion is common in the Republican Party.  It is clearly rooted, imo, in Christian theocracy which influences many of the Republican Party policies (as described in their platform(s)).  These “ideas” have far reaching effects – abstinence only sex ed in public schools, evolution v creationism faux “debate”, global warming, lack of respect for animals (although they proclaim “sanctity of life”), abuse of natural resources, “faith” based exemptions with respect to laws and taxes, etc. 
    Sorry, but the Republican Party needs to “evolve” (a good start, imo, would be to get rid of their imaginary Judeo-Christian “friend” in the sky, which apparently significantly influenced the decision to invade Iraq and continues to influence many of their nonsensical opinions, policies, and legislation which serve to hinder progress and divide this country).

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney wants to hang the lower median income on Obama. Sadly, too many people are listening to this BS. It wouldn’t matter who was president, the economy tanked. Millions lost their jobs.

    Romney’s “I know how to create jobs” line of bull would have made no difference. How many jobs has Romney created in the last 4 years with his tens of millions of low tax income?

    The proof is in the LACK of pudding.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    It’s truly bizarre to see Lord R trying to sell tired voodoo econ, that failed spectacularly during the bush nightmare and is failing spectacularly in europe as we speak, as a fresh, new, “big change”. “We crashed the economy with tax cuts ‘n deregulation, let’s fix it with tax cuts ‘n deregulation”. “If we cut your medicare and SS to keep my taxes low, it will really be good for you.” I  know about the power of the media to spin lies and nonsense into reality, but this is really pushing the outer limits.

    Best news is MA election moving clearly toward Elizabeth Warren. It will be so great to be rid of “Nasty Ken Doll” Brown, whose entire campaign has been cheap attacks and endless repetition of “I’m bipartisan”. 

    • JONBOSTON

      Reality check–payroll taxes pay for medicare and social security, not income taxes. So your effort to link the two is wrong. Your dislike of Romney gets in the way of intellectual honesty on your part.  Since you keep harping about Bush tax cuts (funny, I  thought a bipartisan Congress passed them), how do you explain the economic growth, low unemployment ( 5%) and job growth experienced in the US after the cuts took effect and prior to the Lehman Bros meltdown?

      As far as Elizabeth Warren is concerned , don’t we have one too many law professors in Washington?

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Reality check – the main reason the right wants to cut SS is that they’re afraid taxes on the oligarchs will have to rise when the time comes to redeem the treasury bonds in the trust fund.
        And, the best fix to the minor problems SS has is to raise the cap, which would raise Lord R’s taxes (and I did not say “income”).
        It’s irrelevant whether the congress voted on the bush tax cuts, the point is that they serve as yet another illustration that voodoo doesn’t work. Lord R has no new plan, just same old same old.

        How do I explain the party before the hangover? Are you serious? If you cut taxes and let wall st run wild of course you can pump up a massive bubble and have a crazy party, and a crash – then you blame President Obama for not cleaning up the mess fast enough. 

        Electing a financial con man in response to a mess made by financial con men – ultimate stupidity.

        I don’t care about cheap attack tactics like using  “professor” every other sentence, I care about the fact that future Senator Warren realizes that our #1 priority is fighting back against RR-type class warfare. Say goodnight, ex Senator “Ken” Brown.

  • Yar

    Don’t vote and Romney wins.  Read Dr. Seuss’s Horton Hears a Who!  We need every voice in the nation to speak.

  • Duras

    Jon Stewart killed last night.  He showed that Obama has a more successful investment percentage than Romney had at Bain Capitol.  

    And that line about the Republican plateform saying to a woman that if she want to have in vitro fertilization she can’t, but if she’s a rape victim, she must have the child. Pure genius. 

  • Alieve

    Murdocks’ comment that it is God’s will if a woman becomes pregnant after  being raped effectively releases the rapist from any responsibility for his actions. I am imagining courtrooms around the county where men being charged with rape have for their defense: “God made me do it.” And the women are left to deal with the consequences of “Gods will.”
    Victims of rape don’t need their own personal Jesus -bastard son to remind them everyday of what they suffered through, thank you very much.

  • Mabornatrix

    You say that it’s important that everyone get out and vote in this close election.  I will vote for Obama.  But.  I live in Orleans Parish in the state of Louisiana.  My District will go for Obama.  My state will go for Romney, thereby taking MY electoral vote with it.  Every vote DOESN’T count.  I’m voting anyway, but because of the Electoral College system this election is being decided by the few in the battleground states. So if you live in a battleground state, PLEASE go vote.  You have to be MY voice.

    • Duras

      Strong democrat turnout in a red state might modify republican positions on certain issues.  Perhaps. 

      Also, I live in Florida, and I talked my republican family into voting for Obama this year.  I’m also driving disenfranchized people to the polls.  I’m trying! 

  • MrNutso

    Well, caller, how much federal money was used to BAIL OUT the olympics?

    • IsaacWalton

      So true. ROMNEY turned around the OLYMPICS (uh, WINTER Olympics, BTW) with government assistance! I’m sure he used plenty of his OWN money to do that. Nope. I’m sure he got tons of private companies to invest and help out (nope…I can’t remember, can I BUY stock in the Olympics?). 

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

        Hey, the first rule of running investments is “never invest your own money”.

  • Bryan Farr

    Amongst my friends, Romney is most disliked and so much hurt and hate is being spread for his and Ryan’s stance on Gay rights.  Romney has alienated a large population of voters and instead of embracing all people, he wants to enforce DOMA, ban any of Obama’s progress on gay rights, hospital visitation. I would vote for Romney, but this is the issue that will make me never vote for him.

  • IsaacWalton

    Typical uninformed caller (Christina). Romney campaign slung the most negative ads FIRST. Never mind the Republican mass monster media (read “FOX NEWS”) that spews negative negative negative and WRONG complaints. Wake up Christina, take a good look at the ENTIRE Republican family you are joining.

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

      “The economy has gone backwards”?

      “Mitt saved the Salt Lake Olympics (without hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars).”

      “The Obama campaign is throwing a lot of dirt; there’s been less from the Romney side.”

      Please, more calls from “independents” like Marie who just happen to have all the GOP talking points at hand.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Current caller Craig – enjoy your eternity in Hell.

  • IsaacWalton

    Dear caller Craig…no one said anything about the unborn child being GUILTY of anything. Has EVERYONE forgot that the WOMAN has the FIRST SAY in what happens to that child…NOT the rapist, NOT the politician…and sorry, but NOT God. That WOMAN has the WILL to do what she wants!

  • Dierdra Michelle

    As a woman who was raped as a very young woman, placed the child conceived from that rape for adoption…. I am terrified by the “garbage’ thoughts that are being thrown around about rape/conception/abortion. No person can decide for ‘any’ woman who is struggling with the trauma of unwanted pregnancy.  I can say wholeheartedly that the road I chose was incredibly hard.  

    If this was the only sticking point I could never vote for Romney, but then throw in his policies on The Arts, Gay Rights, and his Foreign Policies. I could never vote for such a disrespectful platform.

  • TinaWrites

    We are a nation with separation of church and state.

    • Coastghost

      –but not, as Paul Feyerabend pointed out, a nation observing separation of state and science.

    • IsaacWalton

      I’m a Christian, and I am HAPPY that we have a separation of Church and State and I in NO WAY want the man made mass Christian machine running our country…it’s NOT what God intended. 

    • DrewInGeorgia

      In theory? Yes.
      In practice? Not so much.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Excellent non-partisan piece in today’s WaPO. Very moving. Don’t politicize rape — on either side.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/10/26/rape-shouldnt-be-used-to-score-political-points/

    • jefe68

      And yet, it’s the right that is the doing this.

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

        B-b-b-but you saw the Beltway Inbred paper: Both sides do it!

  • SKBoston

    There is supposed to be separation of church and state in this country. 

    • DrewInGeorgia

      There’s also supposed to be access to legal counsel when detained, right to trial by a jury of your peers, and a right to express your thoughts via freedom of speech. We traded it all off for a false sense of security.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kyle.rose Kyle Rose

    Caller: A lot of us DON’T GIVE A CRAP ABOUT YOUR RELIGION. You can justify in your own mind all the fairy tales about conception and God’s will you want, but don’t expect us to accept those fairy tales as the basis for law. Believe anything you want, as long as you don’t force it on others.

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

      SERIOUSLY. You can believe anything you want in this country, but you do not have the right to codify your religious beliefs into laws that everyone else must follow even if they don’t share your religion.

      • IsaacWalton

        I’m a Christian and I AGREE with you COMPLETELY. My choice to be Christian, my journey my downfalls…I can share them, IF you want it. Sheesh…God/Jesus, save me from your misguided followers!

    • Potter

      We have our religious fanatics, hypocrites, who don’t appreciate what freedom means.  Odd- since this country was founded by people seeking religious freedom. 

      Are these people crying about the killing of innocents in unnecessary wars? Are these the same people that are for the death penalty here?   
      Are these the same people who are afraid of “death panels ” (but not insurance companies)? Are these the same people who are saying they do not want government to “creep into” their lives ? Isn’t this what Romney is saying?  Are these the same people who are saying Obamacare is socialism but laws against a woman’s right to have an abortion if she needs to should be illegal and that is not the government creeping into what is personal? Is this not the government interfering? Or does the religious dictate that a human being defined as such from the moment of conception should be protected by the state? Religious belief, what God wants ( as defined by some mortals) trumps science?

      A “free country” means I don’t live by your religious beliefs. We have civil laws to obey; we are a civil society. Check the founding fathers.

      • ttajtt

        2000 years ago a hypocrite was the stage performer or actors (like the rep. party picked up from Reagan) you know “where one performs (acts like) what one is not”.   history of the words back ground meaning plays a lot to the true act in ones deed.  

  • larsrisd

    Astonishing to hear people so willing to blame Obama for not cleaning up FASTER after 8 years of Bush. Turning this giant dreadnought of an economy takes time, even without the Repubs dragging their heels on everything just to make a point. 

     I’ve yet to hear about how many middle-class jobs Romney during his time at Bain. Living in Mass, I can say that taxpayers saw fees increase all over the place while he was in office (fee for car registration doubled). The Republicans throw out a tax break with one hand, then kill you with a thousand tiny paper cuts with the other.

  • alison hodge

    I am extremely offended by the last caller, who suggested that women who didn’t understand why they should not have a choice about carrying a pregnancy, that is a result of rape, to term should read scripture and listen to god for guidance. THIS attitude is what is so scary, because it is one religious group trying to force their beliefs on others.  They are welcome to believe this, and I support that right, but they have no right to force this view of reality on the rest of us. 

  • Markus6

    We’re 16 Trillion in debt. We’re headed for a fiscal cliff. We’re spending billions in two wars. We have a dysfunctional congress. The health care bill is a mess. And these are the issues people are talking about.

    We really are dopes.

  • IsaacWalton

    Yes OBAMA voted already. And he cast a VOTE for everyone WOMAN who wants a voice in determining what happens to her body. And he cast a vote for every LGBT person who wants to be respected as equals! It is NOT the country that mainstream, ultra conservative, right wing Repubs want…but I’m sorry…this IS NOT SOLELY YOUR COUNTRY!

  • carache

    Could the panel do anything to correct the quite troubling misperception that the economy can be nimbly directed like a snowmobile or speedboat, rather than something that more resembles a tanker or glacier: the devastating economic crisis was caused by years and decades of misguided policies, diminishing tax revenue and deregulation; it cannot be improved over four years of policy shifts, alone.  I’m gravely concerned that after committing themselves to preventing Obama from passing helpful legislation, Republicans will now claim credit for the gradual economic improvement over the next four years that are the result of Obama’s few legislative victories.  Peoples’ expectations for quick fixes is downright crazymaking.  Why hasn’t Obama driven this point home!

    • anamaria23

      Very well stated.  I find it most irksome that should Mr. Romney win he will benefit from the slow, steady progress so hard won by the Obama administraton.  This “failed Presidency”  puts Mr. Romney  on a much surer footing than the near catastrophe Mr. Obama faced on day one and managed to head off.
      Mr.  Romney is as unprincipled a candidate as ever hit the
      Presidential trail. 

    • hennorama

      The Great Recession’s only precedent is the Great Depression.  It was a “balance sheet” recession unlike the typical “boom/bust” recessions with relatively rapid recoveries most voters have ever experienced.  This makes the “Why isn’t it better already?” argument effective.

      Plus, no one could have gotten elected in 2008 if they had told this truth – “It’s going to be a long, slow grind recovering from this mess.”

      Much of the very difficult work of filling in the very deep hole left from the GR has already been done.  The reason things haven’t “snapped back” is that most businesses and individuals have been busy paying down debt and adding to savings rather than borrowing and spending.  This lack of spending has kept growthlow and unemployment relatively high.  It still feels a lot like a recession.

      But we see very encouraging signs that this is about to change – household debt is now lower than it was before the Great Recession; housing is showing very positive signs;  GDP last quarter grew faster then the prior quarter; the unemployment rate is the lowest it’s been in nearly 4 years and is below 8%.

      We are indeed poised for growth.

    • Fredlinskip

      I agree that Dems are not good “salesmen” of their policies- All they really need to do is express the FACTS and they could win hands down most any election.

      But then again, Dems don’t run massive media conglomerations or possess 24 hour propaganda machines such as Fox “News”. 

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

        Dems aren’t good salesmen? To who?

        You’re wrong in the fact that Dempcrats and their points and their policies are consistently more popular with voters than with the mainstream media.

        And that mainstream media is full of inbreds who are half-infected by Fox News.

        • Fredlinskip

          The elections would be a lot less close and we would have much less polarization in Congress and America- if only the media were willing to disseminate fact from fiction.

          The Misinformation Age has and continues to do perhaps irreparable damage to American society.

  • ChicagoMichael

    Governor Romney is a farce; he is proposing tax cuts to stimulate the economy, but to pay for this and defense spending he is suggesting cuts. The cuts he defines on his web page fall short of what he claims to need to reduce the deficit and pay for his programs. He will be cutting programs and pushing the cost on the states. The Federal government spends 100 billions for mass transit, roads, law enforcement, parks etc. Much of this will be picked up by the state budgets, but the states will need to increase taxes and fares to cover the additional expense. As a result even if the Governor can figure a way to make his tax cuts the tax payer will  pay more state taxes and the cost of getting to work and lving that will off set any tax break. Additionally he is opposed to abortion in most cases. Regardless how you feel about this issue what Romney does not address is 40% of The 1.2 million abortions are by women living below the poverty level. How would he pay to feed and care for the additional nearly 500,000 children added to the poverty level every year. If it is charity how would this cover the addition when he is eliminating deductions for charitable donations.

  • mmmso

    I totally agree with the woman who spoke a short time ago about how Romney speaks his truth at the outset, but, if it is preceived to be a truth that alienates many voters, his advisors tell him to tweak that statement (damage control) ASAP.  My hope is that intelligent people will see thru this and not believe his “follow up” statements.  “Etch-a-sketch” anyone?   

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

    I am incredibly sick and tired of ONCE AGAIN having to watch up to half the country debate, in the twenty-first century, whether women are children or subhuman beings, or whether we have any rights that men or religious bigots are bound to respect. “Talibangelist” is not too strong a term for people like this, in my opinion. I agree with that young woman who called in: this election isn’t just about the economy, but about the very lives, personal autonomy, and human rights of the female half of the population. It’s disgusting.

    • vsnqst

      Well said Red! Each and every woman across our great nation should vote AGAINST ANY and ALL Republicans, to send the Righteous message: How dare you?! Their arrogant presumption of dictating whether or when a woman might exercise her most fundamental rights to autonomously make whatever reproductive choices she wants — these American Taliban of the extreme fundamentalist religious right are ridiculous. Our Bill of Rights principle of “Freedom of Religion” also means Freedom FROM religion. DO NOT impose your primitive religiosity on others. Practice it freely in your homes and churches, but respect the separation of church and state, and don’t bother others with your beliefs. 
      And if all women vote to rid our Congress of these extreme Republicans, Obama will have reasonable, rational legislators with whom we can work to help the country, instead of the destructive, obstructionist, actually treasonous adversaries who vowed to oppose and defeat him starting upon his inauguration. 

  • Coastghost

    There’s a good story we haven’t heard: how were relations between George McGovern and Russell Means?

  • toc1234

    so romney’s bain record is more than fair game b/c he is running in part as a business man (and gov) but obama’s academic record is/was not germaine when he essentially ran as an academic?  strange…

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

      “Transcripters” are the new “birthers”.

    • OnPointComments

      I’m not a fan of Donald Trump, but given the opportunity to provide charities with $5 million dollars, you’d think President Obama would jump at the chance and give him the documents he wants.

      • larsrisd

        Trump’s all about stirring a pot and distracting us from focusing on real problems. Obama’s smart not to give him a moment’s attention. 
        Trump should stop being such a tool and just donate the money to charity himself.
        But then, why support the peasants, eh?

      • JGC

        I would donate $100 to the charity of Romney’s choice if he would release his tax returns for the past 10 years or 12 years.  Mitt Romney, accept my challenge!

  • DrewInGeorgia

    Regarding the Rape comment, I don’t understand the confusion. Of course he said what he meant. If your belief structure tells you that your version of God created everything and that everything is a part of an intended plan, Mourdock’s comment was right in line. How much does this reflect on the failures of structured religion and it’s impact on all who don’t subscribe to it? This is the type of thinking that allows brainwashed subscribers to believe it’s okay if there are people starving, if genocide is being committed, if we are destroying the planet, if a few posses everything while the majority have nothing. After all, everything is God’s will right?

  • scb01890

    Fact check: Romney’s ~ “This year’s growth is less than last”: Yes 1.74 for the first 3 months was less than last year’s 1.8, but April-June’s 2.0 pushed this year greater than last. 

  • Christopher Duffy

    That this race is even close is testament more to the nature of consent manufacture by popular media outlets through spin than it is the merits of Mitt Romney. If our political candidates were honestly appraised by truly independent (rather than the corporate spin machines we call the news media) journalists there is little doubt, in my mind, that our political process would be made stronger for it. Instead, we have candidates like Romney who, despite his obvious disdain for the majority of the electorate, is propped up by the necessity for equal coverage deemed appropriate by CNN, ABC, Fox, etc. Why don’t we just appoint a corporate board to run the country? It would be less disingenuous and achieve the same results.

    • Guest

       Nice!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       That is rich.  You are claiming that the media is propping up Romney?  It is clear that they are propping up Obama.  If Bush tried to go 7 months without a news conference he would be front page news until he was shamed into holding a news conference.

  • lanesvillian1

    If Romney is such a wonderful leader, then why is he trailing so badly in Mass., the state that knows him best? 

    In his four years as governor, Romney morphed from a moderate Republican to a hard-right conservative, as he began to prepare himself for his first go at the presidency. In the past four weeks, he’s moved in the exact opposite direction. He is waging a deeply cynical campaign–say whatever it takes to win, even if it contradicts what you said last week. I am amazed that more journalists aren’t calling him out on it.

    If he wins, he will have proved that etch-a-sketch really does work, and more and more candidates will follow his lead. Meanwhile, we’ll have a shape-shifting plutocrat for president who will stand solely for what’s best for him. 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Fact check:  The WH 2011 economic forecast predicted 4% economic growth in 2012.

    1.25% and 2% don’t quite cut it.

    • larsrisd

      You seriously think Romney would have done better? Try living in Mass for a while as a middle class worker.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Yes I do believe Romney would have done better.

        And I do live in MA so I feel your pain.

    • timcahill98

      And you can thank the obstructionist Republicans in Congress for blocking everything Pres. Obama tried to do to improve economic growth.  If Pres. Obama said the sky was blue, they’d say it was green.  Remember, Pres. Obama submitted a jobs bill last August that would have created over 1 million new jobs (according to the non-partisan CBO) and Congress still hasn’t acted on it.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Myth.

        Harry Reid blocked 32 common sense jobs bills passed by the house.

        See, there are two sides to the the coin.

  • jefe68

    Could not agree more, hey GOP, you don’t own women.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMxtbAP2cyU

    • Gregg Smith

      That is such shallow thinking. Is it really working on you?

      • jefe68

        All the women I know do not seem to agree with your kind of shallow thinking.

        So you agree with the GOP platform on woman’s health care? This is a yes or no answer, no bullshiting here buddy.

        • Gregg Smith

          The GOP has no platform on “Woman’s health care”. Romney has eliminated the gap with women in the polls. Women are not stupid.

    • DrewInGeorgia

       Didn’t watch the video but I liked the “you don’t own women” sentiment.

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

    There has been little talk of what Romney would do instead of raising taxes – I remember what he did here in MA, decided fees were not taxes and were fair game to raise. There wasn’t a fee in MA that Romney didn’t like.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       That isn’t true.

      Romney specifically didn’t raise any broad based fees like auto registrations.

      Also, the MA law does not allow the fee to exceed the cost of the service.  There is nothing wrong with fee for service for specialty services — like handgun registrations.

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

        Just saying beware what you are being offered – Romney has been sounding like removing deductions (at least for the middle class) is also not a tax increase.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           He made a promise to not raise taxes on the middle class — he should be held to that promise.

          • ttajtt

            was not the middle class scratched off obamas first year.  and i am not talking about hourly pay wages working now.  the ones to be tax hit, not the top 1% of the romney class.  
            where would he be If never gave the 4 million tax free, and in his account or did tax it off,    did the 4 mill help him to wear he is now?

  • http://openid.aol.com/ritchdume Richard Dumenu

    Nothing forces clinching my vote for Obama than the chamelionic positions espoused by Romney. And even Romney doesn’t usually recollect some his own policies that he has previously advertised.
    What concerns me most is the lack of playing the real record of the man as governor of MA in this campaign for all to know what he did as such exactly. I believe those records count most in this campaign, because that’s what he is using to assert confidently that ‘I can create jobs, I can do it, that’s my job…’ Is it a surprise that when the nitty gritty of the Bain Capital records were laid bare for all to see and know, Romney couldn’t bamboozle us with it anymore?
    Avail and harp on all the records of his governorship performance for all to see and know in these last days so we can make our final justified informed decision about the man. A person with a chamelionic amnesia can not be a trusted leader.  

    • Gregg Smith

      Well this list doesn’t include Obama’s big fat gay marriage flip flop.

      http://www.facebook.com/notes/republican-security-council/the-top-10-obama-flip-flops-by-ari-fleischer/171275079638338
       
      But forget those. He said in the debate sequestration will not happen and the day before tole the Des Moines Register it would. Which is it?

      • J__o__h__n

        It wasn’t much of a flip flop as he always qualified that he was evolving on it.  He supported every other gay rights issue.  Mitt didn’t tell the MA voters that he was pro-choice but was (for lack of a better word) evolving on it and might eventually become anti-choice. 

        • Gregg Smith

          Okey dokey, how bout the other 10 on Fleisher’s list? Is Obama for or against sequestration?

  • IsaacWalton

    Oh LORD! Romney will NOT make jobs. Dear caller, okay get a job and give up your other MORE IMPORTANT rights!

  • reasontoast

    I don’t understand how Murdoch can say that conception — no matter how it happened — is the will of God and should not be allowed to be terminated BUT it is okay to terminate when conception threatens a women’s life. Isn’t that also God’s will too? Why is it okay to follow God’s will sometimes but not always? He obviously meant to give that mother a pregnancy in order to kill her. Trying to figure out what God wants is so hard!

    • jefe68

      Because men like Mourdock are willfully ignorant of science and biology. 

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

        Not that Mourdock came from a political place full of ignorance and misogyny, but how did he get on the ballot, again? Who did he force out, and what faction supported Mourdock during the primaries?

        • Ray in VT

          Well, at least he isn’t a witch.

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

            Not so fast, there: For all we know, he may “weigh the same as a duck”.

          • Ray in VT

            Someone should look into that.  We don’t need people whom water rejects in Congress.

          • DrewInGeorgia

             I’m filling the dunkin’ tank as we speak…

        • jefe68

          Well that’s obvious is it not? The man won the GOP primary for the GOP ticket for the race for the Senate. It’s scary how many people in this nation think like this man.

          • Tastearb

            It is a shame that the GOP seems to be the only party for folks like Mourdock and Akin.  We are diminished as a people for their thinking the way they do.  While I will vote for Romney Ryan I have the opportunity in my state to vote against a state board of education candidate (GOP)who believes in “intelligent design” in the science classroom and various other candidates who are running for the bench with the most extreme ideologies.  It’s an interesting world, I do want to make it better, hope others feel the same way.

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

            If you don’t want “extreme”, don’t look too close at the GOP platform.

            And why is Paul Ryan not out there turning on his “charm” in front of moderate persuadables in swing states?

            (Hint: It has something to do with his extreme positions, many of which he shares with Mourdock and Akin.)

    • timcahill98

      And let’s also point out their hypocrisy with regard to abortion versus capital punishment.  It’s not okay to terminate an embryo (a non-thinking, non-feeling organism) but it IS okay to terminate a full-grown, thinking, feeling person because of a crime they’ve committed? 

      I wonder how these Christian-like Talibanists would feel if they had to become responsible for raising and caring for the offspring of a rape-induced conception.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Lindsey might want to ask the residents of MA how he handled the “economy” when he was governor. He says a lot and he “forgets” to say a lot.

    • IsaacWalton

      Yes, I think Lindsey is (unfortunately) your typical undecided uninformed voter. They will NOT delve into the “work” that Romney really did in MA. They look at this well groomed (million dollar groomed) white business man and wrongly believe he will get them jobs. Romney just wants to fulfill his family’s long line of male dominated dreams of reaching the highest seat in the country. He will say anything to get it…even say that he wants to save middle-class America—the workers he needs to take LOW PAYING jobs and then CUT to make money for him and his high class circle of friends. The gap between the rich and everyone else has grown immensely because of the policies of repubs over the last 40 or more years. Yes we (the non-rich) have had gains but they have been SOOOO small. That’s because of the top down, horse and sparrow economic policies.

    • SomMom

       No one seems to care that we in Mass. are supporting President Obama, because we KNOW how Romney did in public office.

      Mass. did well during his term DESPITE Romney, NOT because of him. His approach was to slash all spending… education, roads and bridges, aid to cities and towns, etc. etc., so that property taxes and fees sky-rocketed while public services (teachers, firefighters, police, libraries, bridges, etc.) were slashed.

      Under a President Romney, the US middle class would be in for a rude awakening to how a private-sector businessman approaches public office! (Not to mention how he and Ryan feel about abortion and contraception, which is another major concern.)

      • DrewInGeorgia

         A rude awakening would require waking up. Most of us seem to prefer to continue napping.

  • Yar

    Lindsey, do you think the job you get should have healthcare for you and your child?  Obamacare is your child’s health promise. Think about that on the way to the polls. 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Does the caller know that “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” was NOT written by Romney but by the NYTimes?  

    • J__o__h__n

      Who wrote the rest of it?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Did you read it?

        Romney recommended a managed bankruptcy with government support AFTER the bankruptcy.  Instead, Bush and Obama gave GM billions that are  now gone.  Further, Obama’s bankruptcy was way too activist and left GM in a weak position.  If Romney’s advice was followed the taxpayers would have saved billions and the car companies would be stronger today.

        What Obama did was overturn 200 years of bankruptcy law precedent.  This could have a chilling effect on the future corporate bond market.  Why invest if you believe the government will come in at the last minute and protect their friends at your expense.

        • Duras

          Do you think the Ohio voters that work in the factories are idiots?  Because Romney clearly said that he would reduce labor benefits, which Obama did the opposite and they have higher pay right now.  Also, Obama forced them to produce hybrids and electric cars that are helping sales right now.  Moreover, the “managed bankruptcy” requires an amount of private capital that was never going to be available.

          There was a great point raised at the democrat convention that we believe that an auto company does well when their workers earn enough to afford their cars.  Romney has said unambigiously that union workers are earning too much money to remain competitive with labor around the world.  Sorry, but American labor still refuses to work for sweat-shop wages.

          • DrewInGeorgia

            “There was a great point raised at the democrat convention”

            Democratic National Convention, jeez. If it’s too much trouble to type it out just say DNC and be done with it.

            republican’t convention anyone?

        • JGC

          I read it. As you probably know, Romney’s recommendation was a managed bankruptcy, financed by private concerns. But it was a crazy, fearful time with banks dropping by the wayside, liquidity frozen… there was no private money waiting on the sidelines to take over a managed bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler.  The Bush/Obama call on the government was the last resort.  Management at Ford was pleading with the Bush/Obama administrations to step in, because if GM and Chrysler went under, the whole underlying support to the American car industry would collapse along with it, all the small to medium parts supply chain. Romney’s recommendation would have doomed all the domestic car industry at every level. I have to imagine Toyota, Honda and other foreign owned car companies were also in crisis mode, and remember, they employ many workers in domestic manufacturing facilities. 

          By the way, this is the same thinking Romney had on the mortgage crisis: to let all the mortgages go into default as quickly as possible, sweep out the former owners, and let “investors” come in to harvest the bargains. (He did call them investors, not anything warm and fuzzy like new homeowners.)

          Who will be the winners and losers under Romney’s managed bankruptcy of the USA?

          • Duras

            Great points.  I would like to pile on to the examples of Romney hurting the majority of America for the benefit of a few rich people:

            Romney promised that he will replace the banks as middlemen between students and federal student loans, which will cost millions of people thousands of dollars so a few people can make an extra million or two.  If there ever was a more clear example of republicans hurting America to benefit people who are already stinking rich that is it.  And no republican who learns the facts will care at all even if it hurts their own family members.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney will spend BILLIONS more on “swords” so we can continue to be the world’s bully (er, policeman).

    Obama thinks we should spend our money on “plowshares”.

    Shouldn’t be a hard decision.

    • larsrisd

      Amazing that the Republican party has so successfully co-opted the bible belt…they speak the words, but rarely really walk the walk. :(

  • toc1234

    of course Tom won’t mention that the auto makers did technically go bankrupt.

  • Keith Antul

    Caller Carl nailed it.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/AAJAVBIFMHWHUI753KGMFFNXIM Leif E.

    Here’s an analogy: for 6 years Bush and friends took the economy on a sleigh ride down a mountain side and now they expect Obama to pull the sled back up the mountain in 3 years! Preposterous!!!

    • IsaacWalton

      Yeah they did! Let’s BLOW a surplus, start 2 wars and use credit to pay for it. Then let’s let the banks/wall street go nuts and screw the housing industry. Let’s get all of our friends rich (who didn’t create any jobs) and then skip town on the new guy. Wake up undecided voters, THAT’S YOUR REPUBLICAN PARTY!

      • Gregg Smith

        You guys are a hoot!

    • Duras

      How about the republican excuss for Bush’s mishandling of the economy is that he was a wartime president, and then they turn around and blame Obama – another wartime president – for not cleaning up republican mess quick enough….

      I also like the propaganda over the last 4 years that Clinton was actually a republican while Bush was a closet democrat, as if Bush lost his conservative ways during his presidency….  I wish Gingrich would hurry up with that moon colony.

      • sickofthechit

        Why wait for a colony?  Send him there now!

  • Seamus Hareshvara

    One of the guests said that Paul Ryan had a ‘more consistent’ stance on abortion.  That may be, I don’t know.  She went on to say, however, that if you believe that life begins at conception then naturally you must believe that abortion is murder.  I find this to be an overly simplistic and LOGICALLY INCONSISTENT statement that drastically misrepresents the nature of murder, and for that matter it misrepresents abortion.  There are many forms of homicide that are NOT murder; let me repeat: there are many forms of homicide that are NOT murder.  We reserve the term murder for those most heinous forms of homicide that we believe could merit the most severe forms of punishment available, namely execution (a whole other topic about another form of state-sanctioned homicide) or lifelong imprisonment.  If someone is killed by another in self-defense or in a justifiable homicide, punishment is usually not deemed appropriate at all.  I am NOT saying that I believe abortion is necessarily justifiable, I believe it is a complicated topic: to wit, if the life of the mother is in clear jeopardy, then I think an argument could easily be made that -if you view abortion as a form of homicide – it is in self-defense and not out of malice aforethought.   If you do not believe that life begins at conception (or at some point early in pregnancy) then you might argue strenuously against the characterization of abortion as homicide.  All I am saying is that I strongly disagree with the guest’s unequivocal assertion that if you believe that life begins at conception you MUST logically believe that abortion is murder.  I believe that is inflammatory, I’m not sure if she said it to be sensational and just hasn’t thought through the ideas behind her words.  She should think through the logical implications of her assertions before sharing them with the nation.  One would hope that she would do that for her own sake and for the sake of critical thinking.

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

    I hope someone on this panel talked about Romney’s bluff to sucker the media. Otherwise, it’s time to get someone from outside the Beltway.

  • ttajtt

    somewhat out of line. but when after when sodom and gomorrah were destroyed.  locks daughters think to breed with dad to re-populate?  as rulers did in wanting the blood line to stay on top?   NOW was that a survival in thought or life style of gearing?  go for it right now? or go hunt for it?

  • taylorhutchison

    Carl from Nashville wins the Best Repeat Caller of all time prize.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I thought it was  replay.

  • OnPointComments

    “The lesson to U.S. diplomats and consular personnel is obvious. You put your lives on the line for your country, and if the natives get restless, if they overrun your embassy and kill you, the Secretary of State will “accept responsibility” and the president will make nice comments about you on the Comedy Channel.”  –Ken Blackwell

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

      Ken Blackwell? Hasn’t he got some voting machines to dismantle before Election Day?

  • 1Brett1

    We’ve heard from Carl in Nashville, but we haven’t heard from the truckers who used to call in regularly. I wonder what they think about all of this?

  • Rebecca Harrison

    There is one major statement that Romney made during the town hall style debate that I think has been severely overlooked. While Obama finished a statement on investing in science, research, and education instead of increasing the deficit with more tax cuts, Romney very rudely interrupted the moderator proclaiming, 

    “GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS, GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBs.” 

    I am not saying that what Romney said is false. I believe that the government has very limited abilities in physically creating jobs. The economy is like a wild stallion and both candidates are speaking of it like it was a well trained work horse. What bothers me most is that Romney continues to use Obama’s failure to create more jobs against him, while promising that he will create 12 million more jobs by 2016. How will he do this if “Government does not create jobs”? His statement totally debunks his entire campaign and I don’t see how the media has not picked up on it.
    I would also just like to add a new slogan for Romney that I have come up with, I feel that it suits him well.
    “I will do nothing he did, but BETTER!”

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Romney’s point is his policies of tax and regulatory reform will spur economic growth.  The economic growth will result in jobs.  He has economic analysis that backs him up.

      He has a very detailed energy plan that will open up new resources on Federal lands.  It is very easy to see how this will create millions of jobs.  It will have the benefits increased royalty revenues to the government and secure domestic supply which should also make domestic manufacturing more attractive.  In the long run this will reduce our security interests in the middle east.  It is very synergistic.

      Frankly, I don’t think President Obama understands Gov. Romney’s plan either.  So don’t feel bad.

      • Rebecca Harrison

        So you propose we invest in oil drilling and natural gas extraction to invest in our future when such action endangers the health of our citizens, destroys our land, and kills wildlife? Not to mention that the oil on this planet is only projected to last 40 more years at the rate we are using it, making it a horrible long term investment. Instead Obama proposes to invest in renewable energy, keyword RENEWABLE! Meaning that it won’t take millions of years to create more of it. Wind, solar, and biofuel is where this country needs to invest if we plan on surviving more than 40 years. 
        Additionally, Romney spouting off his five point plan for improving the economy every time he is asked a question does not mean that he has a detailed solution. His plan is not revolutionary and it does not vary much from what Obama has been doing and will do. 
        This also does not change the fact that Romney has been promising the American people that he will CREATE 12 million new jobs. How can he say this and still believe that government does not create jobs. Maybe he just plans on digging into his foreign bank accounts and hiring 12 million people himself. I am sure he could afford it. 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Well, Mr. Obama promised 5M green jobs.  He used $90B of the $900B stimulus directly on green ‘investments’.  Are you going to hold Mr. Obama accountable for his false promise?

          The truth is we need an all of the above energy policy.  The key is investing in basic research that will develop ‘cost competitive’ renewable energy alternatives.  I commend Mr. Obama for expanding the funding for ARPA-E energy research.  However, most of the $90B went into less productive ‘investments’.

          Mr. Obama is proposing the status quo.  We know that isn’t working.  Mr. Romney is offering reforms that he claims will grow the economy.  You can’t create good private sector jobs with out growing the economy.  Mr. Romney’s proposals are common sense to me.  Apparently they don’t work for you.  I have no idea if his plan will result in 12M jobs.  No one does.  Maybe it will create more than 12M jobs.  However, the status quo is unacceptable.

          • Rebecca Harrison

            It is amazing to me how quickly people pick up on campaign slogans and use them as fact. Obama is not advocating the status quo. Don’t you think he wants growth too? I understand that you don’t think his policies will cause growth, but I don’t think Romney’s will either. Regardless of whether they will work, both candidates are trying to improve the economy and it is an ignorant notion to think that Obama wants things to stay the way they are and Romney is a progressive candidate. It is so aggravating that Romney tries to put him on that side of the issue instead of talking about the real difference between their proposals.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I’m sure Obama wants growth but I believe he doesn’t know what is constraining growth.

            Here is the difference.  Obama had 4 years to get the job done and he failed.  Sure, you can blame the GOP in the last two years but I contend that is a shallow argument.  The truth is he didn’t show the leadership required to get the job done.

            Contrast Obama’s behavior to Bill Clinton.  Clinton recognized that after huge midterm losses that he needed to work with the GOP.  He gave a little and got a little but was able to get things done.

            Read Bob Woodward’s book.  He is no fan of the GOP but he really indicts Obama’s failure in leadership.

          • Rebecca Harrison

            We expect so much of one figurehead, that we think he can reboot an economy in four years and condemn him to exile if he cannot. Its not like Obama caused this mess or even made it worse, it has been improving. It took 11 years for the economy to bounce back after the Great Depression. The recovery only really got started after four years. We have to see the plan through that we started, not switch four years down the line. Look towards Japan to see how that worked out for them. (On Point had a great discussion of this last fall http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/09/27/a-lost-decade)

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Thank you for the link.  I don’t believe this needs to be anything like Japan.  Japan has made many mistakes.

            I will concede that it is easier to be critical with the benefit of  hindsight.  Apparently, it is also easier to be analytical about the past when we aren’t in the midst of an election.  Both sides are spinning the facts so it is difficult to find objective analysis.

            However, it is crystal clear to me that many mistakes and misjudgements were made by the current admin.  If we don’t learn from our mistakes then there is no hope.

            Also, remember the recession ended in June of 2009.  By June of 2010 they thought we were in ‘recovery summer’ and we were on track for a full recovery.  It is clear now that they had no clue how bad things were and equally clueless as to why things were so bad.

          • Mike_Card

            Willard insists that his “plan” will result in 12 million jobs and a reduction in the national debt of 5 Trillion.  Apparently he disagrees with you.

            That $90 Billion number was manufactured by the Romney campaign, it was never claimed by the administration.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             You lose all credibility when you refer to Romney as Willard just as others who refer to Obama as Barry or even Hussein lose credibility.

          • Mike_Card

            Which, naturally, has nothing to do with my comment.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             No.  It WAS your comment.  Everything else was filtered out.

    • jimino

      Using logic to evaluate Romney’s positions and the reasons many of the “47%” will vote for him is useless.

      Here in Nebraska, our uniformly Republican Congressmen took time out of their re-election campaigns, based upon the claim that “government does not create jobs”, to pose for pictures, in their little hardhats, at the site where government spending is constructing a new Stratcom (military) Headquarters.  They were celebrating and taking credit for the obvious fact that government spending clearly helps the economy and creates jobs. 

      And they will all be easily re-elected.

      • jefe68

        And what, pray tell does that speak to in terms of the people voting these rubes into office?

      • notafeminista

        Wait, Mr. Romney referred to the 47% as people who believe they are victims, not taking care and responsibility for their own lives.

        And yet you believe many of this same 47% will vote for Mr. Romney.

        Hum.  So which worse?  Pointing out an obvious statement the Left as been promoting for years (Group A has been victimized by Group B)…

        …or calling someone stupid.  The portion of the 47% who votes for Mr. Romney despite the fact that (you think) he has, at the very least, a poor opinion of them. 

        • jimino

          The vast majority of the “47%” don’t even know they are part of it.  Where I live a lot of them are farmers and ranchers who depend on government subsidies and disproportionately low taxes to survive; or retirees on Social Security and Medicare; or large God-fearing families. And almost all will vote Republican.  Hell, one of them will probably be our next Senator!  They certainly do not think of themselves as victims or takers, but that is how Romney and Ryan define them. 

           

          • notafeminista

            Hey good job!  Referring to  47% of the population as stupid twice in two posts?  Personal best, I’m guessing.

            And people wonder why Mr. Romney couched it the way he did…”they believe they are victims.” 

            Well of course they do!  We know this because the Left tell us its so..(this just never gets old does it?)

            Women are victimized by men.
            Blacks are victimized by whites
            Gays are victimized by straights.
            The poor are victimized by the rich.

            Let’s see..who gave us the notion that standardized tests were not written for anyone who was not white…could it have been the Right? Oh no…the Left again – telling black people they couldn’t pass tests because they were black.  I cannot imagine anything more demoralizing.  It’s not as though race is a learning disability one can learn a work around for, one can’t form a study group to overcome race. It is unfathomable that anyone would lay that kind of a burden on a person.

            And the women..waiting for men to tell them what they can or cannot do (despite legions of women throughout history doing as they damn well pleased – without the benefit of men’s approval).  Again, why create that kind of burden?

            ….and so on.

          • jimino

            So tell me who makes up the “47%”.  Does it include retirees on SS and Medicare or not?  Does it include hardworking large families or not.  Farmers receiving federal subsidies or not?    And you think they consider themselves victims and would never vote for Romney?  You really have no idea what you’re talking about. 

    • TomK_in_Boston

      A lot of this is just semantics or idiocy. Of course government does create jobs directly, for public sector employees, and despite the class warfare rants they are real, important jobs: soldiers, teachers, fire, police, etc, plus with 1930s-style infrastructure projects that are still benefitting us today. The massive layoffs of public sector employees are a big part of our unemployment rate – the romneys think it’s a good thing.

      Gvt creates jobs indirectly by funding R&D. The short-term orientation  of private companies makes them unable to support basic research. Basic research, which is later commercialized, requires gvt funding. The biotech industry, which is booming in MA, started when Watson used his gvt fellowship to visit Crick’s gvt funded lab. Subsequent developments were made in NIH funded labs. There are countless examples. Government had an essential role in creating the jobs in the biotech industry.

      Gvt also creates and SAVES jobs by maintaining a stable economic climate. If we had not deregulated wall st and cut taxes too much at the top the bush crash would not have happened and millions of jobs would have been saved.

      Lord R disgusts me with his mindless voodoo economics. Believe me, I understand – it works for him.

  • Gregg Smith

    What in the world is all the fuss about Sununu’s comment on Colon Powell? Why on earth would he apologize? Many, many people voted for Obama because he’s black. Many people admitted race was a major factor. Most were white. Obama could not have been elected if so many didn’t vote for him based on the color off his skin. Regarding Powell, the accusation was leveled by George Will, Pat Buchannan and Rush in 2008. There were many others. 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0yv-nFheug&feature=related

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       What is amazing is Obama fails every leadership test highlighted in Powell’s excellent book on leadership.  Therefore, he certainly isn’t endorsing Obama based on leadership.

      • Mike_Card

        And General Powell would know less about leadership–and how to judge it–than you…

    • Duras

      Colin Powel explained why he’s voting for Obama with several reasons.  Sununu insinuated after the fact that Powel isn’t looking at the issues and is voting based on race.  Are you kidding me?  If you can’t see how that’s racist, you are a racist!  Powel made up his own mind based on the issues which he made clear.  Sununu decided not to rebutt Powel on the issues and disagree with his decision but assumed he’s doing it – not based on a thought-out analysis but on – race. 

      • Gregg Smith

        The former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Secretary of State didn’t even mention Benghazi. I guess the military and embassies aren’t his thing.

        Are you seriously saying Sununu’s comment was some how racist? That’s weird.

        • Duras

          First off, republicans are the kings of using the word “terrorism” ambigiously.  “Terrorism” is defined as violence or the threat of violence to advance political or religious causes.  Obama called it terrorism in its ambigious sense the day after the attack without knowing the underlying motive, which is what you are talking about.  And the underlying motive was in question for quite some time.  The video did cause uproar in the Arab World, you do know that right!  And it was Romney who came out early and started shooting off his mouth without forethought.  Obama spoke ambigiously until more details emerged.  So get bent.

          Second, why did Sununu think that it was about race even though Powel articulated several reasons why he’s voting for Obama?   Did Powel say that it was because Obama’s black?  Why didn’t Sununu disagree with Powel’s rationale?  Because Sununu assumed that he didn’t have a rationale/mind and was voting based on superficial likeness.  This isn’t a lynching, but it is unambigious racism.

          • Duras

            One thing I learned growing up white and in the South is that the more racist some one is, the more they say the democrats just play the race card.

          • Gregg Smith

            I am going to have to research it but if memory serves Powell admitted the race factor to his endorsement in 2008. 

            No Duras, Obama said the underlying motive was the silly video… over and over. He sent Susan Rice to say it too…over and over. It was not ambiguous. Hillary promised a father of one of the slain they would not rest until the video maker was in jail. There is more breaking news within the last hour and it keeps getting worse. I will not beat a dead horse and try to pin you down. I feel certain the facts are clear and you will not condone this. Surely you have that much decency.

        • Mike_Card

          Are you seriously putting up Sunununu up as a credible authorty on anything at all?

    • jimino

      And of course you will concede that many people did not and will not vote for him because of his racial makeup.

      Regarding leadership from a military man’s perspective, what do they call those who, upon being informed of who their duly selected leader is, respond by saying that their primary goal will be to assure that leader’s failure?  Don’t they shoot those guys? 

      • Gregg Smith

        Are you talking about Harry “this war is lost” Reid?

        • jimino

          I thought I followed the news pretty closely.

          Who surrendered?  When did it happen?  When did we “win” (that’s the opposite of lost). Can’t believe I missed it.

          When the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bremer families spend a month in the general population of Baghdad, then you may have a point.  Maybe you as leader of their band of  sycophants can join them.

    • 1Brett1

      Are you serious? You put this video up as some kind of equivalency to Powell’s decision? So, Powell is just like some ranting Black woman playing the worst kind of stereotype on Youtube…Okay, then. (It’s also difficult to tell if she’s even real or is using some kind of parody device, putting people on, which really doesn’t matter.) 

      You are being a racist pig for even putting this video up. Man, maybe Rush has poisoned your mind or maybe you would have had the tactics you do irrespective of listening to Rush. Either way, your tactics are despicable. 

      • Gregg Smith

        Dude, it’s funny. If you don’t like it complain to Glozell. 

        How about the chairman of the National Black Chamber of Commerce Harry Alfred? He was great we he smacked down the racism of Barbara Boxer in that hearing but I digress.

        http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/voting-for-obama-because-he-was-black-was-the-biggest-mistake-of-my-life/

        Or how about Snoop Dog?

        http://perezhilton.com/2012-10-06-snoop-dogg-barack-obama-mitt-romney-voting-reasons#.UIrAoGgTtaU

        And please, enough with the righteous indignation. You cannot seriously believe many people’s votes for Obama were not because he is black. Glozell made a better case than Powell. Your non-sequitur Rush rant is hilarious. 

        Just face it Brett. Obama’s a disaster who was given the benefit of the doubt because of white guilt and the color of his skin.

        If you want to talk about despicable tactics then talk about the astonishing ease with which you throw around the word “racist”. Jerk.

        • 1Brett1

          You can rant about Glozell, Barbara Boxer, Harry Alfred, or Snoop Dog, all you want, but you are the one who put this video up here as a statement. Your argument for your racist “joke” is justified because others make racist remarks? Sorry, but your putting that video on here is racist. 

          If you’d said people vote based on skin color sometimes. I wouldn’t have found that necessarily racist. The video isn’t funny; it’s not even ironic, and you’re not laughing in any ironic sense, Gregg.    

          • Gregg Smith

            Obama could not have been elected without the votes of those (black and white) who voted for him because he is black. That’s the racism. It’s not from me, Sununu or Glozell.

          • Gregg Smith

            It just now occurs to me (you know I’m slow) that you think Glozell is for real! She is making fun of the notion. She became popular after the 2008 election with this:

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TswMeHnh2cA

            I think it got her on Leno. But you seem to think that I think it’s some kind of tactical statement. What kind of pathetic world do you live in?

        • jefe68

          You are real piece of work and I have other words I could use but your not worth getting  banned for.

          • Gregg Smith

            How much did Obama’s race play in your vote?

          • jefe68

            What an absurd question.
            You really are something else.
            It’s amazing how you turn around the idea of race to support your white guy sensibility.

            For the record it had nothing to do with why I voted for President Obama. I’ve never voted for a Republican as I think the GOP is a party of regressive extremist, and one that has been getting more extreme every year.

             

    • Steve__T

       That’s sick

  • ttajtt

    how can the government create make do jobs when the tone is reagan economics say less government?  its in name of the profit margin that margin divides rich and poor a non-togetherness margin.   do we not hunt together and do we not share together.  

  • sickofthechit

    Be careful when Republican Politicians (Repugnicans) say they are going to bring you “Change”.  The only “Change” they will bring us is nickels, dimes and quarters, and “Really Big Change” means fifty cent pieces for us, but million$ and billion$ for their $upporter$. charles A. Bowsher

    • Steve__T

       I worked for the government in 1986. That same job has kept up with increases (raises) throughout the years. I was just offered a private sector job making a $1 less per hour for the same or similar job that I worked in 1986. WTF I don’t need that kind of change. Guess I need to get one of those Gov jobs that they don’t create.

      • JCR2012

        You DO need that kind of change because with the other change, you would’ve lost your job and wouldn’t have been offered a private sector job at all for a long period of time. You do realize it was Bush who put us in this mess and that it takes time to fix the economy, don’t you!

        • Steve__T

           Well It just so happens that I am pretty good at what I do. And have had many jobs that paid more, much more. This was someone, a head hunter looking to fill a position and I told them what I make now and they said have a nice day.
           As far as the rest of your post yes it takes time to heal fix repair anything as messed up as our economy, and believe with all my heart Bush is at fault, and should loose his pension, and just like they are doing to Armstrong, make him give back what we paid him for doing such a horrible job and wrecking this Nation.

  • Gregg Smith

    Two of the slain heroes in Benghazi disobeyed orders to stand down and went to aid the flaming embassy. That’s right.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

    Can we disavow the notion this was about a video? They knew and they are covering their asses… to no avail.

    • OnPointComments

      “An urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.”

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Megyn Kelly just interviewed the father of one of slain Seals on live TV.  It was heart wrenching given the recent news that the CIA requested support and it was denied.

      He was upset that his son had laser targeting on the mortars attacking him but the air support was denied -3 times.

    • Ray in VT

      It’s a good thing that because we know these things now that we can use it to go back in time to divine the nature of the attack so that we’ll have known it then.

      • Gregg Smith

        Tune in to the latest breaking news. Study it for a few days then we’ll talk. I don’t want you to go out any farther on the limb. This is awful stuff.

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

        You know the rules of time travel:

        1) Save Lincoln
        2) Kill the infant Hitler
        3) Stop Oswald
        4) Keep that dinosaur hunter from greasing that butterfly.

        You can get in line after that.

        • Ray in VT

          Roads?  Where we’re going we don’t need roads.

      • notafeminista

        “Bin laden determined to attack in the US”

        President Bush raked over the coals for not divining just when and where Bin laden was determined to carry out his attack(s).

        President Obama (and administration)given a pass for ignoring direct repeated requests for increased security in a known and specific location.

        Hum.

        • JCR2012

          Bush didn’t have a crystal ball to know when or where bin Laden was going to attack but he ignored available intelligence about these attacks (along with other key administration leaders). But more importantly, Bush also ignored firm intelligence from marines/seals on the ground in Afghanistan ready to bring bin Laden to justice in 2003 but he thought Hussein’s fake WMD’s were the top priority and put the operation on hold, long enough for bin Laden to disappear. 
          Finally, you can’t seriously compare these two attacks, in magnitude or in nature. President W. Bush was responsible for defending Americans in American soil from a few terrorists, while Obama was responsible for defending a few Americans in foreign hostile territory. I’m not saying one tragedy is less of a tragedy than the other but you can’t certainly compare the two. It just doesn’t make sense.

          • notafeminista

            Au contraire, that very comparison was made (and I’m sure the poster thought quite ably so) on this very board last Friday.  Have a look.

    • Mike_Card

      OK.  We succumb to your superior powers of intellect, deduction, and clairvoyance.  Obama and everyone else–save you–have been wrong or just plain deceitful.  Stop the presses and commence the impeachment procedures.

      • Gregg Smith

        I can make it ’til Tuesday after next.

        • Mike_Card

          So…now that you’ve won, will you just STFU on this topic?  Or are you too plugged into it to stop sucking your thumb?

          • Gregg Smith

            Don’t hate me because I’m right. 

  • twenty_niner

    Time to correct a few myths:

    Myth) Bush cut taxes and put two wars on the credit card, which is what put the car in the ditch that we now have to get out of ditch.

    Answer) WRONG. Yes, Bush recklessly racked up debt (and so has Obama), but this has nothing to do with the recession.

    Explanation) Deficits do matter, but the negative effects have yet to be seen. On the contrary, from a Keynesian perspective, Bush’s tax cuts and war spending were every bit as stimulative to the economy as the Stimulus Package of 2008. With the collapse of the tech bubble and the 9/11 attacks, the economy was surely headed into a deep and long recession, which was thwarted by tax cuts, massive government spending, and the Fed’s slashing of rates.

    The deficits and debt have yet to inflict any pain on anyone. Because of the dollar’s reserve status, the Fed has been able to continuously reduce rates even as the debt grows exponentially. The problem is, at the moment, purely conceptual: At some point in the future, the Fed will have to unwind its balance sheet or risk a 70′s style spike in inflation. Unwinding the balance sheet is not without risk, as this could send bond prices plummeting (with a corresponding spike in rates) for both Treasuries and mortgage securities. To an increasingly leveraged economy, any spike in rates could unleash a serious recession, the one we just postponed with last stimulus.

    But none of this has yet to happen. Both Bush’s and Obama’s deficits have been purely stimulative, leaving deficit hawks with a tough argument – having to conjure future fiscal doomsday scenarios with no ability to point to any evidence of a downside, even at the margins, which highlights the danger of current climate.

  • hennorama

    Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan appear to be relying on the declining attention span of Americans in this age of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google et al.  The simultaneous consumption of various multimedia appears to be overwhelming our brains, and perhaps even changing our brains so that we have difficulty picking up on nonverbal cues such as facial expressions, tones of voice, and body language.

    “Research on the brain’s response to electronic media is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. On the plus side, it suggests that digital natives have higher baseline activity in the part of the brain governing short-term memory …”
    This may mean some will tend to believe the last thing they hear that “Sounds good” since their brains are so much more short-term oriented.  They may fail to recall the prior statements and positions that are the exact opposite of the latest messages.

    Source:http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/03/digital_natives_are_slow_to_pi.html

    The average adult attention span has declined 33% in just  the last 12 years, from 12 seconds in 2000 to 8 seconds in 2012.  As a comparison, the average goldfish has an attention span of 9 seconds.  Of course, a goldfish’s life has far fewer stimuli than does the average adult.

    Check out the chart on attention span here:

    http://www.themrsite.com/blog/2012/04/the-challenge-of-the-digital-brain/

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       What did you say?  I missed it.

      • notafeminista

        He is saying (once again) people will vote for Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan because they are stupid and now have a technology induced inability to critically analyze what President Obama is saying – therefore a voter will just go with whatever the last thing he/she heard and vote accordingly.

        You see, voters just aren’t smart enough to see how brilliant(still even!) President Obama is.  Because President Obama speaks slower (and we know this because of the debates)it takes the listener longer to fully analyze and appreciate the full impact and importance of anything President Obama says.  Fortunately we do have the media and Mr. Carney to clarify for us anytime one of President Obama’s statements is misinterpreted by the unwashed masses which as we know, happens with alarming frequency.  We’ve seen just in the last six months the number of times President Obama’s administration had to explain two or three times what was actually meant by a given statement of the President. I’m guessing it can be directly tied to a large and significant increase in the use of social media in the last six months.

        Unfortunately, the Left forgot that a brain comes with a lady and her parts.  Dang.

        • hennorama

          I find it interesting that you assume to know my gender.  Do you also believe that you know my ethnicity, race and religion?  Curious.

          Actually, I said no such thing regarding intelligence or lack thereof, nor did the authors of the articles I (intended to) linked to say any such thing.

          (I realize that it’s ironic for me to use digital means and evidence while commenting on “the digital brain” and how declining attention spans may be impacting the upcoming elections.  I also realize how ironic it is that I initially failed to pay close enough attention that I linked to the same article twice.  Mea culpa.)

          If I had properly posted the links, you could have discovered the following, which is the entirety of the paragraph I quoted in my original post:

          “Research on the brain’s response to electronic media is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. On the plus side, it suggests that digital natives have higher baseline activity in the part of the brain governing short-term memory, the sorting of complex information, and the integration of sensations and thoughts — so, in certain respects, computers make you smarter. As if to underline that point, IQ scores are on the increase in the United States as the number of digital natives rises, and people’s ability to multitask without errors is improving.”

          In certain respects, computers make you smarter.  Not in all cases, of course.

          • notafeminista

            Use of “he” is grammatically appropriate when sex (not gender – a social construct) is unknown. 

            If you were not making a comment regarding intelligence or lack thereof, why did you specifically mention shortened attention spans in relation to only the  Republican ticket and not politics as a whole?

            Say for example, what effect might these shortened attention spans have had on the Arab Spring?  The OWS movement?

            Why limit it to politics?  What effect might these shortened attention spans have on purchasing decisions? What movie to watch?  What color to paint the house?  Why, the possibilities are absolutely endless.  Yet you limited it to solely the Republicans.  What precisely were you hoping to accomplish with your statement and/or observation?

            I just bet it was not to imply individuals who vote for Mr. Romney/Ryan are smarter.

          • hennorama

            Thank you for your response. Clearly you have misinterpreted the meaning and intent of my original post. I was attempting to explain a possible reason why Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan seem to be paying very little political price for repeated changes of positions. I was not making any comment on anyone’s intelligence.

            While I admit I did not preface my remarks with “Mr. Romney has changed his views on substantive matters so frequently that many have stopped bothering to even keep track of the changes or their frequency and has not really paid much of a price” I believe that can easily be inferred from my post and by anyone having even a modicum of memory.

            The shorter one’s attention span, the more easily distracted one becomes. Not less intelligent or more stupid, merely more easily distracted.

            My point: Attention spans have declined. Those with the highest use of digital media have higher activity in the part of the brain governing short-term memory. They may not recall Mr. Romney’s prior positions. They may believe the last thing they hear that “sounds good.” Many of Mr. Romney’s recent positions are exact opposites of earlier positions. Mr. Romney appears to be relying on (and benefiting from) shorter attention spans.

          • notafeminista

            Which means President Obama will not benefit…no?  Given his more slower, more thoughtful speaking style. 

            On a side note, you contradict either yourself and/or the article you reference. The increased ability to “multi-task without error” is hardly indicative of one easily sidetracked – quite the opposite in fact.

    • Rebecca Harrison

      It is sad how true this is, Romney and Ryan are truly counting on the fact that everyone forgets what they have said up until this point.

  • notafeminista

     …probably more appropriate for next Friday, but too good not to share.  Mayor Bloomberg are you listening?

    http://mises.org/daily/5619/Who-Serves-During-Disaster

    • hennorama

      The conclusion of this article says “Government monopolies have the incentive to provide the least amount of service for the highest cost. So, the government brass suspends services and tells their constituents to go away and come back when it’s more convenient. Meanwhile, Waffle House fires up the generators, eager to serve their faithful customers in the worst of conditions.

      Comparing the decisions on whether or not to close individual restaurants to the decision to recommend evacuation of the most highly populated U.S. city is absurd on its face.  More than 8 million people live in NYC.  How many customers and employees go to the average Waffle House each day?  100?  200?  500?  1000?

      Comparing these decisions is just silly, regardless of the outcome.  Not only is number of people involved in NYC orders of magnitudes greater, the impact of a negative outcome in NYC would be felt throughout the country, and potentially even worldwide.

      • notafeminista

        Kind of missed the point didn’t you.

        • StilllHere

          intentionally

  • Gregg Smith

    The polls continue to reflect the Romney surge.

    • Mike_Card
    • DrewInGeorgia

      Sucker.

      The following is from a comment I recently posted:

      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.

      • Gregg Smith

        Now that is funny!

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

        I’m still laughing over everyone calling Ohio a “dead heat” at this point in 2008. (The actual results I’ll leave to the reader.)

        The thing is, nobody who gets paid to be in the media remembers that. So of course Greggg thinks Romney is “surging”.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Someone did an deep dive analysis of the party ID numbers in Gallup and changes from 2008 and 2010.

      It isn’t looking good for Obama.

      http://www.redstate.com/2012/10/26/swingometer-gallup-party-id-figures-predict-solid-romney-win/

      • JCR2012

        You should really start reading news from unbiased or independent sources. It’ll enlighten your life!
        Start with facts checker websites!!!

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “A Chronic Case of Obamnesia”

    Obama’s greatest hits of  flip flops.

    Here is just one:

    “So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant, they can, it’s just that it will bankrupt them”—Sen. Obama, January 2008, on his plans to financially penalize coal plants.

    “Now is the time to end this addiction, and to understand that drilling is a stop-gap measure, not a long-term solution”—Sen. Obama,
    August 2008.

    “Here’s what I’ve done since I’ve been president. We have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years. Natural gas production is the highest it’s been in decades. We have seen increases in coal production and coal employment”—President Obama, October 2012.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578078902106077268.html

    • J__o__h__n

      Mitt flip flopped on coal too.

    • AC

      to be fair tho, i think he always clarifies that the coal is talking about is ‘clean coal’ which does pass current regulations

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         There is a lot of confusion about clean coal.  Some people define clean coal as carbon sequestration and others simply mean tighter particulate filtering.  Particulate capture IS affordable but carbon capture is not.

        The truth is we have been very fortunate to have a glut in natural gas in recent years to at least keep electric rates from skyrocketing.  When Mr. Obama made these comments he had no idea that we’d have a nat. gas glut and he was referring to taxing carbon (aka cap and trade).  Another disaster avoided. 

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         One other quick thought. 
         I think the point of the article is to counter balance some of the criticism of Mr. Romney to show that Mr. Obama isn’t as ‘pure’ on consistency as some believe.

        Much of the criticism of Romney isn’t fair and the same it true of Obama.

        • JCR2012

          Even if the article you posted is true, one thing is to change your point of view on one issue by reasoning another completely different is to have no point of view. Romney needs to grow a spine. If he at least stood up for what he used to believe in during the primaries, he would have at least shown some leadership. True republicans must be very disappointed in him for following his political advisers  recommendations instead of having a steady stance. Besides, look at what you’re doing… instead of making the case for Romney, your argument basically is trying to justify his weaknesses. It’s like saying criticism of Hitler’s actions is unfair because there are racists people in our Nation too.

          • notafeminista

            Did you read the entire article?  Senator/Candidate/President Obama changed his mind three times on the issue of same-sex marriage.  Mr Romney needs to grow a spine?

            Candidate Obama told Pastor Warren that the issue of abortion was “above his pay grade” AS he was applying for the highest, most visible job in the United States.  Ain’t no one above that pay grade. 

            ‘T’ain’t Mr. Romney who needs to grow a spine.

    • Steve__T

       “So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant, they can, it’s just that it will bankrupt them”
      We have seen increases in coal production and coal employment”

      Which were all garnered from existing infrastructures, no new coal fired plants were built

      In reply to Chubby Checker the twisten champion 

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Which best describes Lord R’s “Five Point Plan”? Other suggestions?

    1. Class warfare
    2. Tired old voodoo economics
    3. More of what caused the Bush crash
    4. More for me
    5. Jobs for China

    • Coastghost

      Compare the rival Obarma Plan:

      1. O
      2. O
      3. O
      4. O
      5. O

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Nonsense. Implement the ACA, raise taxes at the top (but not by enough!), get us out of Afghanistan, spend on infrastructure and R&D….sounds good to me, especially compared to yet more attack son SS and medicare and tax cuts supposedly balanced by unspecified loophole closings that nobody over 4 years old beloeves he will actually find.

        Are you one who says the President “has no plan” on health care out of one side of your mouth while attacking big bad “Obamacare” out of the other? ROTFL

        • Coastghost

          No, I argue that the partisan Patient Protection and Affordable Care Tax Act has hobbled the economic recovery because many of its provisions remain to be implemented and thus pose a significant question mark for businesses all the way through 2014 at least (when these provisions finally begin to be implemented). I’ll also repeat data from a post earlier this week, with the relevant link:

           

          http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/10/the-nature-of-uk-austerity.html

          Veronique
          de Rugy has looked 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 fact that spending CUTS are NOT occurring, just as they ignore that tax
          increases are NOT promoting growth. 

          • Steve__T

             The last tax hikes were when mmm
            Clinton?

          • JCR2012

            Tax hikes for whom?
            Middle class Americans are proud to pay taxes, unlike the higher class. Let’s make it fair, shall we?

          • Gregg Smith

            Obamacare is a huge tax hike. 

          • TomK_in_Boston

            You don’t understand the difference between “no plan” and a plan you don’t like. The ACA is a conservative baby step. It’s straight out of the Heritage foundation, newt gingrich, and of course it IS Romneycare, which is working fine in MA. I would like a “government takeover” of the health insurance system, but unfortunately we don’t have it with the ACA.

            Spare me the “uncertainty” talking point. If the middle class had $ to spend, instead of having everything diverted to the top, there would never be a mention of uncertainty.

            Tax increases can slow the economy – if taxes are already too high. That is not our situation. With the rich and the corporations paying historically low rates, and wealthy beyond their wildest dreams, having them pay more is no problem. When Scrooge McDuck has 100′ of money in his money bin, it really doesn’t affect his abilities as a “job creator” if it goes down to 99′.

            I am really sick of voodoo econ talk. I’ve been hearing this nonsense since 1980, we’ve been doing it,  and all that has happened is redistribution to the top. 

      • StilllHere

        Exactly right

  • Tastearb

    Driving back to work I heard the last ten minutes of today’s show where it seemed everyone was playing “pile on” Romney-Ryan, while implicit assuming that Obama has and is providing all the answers to our problems.  What a crock! Through Obama’s expert leadership we are now on the road to becoming Greece.  Govt spending is at 24% of GDP, the economy is barely growing, and there are hundreds of executive orders waiting in the wings to tie our businesses up with new regulations that will result in more lost jobs and continued slower growth.  Your program is a world turned upside down, filled with true believers and well-meaning but seriously challenged liberals.  Look around – is this the America you want to live in and pass on to your kids?  Will there be any jobs other than Govt jobs to regulate the economy into oblivion?  Tom Ashbrook – wake up!

    • jefe68

      No sorry, it’s you who needs to wake up.
      This diatribe is full of Fox news memes and not much else.
      On the road to Greece, not very likely.

      • Tastearb

        A lot more likely than you think.  But thanks for the reply.

      • notafeminista

        Ok…tell us why.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Everyone needs to study this website and also understand the duration on our national debt is under 8 years.

      http://www.usdebtclock.org/

      • JCR2012

        You are probably right. Lets see, that will put us in the G.W. Bush administration that not only started this mess with the same policies the RR ticket brings to the table on this election, but also left the economy in its way to a depression. It took 2 unpaid wars and tax cuts for the rich for this soup to start boiling but once it was boiling we wanted it to be cold immediately. It is tough to go from surplus to deficit in 4 years but the previous administration proved it isn’t in 8 years.

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

          You are addressing the people who, mathematically speaking, weren’t able to pronounce “Debt clock” for the eight years prior to Obama’s election.

          Amazingly, every righty in this space was yelling themselves hoarse about the deficit and debt during Shrub’s regime.

          Can’t statistically be true, but to listen to it, there are four hundred million TruePrincipledConservatives who spent the ’00s telling RedState and TheCorner and FoxNation to cut spending.

          • notafeminista

            As opposed to the four hundred million TruePrincipledLefties who have given their a guy a pass for being just like the other guy. 

          • JCR2012

            Yeah, they speak about the national debt as if it was a new thing we started living with in our Nation. National debt has double under Reagan’s, Bush’s and Obama’s administrations (see http://zfacts.com/p/318.html). The difference is that Obama had a good reason for it (saving the economy) while the others just wanted to give tax cuts to the top earners. But if they thought about it honestly, not only Obama had to steer this economy from a nearmiss depression to a slow growing economy (I take that any day) but also he had to extend tax cuts for top earners because republican-dominated Congress held other important tax cuts extension bills for middle class Americans hostage. I think that what we have to do to boost this economy is leave Obama in office and cleanup Congress from all those republicans that decided their party’s agenda was more important than helping their constituents. That’s the point of view of an independent voter.

    • StilllHere

      They don’t have the answers to these great questions, but they’ll attack you for asking.

    • JCR2012

      Wao! really! I’m no liberal and certainly not a democrat, but I think you probably had a bad day at work and decided to hear what you wanted to hear about the show. Everybody is welcome to make comments. 

      Now, keep in mind that Obama had to steer a fast-dropping economy heading for depression into what you call a slowly growing economy. He was busy making that happen the first couple years (give or take), keeping his priorities straight. Our economy would’ve improved much faster in the last two years if your repubican mates in Congress would’ve cooperated (or at least not gridlocked) and taken responsibility on the mess their party created and showing at least some concern for us the people and not their party’s agenda. National debt increases when money is spent keeping an economy alive, is that simple. Now that the economy is not in the steep decline it was, it can start growing again (even if it is slower than expected). But it is not the time to go back to the policies that put us in this mess in the first place, which is all the RR ticket brings to the table. It took the GOP more than 8 years to cause this mess, it is not going to get fixed in 4, especially with no GOP support (even on things they have historically agreed with). I say that the solution to this mess is not to change the administration but Congress.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    More in the endless stream of Romneylies. Chrysler said, due to increasing demand, some production might be re-started in China. The RR spin machine immediately turned this into closing plants in the USA and moving American jobs to China. Maybe since Lord R’s Bane is so fond of that, they just assume everyone does it. And of course, he’t trying to lie his way out of “Let detroit go Bankrupt”, so he’d love for this to be true. Thoroughly disgusting.

    “There are times when the reading of a newswire report generates storms originated by a biased or predisposed approach,” Chrysler spokesman Gualberto Ranieri wrote. “On Oct. 22, 2012, at 11:10 a.m. ET, the Bloomberg News report ‘Fiat Says Jeep Output May Return to China as Demand Rises’ stated ‘Chrysler currently builds all Jeep SUV models at plants in Michigan, Illinois and Ohio,” Ranieri continued. “Manley (President and CEO of the Jeep brand) referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.” In his speech to supporters in Ohio, Romney cited the Bloomberg report in attempt to push back on attacks from President Obama for his opposition to the bailout that was given to Chrysler and General Motors in 2008 and 2009. Obama has seized on an op-ed Romney wrote in the New York Times that was titled “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” to argue that he was not in favor of the preservation of the U.S. auto industry, which many jobs in Ohio are tied to. “I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by the Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China,” Romney said in his Defiance speech. “I will fight for every good job in America, I’m going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it’s fair, America will win.”But Ranieri said the former Massachusetts governor had jumped the gun. “Despite clear and accurate reporting, the take has given birth to a number of stories making readers believe that Chrysler plans to shift all Jeep production to China from North America, and therefore idle assembly lines and U.S. workforce,” Ranieri wrote. “It is a leap that would be difficult even for professional circus acrobats.”Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China,” he continued. “It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation. A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.” 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       It’s not working Tom.

    • Coastghost

      Obama is so busy diagnosing amnesia, he’s managing to inflict it across the board. It wasn’t as if Detroit was sinking into Lake Erie without the Obama bailout: Ford accepted no Federal bailout, had no need of one. Plus, EVEN IF support for an auto bailout was critical, why bailout Chrysler of all companies? Chrysler already received the Carter bailout. Should Americans expect regularly-occurring Chrysler bailouts every three decades or so for the rest of this century? If Chrysler can’t manage operations any better, the company deserves to go under, just like American Motors and other auto manufacturers of the 20th century that NEVER received corporate bailouts . . . . or just like Solyndra and other “green energy” companies that folded even with receipt of Federal “investment”.

      • JCR2012

        The bailout wasn’t about helping Chrysler the company, but Chrysler the (big) employer. I can’t argue your point on Chrysler of all companies, but keep in mind that we were heading into an economic catastrophe that Obama kept from becoming a depression. Without the bailout, many Americans would have lost their jobs, making the overall economy worst. Under different circumstances, I’m sure we would’ve never bailed them out like we’ve haven’t all those other companies you mention.

  • donniethebrasco

    Tyrone Woods didn’t fit the White House’s narrative so they let him die.

  • ttajtt

    yes i stand corrected & stood and corrected it.  there is a history of it happing.   on insects it is good food, if birds fish can eat it, and they aren’t fat.  like all birds lobster oyster and like wise to survive a nuc war and then if you are what you eat this raise my odds.

  • OnPointComments

    The father of one of the Navy SEALs who was killed in the Libya consulate attack has criticized the White House reaction to his son’s death – especially a bizarre and obscene comment Joe Biden made to him.  He revealed that at the ceremony for the return of Tyrone’s body, the Vice President approached his family and asked, ‘Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?’
     
    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/10/26/father-of-slain-navy-seal-in-libya-says-obama-had-no-remorse-biden-made-disrespectful-joke 
     
    I think Dr. Keith Ablow had it right when asked about Biden’s debate performance:  for Joe Biden, you have to put dementia on the differential diagnosis.

    • Steve__T

       Anybody that thinks Romney/Ryan is going to make it better is demented.

    • StilllHere

      So true, not even debatable.

  • IsaacWalton

    Ugh. I know the show is over but I just had to say this. Romney is promising to make 12 million jobs. THAT would be great, but I doubt seriously that he can do ANYTHING to improve the rate of job creation. And rather than lose the gains we’ve made in civil rights, I’d take slow job growth any day.

    • William

       The biggest assault on our rights is via Obama-care by forcing people to buy a product from a private company.

      • Steve__T

         Pray tell what did Romneycare do to MA

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Romneycare didn’t cost $2.3T and beaucoup jobs.

          • Steve__T

             So you’ll put up national numbers against a small state try again.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Romney care is 60 pages

            Obamacare is 2300 pages with over 4000 pages of additional regulations.

            Equating the two programs is obscenely silly.

          • JCR2012

            On the issue of forcing people to buy healthcare… jeez, where have I seen that before??? Oh yeah, social security has an individual mandate also and guess what, healthcare reform is important for people to be able to keep their social status and not having to go into bankruptcy when they or someone in their family get sick. The way I see it, obamacare is more “social security” than what we call social security. This is one of the most important aspects that are on the line on this election. His plan IS the status quo and he lied about his plan covering pre-existing conditions… it does only if the person hasn’t lost coverage, which is basically the same we have right now.

          • Steve__T

             Again you are putting one state up against 50 try again.

        • William

           That is a state and not the country and I don’t agree that a state should do that either.

          • Steve__T

             Good for you. Now if we get a single payer plan attached to to original we will all be much better off than say… NOTHING.

          • William

             I would rather see 100,000 more doctors that work only in family or primary care before trying single payer.

      • JCR2012

        An assault? Have you had to pay any medical bills recently? Healthcare bills can put people on the streets. That’s an assault! Also, you can also buy from the public option!!! Problem solved!!! Finally, if you work, you are mandated to pay social security. But in order to see the “pay off” of S.S., you need to be able to get sick and not go into bankruptcy (unless you make real $$$). That, to me, is the real “social security” and it helps us now. It is all for the well being of the people and to protect us from predatory activities from health insurance companies, among other entities.

        • William

           Certainly we have a problem with expensive medical bills but is the solution going to be found in giving up freedom to someone in government? Do you actually think this will make medical care cheaper? Is not the core of the problem that too many people want something cheap or for someone else to pay for their medical care?

          • JCR2012

            I do agree that Obamacare as it stands today will not make healthcare cheaper. But it is a start of a reform that can be shaped properly in the future and more importantly, it brings regulation to the healthcare industry and protection to the people NOW. But in order to be able to attack the core of the problem in the future, we can’t struck this reform down now or else I doubt any other president would make it happen, as in the last 30 years. Romney doesn’t have a better idea and his “plan” is the status quo. He said in a debate that his plan would cover pre-existing conditions and it doesn’t (among other things that it doesn’t do); it does if you don’t lose coverage, which is basically what we have today. I would like to respond to your last question but would you please clarify  what you meant with “for someone else to pay for their medical care?”.

          • William

            Certainly,
            Medicare was sold as a “affordable fix” for seniors medical insurance/care and it is bankrupting the country.
             Seniors love Medicare because they have not nearly paid in enough to cover their costs and “the other guy” is footing the bill.
             Obama-care seems more about a power grab by government than actually fixing a problem, i.e. affordable medical insurance/care.
             To me, the really scary part of Obama-care is too people seem to willing to allow government to take away individual freedom and force them to buy a product from a private company. Now that the courts have said that is perfectly ok, just so you call it a tax, that is the beginning of the end. Can you imagine if the same political leaders determine that we all need to buy “food stamp insurance” (47 million people on food stamps, which is more than the number of uninsured people), or “unemployment insurance”, “workmans comp” insurance, etc…it will never stop.

          • JCR2012

            I agree, it might not be fair for the other guy to pay the bills of those who haven’t paid in enough for Medicare but then, why is it fair for the other guy to pay for the care of the uninsured as we are doing now? I don’t know much about Medicare finances/status, but I can tell you we have an opportunity to tackle even a bigger demon here and if we miss it, it won’t come back.
            BTW, nobody is taking your precious freedom from you, that is just republican propaganda. You’ll be able to buy from private companies in competition to get your business (unlike now) or the government option.
            Finally, you are scared of something that already happened. Social Security has an individual mandate which sets the precedent for the cataclysmic event you are afraid of. And they haven’t forced you to buy food stamps yet!
            Finally, the reason the individual mandate is so important on this or any other healthcare reform plan is because it provides insurance companies with a bigger share of the pool of “healthy” people, which keeps them in business. Insurance in general is based on two main principles, risk transference (individual agrees to pay the insurance company for them to retain his/her risk) and the law of large numbers (this is where the individual mandate comes in). The larger the pool of people under the same insurance company, the more probable it is to for the insurance company to have a favorable distribution. An individual that chose to not have insurance also gets care during an emergency, for example and the other guy has to pay the bill. Forcing them to get cheap insurance just like we’re forced to buy insurance for our house, car, etc., isn’t violating his right but making sure the other guys’ rights aren’t violated. It is all about protecting the many, not only the one.

          • William

             Our country and economy have been the greatest the world has ever seen because we always cherished individual freedom. That is the key to our success and once it is gone we will fail.
            Forcing people to buy a product from the private marketplace just because they are living is totally different than buying car insurance.  If you are worried about making everyone “pay their fair share” then why are we spending nearly a trillion dollars on welfare? Should we not require these people “pay their fair share too?” Or as Obama calls them “free riders” that are a burden to the medical system.

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

            “Freedom to someone in government?”

            Why is it every single right-winger on this board has gold-plated healthcare?

            The odds of this are astronomical not in favor, but it appears to be amazingly true: Not a single righty in this space has ever been fcked over by an insurance co death panel.

        • notafeminista

          I know, darn it all!  How dare doctors and nurses and anesthetists and radiology techs and pharmacists expect to be paid for goods and services provided.  Bloody arrogant of them I say.

          • JCR2012

             Clever, clever comment! But it is not about healthcare professionals getting fiar pay for their service/work, it is about them overcharging Health Insurance Companies for those services. We have a local hospital that charges 60% less to people that do not have health insurance. Do you think this is a good faith discount they are passing on to the individual or what the fair price should be? Besides, the assault I was talking about was on the overpriced healthcare cost, not on getting an actual bill for services rendered. Your type like twisting people’s comments, don’t you!

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

            JCR, actually, it’s not clever at all. It’s a faux pearl of “satire”.

            Anyone who’s worked in insurance or healthcare can vouch for how much of the healthcare dollar get “shaken out” between the patient and the actual person who does the medical work.

            There are oodles of layers of gatekeepers and overhead in the for-profit HC industry. (TO be longwinded, I have to point out this is not about doctors, nurses, X-ray techs, or people in white coats looking at medical charts.)

            None of these bureaucrats could take my blood pressure if my life depended on it. But their money comes from keeping people from getting healthcare, not providing it.

            That’s why private HC is so much less efficient than Medicare.

      • hennorama

        No one is forced to buy anything under Obamacare.  You are free to be  uninsured, and simply pay a penalty.  There’s no employer requirement either.

        “Individual Responsibility:Under the Affordable Care Act, starting in 2014, you must be enrolled in a health insurance plan that meets basic minimum standards. If you aren’t, you may be required to pay an assessment. You won’t have to pay an assessment if you have very low income and coverage is unaffordable to you, or for other reasons including your religious beliefs. You can also apply for a waiver asking not to pay an assessment if you don’t qualify automatically.

        Employer Responsibility:Under the Affordable Care Act starting in 2014, if an employer with at least 50 full-time equivalent employees doesn’t provide affordable health insurance and an employee uses a tax credit to help pay for insurance through an Exchange, the employer must pay a fee to help cover the cost of the tax credits.”
        http://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/index.html
        Simply search for Individual Responsibility and Employer Responsibility

        In the same way, all states do not require car insurance, but all states require that you demonstrate  financial responsibility to operate a vehicle on the roadway.  Most people do this by purchasing auto insurance, but some use a bond or some other approved means that shows the ability to pay if you cause damages in an accident.  And if you are stopped and can’t prove your financial responsibility, you pay a penalty.
        http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content20009.aspx

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The tale of two candidates – dateline 10/26/12

    Romney — major economic address on how to change what is broken in Washington

    Obama –  MTV visit.
           maybe we’ll find out today’s burning question:
                              “boxers or briefs?”

     

    • StilllHere

      Why would today be any different than the last four years?

  • Steve__T

    The percentages of failed business Romney VS Obama on John Stuart last night was Hilarious, the truth IS funnier than fiction.

      http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-october-25-2012-nancy-pelosi

  • Howard1012

    Unfortunately, the undiscussed force in this election is racism. There are many folks that are anti Obama on what really comes down to racism. 

    In the end, a country will get the government that it deserves.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Evidence please.  I don’t see it, thank God.

      • Steve__T

         Don’t thank God open your eyes.

    • StilllHere

      Wow, the racism card.  How many blacks are going to vote for Romney or voted for McCain?  Not many right.  Are blacks racist?  

    • notafeminista

      Undiscussed?  Have you been out of the country for the last 4 years?  The Left never.misses.a.chance. 

  • paradigm99

    I hear many people say the race comes down to Obama & preserving civil rights & freedoms; or Romney and fixing the economy. But Romney is not going to help the little guy. Please, everyone, read Romney’s record as a financial “whiz” at Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney . When at Bain Capital, he maximized profits for shareholders, but companies like Ampad went bankrupt later on. At Dade Behring, 1000 people were laid off, then the co. went bellyup. This is a premonition for us if you elect Romney. He is NOT going to give a damn about the little guy. The man has a net worth of $250 million. Who do you think his pals are? Joe the pizza guy? The big bank & corp. lobbies will be all over him for policy favors. Obama isn’t the greatest but at Least he’s a Democrat & the Democratic platform is the closest we have right now to work for average people. Romney & Ryan are both in the corporate culture. Ryan even refused to meet with his constituents unless they paid a $15 admission fee! Point Two: The only women’s issues being brought to the forefront are abortion rights and jobs. These are very important. But I am a woman, 64, single, and I hear nothing in this campaign about the growing rate of poverty among women like my age. Bottom line: All of us deserve a good quality of life. We MUST bring all the jobs back to America from China. Stop buying Chinese goods and their American market will dry up. You can do that, no matter who you vote for.        

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       News flash:  Romney was in business to make money.  His business was to purchase failing companies and try and turn them around and then sell them at a profit. He had a very good success rate and did save or create thousands of jobs.  You can cherry pick a few losers.  And guess what?  Romney’s profits went to his investors.  His investors were comprised mostly of charitable endowments and public sector pension funds.  So you see, Romney was helping the teachers unions.

      However, when Obama took over the auto industry he went in and closed thousands of auto dealers resulting in the loss of 10′s of thousands of jobs.  I guess Obama isn’t for the little guy either.  Of course not.

      My personal opinion is Romney will be much better for the middle class because his priority is to grow the economy.  Frankly that is the only way out of this debt and jobs crisis.

      • Steve__T

        News flash:  Romney was in business to make money.  His business was to
        purchase failing companies and try and turn them around and then sell
        them at a profit. He had a very good success rate and did save or create
        thousands of jobs.

        No he created nothing but money for his partners and himself. And left a lot of companies in bankruptcy, closed businesses lost jobs and walked away. 

        ” You can cherry pick a few losers.”

        So just what are you saying about Obama but Solindra? that was not his only investment, but because they went under YOU CHERRY PICK that as a failure when 90% of the rest have staid afloat
        you wont mention that, it’s called obfuscation.
        So stop the BS OK.
         Im not real happy with Obama’s record but I won’t sit by and let you lie about the facts.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           “Im not real happy with Obama’s record but I won’t sit by and let you lie about the facts.”

          “No he created nothing but money for his partners and himself. ”

          OK — back up that outrageous statement.
          His success rate at turning around companies was one of the highest in the industry.  He also provided returns to his investors — charitable foundations, etc.

          You are doing what you accuse me of doing.

          • Steve__T

            I asked you for a link earlier and never got it but I back up my words.
            you won’t believe it but that’s you, the evidence are facts I dare you to listen to this and try to disclaim any of it checked it out my self its true tell me different

            http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/30/matt_taibbi_the_secret_to_mitt

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             OMG.  Matt Tiabbi is a foul mouthed propagandist.  He would make Goebells proud.

            Try again.

          • Steve__T

             He can’t hold a match to you.

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

            Ohnoes, a liberal journos’ toooooooooooooooone is meeeeeeeeeeeeeean!

            And you wouldn’t know journalism if it bit your hindquarters.

          • notafeminista

            And your credentials in “knowing” said journalism are what?

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

            1) Whenever you, personally, whine about something, I know I’m on the proper track.

            2) WFTC has a record of putting up links from crap sources. It saves a lot of time, actually.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           90% stayed afloat?  Where is the evidence.

          Here are a list of 27 failures as of this summer.

          http://heritageaction.com/2012/07/can-president-obama-name-one-clean-energy-success/

          • Steve__T

             27 out of how many? how many companies has Romney run into the ground for profit? When you’ve got an answer get back with the facts.
            And I don’t mean no spin rhetoric I mean facts.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Hah.  I found your 90% success rate number and it is based on only 5 companies have COMPLETED bankruptcy.  Some lame CNN idiot is giving Obama cover by playing with percentages with incomplete info.  Typical.

          It doesn’t tell the real story. It is just spin.

          Here is the latest list of 34 companies that are either bankrupt or faltering.

          http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/18/president-obamas-taxpayer-backed-green-energy-failures/

          UPDATE: 18 of the 34 ‘faltering’ companies have filed for bankruptcy. Was CNN and the media being HONEST in covering for the failures by only counting FIVE?

          WAKE UP.

          • Steve__T

             You need to go back to sleep

      • StilllHere

        I don’t think you’re going to get the slacker communists on this board to understand.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Alas, you are correct.

        • Fredlinskip

          I don’t believe that wishing that we lived in a society where a larger segment of Americans were able to participate “the American Dream” instead (of working all their lives in order to ultimately benefit a privileged few) would classify one as a communist.

          I guess I sort of care about my country.
          From you’re comments it’s hard to tell if you do.

        • DrewInGeorgia

          Good morning Senator McCarthy.

          Quick everybody! Hide your Cards! Joe Schmoe is coming to get us!

      • Fredlinskip

        Success in business and govmint require 2 different skill sets (see reply to earlier comment above)

    • William

       Looking back and compare the “evils” of big business to the “evils” of big government. Who has a more successful track record for uplifting people out of poverty?

      • Steve__T

         Neither

        • William

           The failure of the USSR has proved once and for all that big government is a failure at lifting people out of poverty. If not that, then the failure of the various Great Society programs started 50 years ago also point to the failure of big government.

          • Steve__T

             This aint The USSR This Is America and don’t forget it, we don’t compare to any other Nation on this planet.

          • William

             We do well when we learn from other countries fatal mistakes.

          • Steve__T

             Yeah but this one has still has a most important one to learn; Don’t lie to your people.

          • William

             The Administration does not seem to care about telling the truth about Libya and is still get a free pass from most of the press. Some things will never change.

          • Fredlinskip

            We could learn much from other countries economies currently- Which countries are doing better in tough times the ones that chose the austerity rout or stimulus rout?
            We also could learn from the mistakes of Roman empire. 
            And we might consider learning from the mistakes we made just before the Depression.

            History unfortunately seems to repeat itself when people willfully ignore it’s lessons to satisfy their own selfish interests.

          • William

             Austerity is long overdue in many nations and needs to happen. That means cuts in spending and failed government programs.

          • Fredlinskip

            box too small – see new comment

          • DrewInGeorgia

             We don’t learn anything from our own country’s failures, why the hell would we learn something from the mistakes of other nations?

          • William

             True. We have to entitlement programs that are bankrupting us and we create another one.

          • DrewInGeorgia

             We have to entitle programs that are bankrupting us and create another one?

            Was that a Mourdock Moment or typos?

          • notafeminista

            You’re not suggesting there might be something exceptional about the United States are you?

          • Steve__T

             Are you from a forging country? You damn right we are exceptional you got a problem with that?

          • StilllHere

            Have another one Steve, you might make more sense then.

          • Steve__T

             And you might go back where ever you came from.

          • Gregg Smith

            Bingo.

          • Fredlinskip

            The threat to “GS” programs currently is simply one of mismanagement and mis- appropriation of funds.
            It should have been no surprise to “Leaders” of this country that baby boomers were going some day retire. 
            In times of economic strength, $ should have been set aside to fund these programs. Instead the $ went to tax breaks for those who didn’t need, unfunded wars, no-bid contracts, porkbarrel spending , etc.

            The $ was there- common sense prioritization was not. 

          • William

            It is difficult to understand why allowing people to keep more of their money has to be “funded”. We have elected officials pitting one group of people against another in order to take more money and waste it on their own pet projects. I have yet to see any serious spending cuts during the last 12 years and that needs to happen. 

          • StilllHere

            There is no way to argue with this, it makes too much sense.

          • Fredlinskip

            Box getting too small- see new comment above.

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

            The “threat” to programs has been, for about a dozen years, almost anyone inside the Beltway wanting “reform”.

            When you hear that, hang on to your wallet

          • JGC

            What is your opinion on Great Society vs. Fair Deal programs?

      • StilllHere

        Business, no contest, but the big government lovers won’t admit it.

      • Fredlinskip

        Success in business and govmint require 2 different skill sets:
        A businessman whose motives are profits over ethics, might find ways to get out of paying pensions to workers and firing older workers & hire  new just so as to decrease salary payout.
        Such a person in government, in the interest of paying down debt, might find ways to cut benefits Americans paid into their whole working lives, making sure taxes are low on those who have benefited most from American system- all for the ultimate goal that “execs” and shareholders at the top will continue amass majority of America’s resources to the detriment of the rest of our country. 

        • Gregg Smith

          What about the highly ethical businessman who has learned integrity and loyalty create more profits? It is true you know.

          A person in Government does not worry about debt, they worry about bringing home the bacon. It’s natural to scrutinize less when you are spending other peoples’s money. Many aren’t that ethical either. 

          • Fredlinskip

            Did not wish to insinuate that all businessman are unethical.
            But some businesses that have become so obsessed with profits for “owners, shareholders”, & executives, they have been able to distort our economy beyond recognition- to the detriment of all except themselves.

            Banking industry comes to mind.
            Corporations that pay no tax would be another example.

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

            For some reason I feel Gregg has a way of inferring things that you don’t ever imply.

            And, in businesses, lobbying to not be regulated isn’t considered to be “fixing the game”. It’s considered a good investment.

          • Gregg Smith

            Learn the difference between “infer” and “imply”.

          • Gregg Smith

            But can’t you see the unabated (legal) quest for profit does incredible good for our fellow man?  Profit is not evil. My grocer doesn’t care if I go hungry, he wants my money. Cool, I want his groceries. What if Steve Jobs or Bill Gates didn’t strive so hard for profit? How many lives have they affected for the better? What if the person who cures cancer does it for the soul purpose of gaining wealth? The ethical quest for profit provides jobs, innovations, spin-offs, charity and accomplishment. Is it more noble to be poor?

          • Fredlinskip

            I like how you always refer to Gates and Jobs.
            It’s hard to find clearer examples of businessmen who have done good for American society. If it weren’t for the technology “bubble” they helped create, America would be in direr straits. 
            You seem to fail to see that corporations whose only motive is profit can cause enormous damage.
            Lincoln railed against this. So did Jefferson. Theodore Roosevelt. Eisenhower. The list is endless.
            Please look at both sides of equation.

          • Fredlinskip

            What about the highly ethical elected official “who has learned integrity and loyalty to American people”? (Or is this a concept impossible to imagine?) “It is true you know”.

          • Gregg Smith

            Sure there are ethical politicians. Who would say otherwise?

        • William

           It was a government official that took the pensions from 20,000 Delphi workers and gave that money to UAW members.
           Certainly the shareholders and owners of a company have to stay on the top because they take the risk by starting or investing in a company.
           We now have a situation in America where elected and unelected government officials have made themselves experts in the economy are are just destroying it.

          • Fredlinskip

            Their was a time when “shareholders and owners of a company” were LESS beholden to their own outlandish personal enrichment and more to the welfare of their employees- which has created a situation where employees don’t have the $ to spend to stimulate a healthy economy.

            In govmint an elected “businessman” might want to “stay on top” by rewarding it’s “shareholders” (lobbyists, corporate interests, and top %ers that funded their campaigns) to the detriment of it’s employees (American people).

            Govmint officials did play an essential part in wrecking economy… through deregulation and lack of enforcement of current regulation. They did this in order to satisfy the interests of the “shareholders” (corporate interests) that got them elected.

          • William

             There was a time when employees were very loyal to the company they worked for but those days have past.
             Banks did not lobby to give loans to people that they knew could not pay them back. That was forced on them by government.
             At the end of the day it is obvious that the average, hard working, honest person in this country should realize he is on his own.

          • Fredlinskip

            Don’t tell me that when bank CEO’s were testifying before congress that they had no idea what was going on as they reaped outlandish profits from housing and credit bubbles.
            Bank CEO’s from Ivy League schools found  had no ethical difficulty in jeopardizing American economy for personal profit. 
            And they had no problem rewarding their employees with huge bonuses for doing so- even after financial collapse.

        • notafeminista

          The first goal of your “govmint” person always is to stay in office.  How precisely does that suit your best interests exactly?

          • StilllHere

            That’s just the politicians, the bureaucrats are even worse.  They are about empire building, growing their budgets constantly.

  • Gregg Smith

    I find the Hillary dynamic fascinating. She fell on the sword but did it in a way that tacitly called out Obama. She said the “buck stops” with her. I believe she has an eye on 2016. She may think in the end she will be exonerated and the act of loyalty during an election will be regarded as noble. I have come around to the thinking she must have acted on the numerous request for more security in Benghazi. More than likely she has a paper trial to cover herself. She was denied. It’s all on record and she knows two things for sure: 1) Obama is toast if she releases those memos and requests before the election, and 2) If that happens she will be blamed and that will hurt her in 2016. The word is (from Fox, Rush, Norquist and Pat Roberts) Bill wants her to do it and she is resisting. He doesn’t like Obama and thinks a hostile takeover (or take back) of the Democrat Party is preferable to finding the loyalty of following Obama’s path to destruction. He’s right of course. It’s a long shot but the Clintons are a force to be reckoned with. My guess is there are far more Democrats who would take Clinton over Obama than would take Romney over Obama… but there are a lot of those too.

    • hennorama

      That is a nice warm pile of speculation that is of course evidence- and fact-free.  Other than the fact of the speculation already having been made before through “the word” of those well-known unbiased entities and individuals you listed, of course.

      The facts that Pres. Clinton has been campaigning far and wide on behalf on Pres. Obama, and that they will appear together on Monday are rather inconvenient facts that negate your speculative discourse.

      • Gregg Smith

        First you need to remove your “like”. I gave all the necessary qualifiers to not imply it was fact. But au contraire, there is evidence. I am not alone. It just can’t be proven. So, maybe Hillary is incredibly uncaring and incompetent but I don’t think so. Maybe Bill and Obama are buds but the record doesn’t show that. Or maybe Obama is covering his ass. Are there other options?

         

        • hennorama

          Ha! You actually look at and care about who “Liked” your post(s)? Interesting. Indeed I hit the “Liked” button inadvertently, but I see no need to remove that, since I do actually “like” sparring with you, generally.

          Yes, you used caveats and qualifiers in your post, in the same way Amb. Rice did on her Sept. 16, 2012 TV appearances.

          Regardless, the content and theme of your post is speculative and cited no evidence, which is my point.

          • Gregg Smith

            Yes I do. I notice if there are 4 or 5 as that is odd. You would be surprised at how many times liberals who disagree on many issues click it. You would be surprised at how many times I click it ( yes, you too on occasion) on comments of those I normally disagree with. I think it’s a good thing to identify common ground. It also helps me remain civil by realizing there are folks here who agree where it’s unexpected. I work hard to not get personal but after being called a racist or a brainwashed ideologue so many times I can get a little snarky. From there, it’s easier to generalize falsely the commenters opinions. That is not to say I haven’t concluded some specific commenters are total jerks.  

            I also think it’s a nice gesture so I’m not going to disrespect it. It was not always like this and I still don’t understand who “guest” are.

            You seem to think there is something ignoble or narcissistic or something about looking at them but I’m not about wanting people to like me. Surely you realize that but whatever. 

          • hennorama

            Thanks again for your responses, Gregg,

            I don’t think you’re a narcissist or are striving for popularity or have any motives other than to express your views and/or refute views you disagree with.  I not surprised that anyone would look at the number of “Likes,” but am surprised that the details of who clicked that button are important to anyone.  My use of “Ha!” was not to be critical but instead to express my surprise.

            Apologies for any offense taken as that was not my intent.

          • Gregg Smith

            The evidence is 20 years of watching the Clintons. Dan Millbank wrote a piece. AllahPundit has been all over it. 

            Are you saying Hillary is uncaring and incompetent? What are the other options? Go ahead, speculate.

        • DrewInGeorgia

           You can remove a “like”? How? Never tried to do it so I wasn’t aware that you could.

          • Gregg Smith

            The “like” button is a toggle. You just click it again and the thumbs up disappears.

          • DrewInGeorgia

             Thanks

          • Gregg Smith

            You’re welcome but I cannot tell you if it is possible to like yourself.

          • DrewInGeorgia

             Self-Esteem? Sure, it’s possible to like yourself Gregg. I’ve found that helping others goes a long way. Wait a minute, you meant possible to give yourself a like in Disqus didn’t you?

            ;’)

          • Gregg Smith

            I’m so confused.

          • JGC

            Disqus cleaned that up a couple of months ago; it used to be possible to self-like. But now if you do a post, your choices are “edit” or “reply”.  No more “like”.  Probably a good thing. Didn’t the Supreme Court recently  rule against a perversion like self-liking?

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

    Photoshop fail: Apparently Romney’s minions needed to show more folks at this appearance than actually wanted to be there.

    http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/9038/large/romneyfakereverse.jpg?1351279674

    http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/web03/2012/10/26/14/enhanced-buzz-20739-1351276397-3.jpg

  • Fredlinskip

    (Reply to William below)
    “It’s difficult to understand” why people so obsessed with concept of “allowing people to keep their own $” can not see the unhealthy inequities carrying this concept to it’s extreme has created.    You commented about failure of Russia. In the days when “communism was king” in Russia, a tiny percent of Russian elite, owned the vast majority of the countries assets (sorry I don’t have time to present the actual stats). We now have the same situation in America.Does that make you proud?

    • StilllHere

      Complete hyperbole.  Income is considerably more concentrated in Russia and the winners are chosen by the government.  Here the government is the confiscator.

    • William

       The murders and thugs that replaced the previous elite class in the USSR  were no better and actually worse. They are responsible for enslaving a great deal of people and murdering tens of millions of people. They lived just as large or larger than the elites that they despised.
       “unhealthy inequities” or “wealth gap” or “haves and have nots”, the name changes over the years but is it just a ploy to pit one group of people against another? What does that accomplish other than electing a new group of elites that are quick to enrich themselves.
       Who are our evil elites? Gates, Jobs, Buffett, the local doctor? Do these elites just enrich themselves or create companies that help other people enrich themselves?
       I am not proud to see the vast numbers of people unable to have a good job, nice home, good school etc…but I see very few solutions coming from the same group of elite political and government class, making the situation any better for those that actually need help.
       I do see a growing elite political and government worker class that has greatly rewarded itself. That does not make me proud either and is very scary.
       

      • Fredlinskip

        You are the one “pitting one group of people against another” when you make such statements as “employees were once loyal…. but those days are passed”.

        I think you pretty much have to be blind, deaf and dumb, to not see that creating a society run for the benefit of a few Kings, Queens, and Princes is not detrimental to a healthy society.

        • William

          There have always been rich people that make more than the average person and I don’t see anything wrong with it. I look around at the various failed states in the world and a lot of them punish success and reward failure which encourages their best and brightest to come here.
           I do see the welfare class growing and voting themselves ever increasing extras which don’t really uplift them. That is not a society that will survive.

          • Fredlinskip

            What failed states that punish success are you referring?

            Is this “welfare class” the 47% Romney referred to or the currently unemployed?

  • JONBOSTON

    Each Friday this Romney -bashing news roundup is sounding more and more desperate. There is never ever any critique of Obama and what he has accomplished as president.  Or for that matter how his nasty campaign this year compares to the 2008 “hope and change”  campaign. Nor is there ever any discussion on the flip flops Obama has made on such issues as single payer universal health; the Obamacare mandate; his opposing in 2006 then support of an increase in the debt limit ; his supporting in 2006  then opposing in Nov 2008  then supporting in May 2012 same sex marriage; support then abandonment of public financing of campaigns; transparency in government , including lobbying ;reversals on Guantanamo ,military tribunals, rendition and the Patriot act; his global apology tour which he later denied; etc etc….. I guess we should all be satisfied with 8% unemployment, 15% real unemployment, reduced number of people working, reduced family income, awful GDP growth (latest quarter boosted by end of fiscal year federal spending), increased dependency on government welfare programs including food stamps and disability filings ,and I could go on. Obama’s rollout on Monday of his “agenda” for the next 4 years was laughable –maybe this is why there was no discussion about it.  Does he really believe that the path to middle class prosperity runs through more hiring of teachers, firemen , non-existent green energy jobs, and taxing the 1%. Does he think people are that stupid? Maybe so if you go by his appearances on MTV, Letterman , Leno, Rolling Stone, the View, etc. What’s next , Jersey Shore?

     Doesn’t On Point have any interest in what Obama would do the next 4 years to grow the economy, increase jobs and heal the partisan divide?  And what about Libya? Does it not concern On Point, NPR, civil liberties crowd , the once respected New York Times, or the national media that an innocent You Tube filmmaker is rotting in jail because our pretend president needed a fall guy for his ineptitude or even worse lying ? It’s becoming more evident that those murdered in Libya sought military assistance but were denied any help despite several pleas. Is there not the slightest interest or concern of Tom Ashbrook that Obama may have either been derelict in his duty as commander in Chief , or worse may have lied to the American public about what happened.  What about maintaining the integrity of the office of the presidency? Or is it more important to focus on what Senate candidate Mourdoch said so as better to tar Romney with his extreme comments despite the fact that Romney does not support such views.  Or the week before your focus on ” Romney’s binders”. If I didn’t know better I’d believe that each Friday’s “news topics” are coordinated with the slime merchants ( Plouffe, Axlerod , and Cutter) running Obama’s campaign..I can only imagine what petty garbage will be discussed next Friday. On Point has,regrettably, become a shell of what it used to be a fair, balanced and intellectually honest analysis of the news of the week.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       There is a great piece by Andrew Sullivan about the comparisons of Obama’s flailing end game and Bush I.  Bush I even released a glossy pamphlet called “The Agenda” in the last few weeks of the campaign. Also, Bush started calling his opponents snarky names like “Ozone Boy”.

      “George Herbert Walker Obama”
      http://weeklystandard.com/articles/george-herbert-walker-obama_657916.html

    • DrewInGeorgia

       Ummm, yeah.

      Evidently in the alternate reality of those of your ilk an Ad Campaign is considered an attack.

  • Fredlinskip

     William below- “Austerity is long overdue in many nations and needs to happen. That means cuts in spending and failed government programs.”
     
    “Austerity is overdue” to cut debt and deficit, but why don’t governments have sense God gave rocks to pay down debt & deficit in times of economic strength? 
    **Examining where the $ was spent when we had a thriving economy is the key to understanding how we got here. We willfully ignore history to the detriment of all but the top %ers.

    On other hand, too much austerity in tough economic times can make problem worse.
    At present, different countries have responded differently to current economic difficulty.
    One whose eyes are open should be able to discern which course is more profitable- austerity or stimulus.
     Or are we so blinded by our own beliefs that  we will never learn- repeating mistakes until end of days.  

    • William

       Where those times of “economic strength” actually that strong or just better than what preceded it?
       We can look at the “Bush years” with low unemployment and call them “good times” when compared to now. But were those “good times” built on a false economy, i.e, housing bubble based on loaning money to people that would never pay it back? Then I would say those were actually bad times and just a cheap high.
       I looked at the various EU countries and they have spent all they can spend and yet are demanding more loans, with the exception of Germany. Doing more of the same won’t make for a better outcome. So slashing spending and telling people that their economic future is in their hands and they need to meet the challenge.
       Our normal federal spending is 2-3 trillion dollars across the entire economy which is more than enough stimulus at the federal level. Toss in state and local government spending it is clear that government spending to stimulate the economy does not work.
       Have we seen “too much austerity?”. And, why does austerity only limit itself to money and not a reduction in regulations?
       Is our economy just over regulated, especially for new small businesses, and that is actually what the root of our economic problems?

      • Fredlinskip

        Agree with you that Bush economy was a false one built on bubbles.
        Unemployment was low but median income did not advance during those years.
        Bubble or no, Bush had the $ to pay down the debt. But then again nothing Bush did made sense in terms of long-term prosperity.

        One structural fault in our gov system is that during tough economic times public employees should take some of the hit. In good economic times, gov employees should receive some of the gains. To not do so discourages good people to enter public sector.

        We have seen trend for decades now of new small businesses swallowed by big businesses- this is  more detrimental to American way of life than regulation ever was.

        I have no problem with austerity- as long as top %’ers share some of the pain. Our country functioned much better in the past when the higher tax brackets shared a greater part of the burden AND **there were incentives in tax code that encouraged megacorps to reinvest in America.

        • JONBOSTON

          You’d have a great post if any of your underlying assumptions were so. First the income disparity between those at the top and those at the bottom has been going on for 30 years and is a function of of a global economy that values greatly intellectual achievement. Ours no longer is a manufactured driven economy. Second , giving more to public sector employees during good times is exactly how states got into their mess. Absolutely horrid idea. If public sector employees want more , let them enter the dreaded private sector. Also your belief that the wealthy are sharing a smaller income tax burden  is wrong.  Our income tax system is still steeply progressive, more so than most wealthy nations. Go look it up yourself. You might actually gain some insights. Last , I share your nostalgia for the good old days when small businesses thrived alongside big business. But the only reason why Walmart exists and expands is because we consumers demand cheaper and better products. And Walmart delivers. 

          • William

             Is the problem that the people at the top are making too much money or the people at the bottom are making too little money? It’s not a zero sum game so how much money a person makes is usually determined by their education and desire to achieve wealth.
             I never said the walthy are sharing a smaller income tax burden. The IRS said the people in the higher income bracket pay the majority of the income taxes.
             We have a very progressive income tax system.
             I remember the days before Walmart and glad many of those mom and pop stores are gone. They were overprices, poor service, selection and made it almost impossible to return something.
             I don’t like how Walmart pays it’s employees but I’m not going to tell them how to conduct their business.

          • JONBOSTON

            Who cares what the people at the top make. More power ( or wealth) to them. Just re-invest your riches in the economy so the country benefits with economic growth and more jobs. The problem is that people on the bottom make so little because their contributions and value added are  replaceable by low-skilled low wage workers. The long term solution is an educational system that actually educates our young people, rather than churn out functional illiterates. If Democrat politicians truly cared about helping the poor, they would demand better public schools and expanded school choice options for those stuck in failing urban public schools. 

          • Fredlinskip

            Like your post.
            Except that Dems have been promoting improving education system far more than we hear from GOP.

          • Fredlinskip

            Too much to respond to in this box-See new comment

        • William

           I think Bush was more of a Liberal than Conservative and that was his major character flaw. He wanted to be liked by the MSM so he created another entitlement program for seniors and the MSM and Liberals still hate him.
           I agree about government workers need to take a hit, a bit one. I read in WaPo yesterday that the gov. worker lobby group wants a 35 percent pay raise to keep up with what they consider a “pay gap” between them and the  private sector.
            Austerity to me should focus on elimination of government regulations that don’t make sense or hinder the creation of new business, hurt existing business etc…and less spending..less government workers.
           I’m not sure how to share the pain equally. I don’t fault smart people from getting ahead legally and just taxing them higher just because we can does not make our country more attractive for foreign investors.

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

            Ah, “Bush was never a conservative”.

            The next time a GOP president comes along, it’s on you to make him own his crap.

            Funny how every TruePrincipledConservative in the world is here on this page.

  • Fredlinskip

    William wrote:”There was a time when employees were very loyal to the company they worked for but those days have past.” 
     
    You must have very direct experience to so thoroughly believe that employees are currently unloyal. Perhaps if employees were treated with dignity, respect, and did not see majority of their efforts go to corporate execs, their attitudes might improve? The baby boomers were perhaps the most productive workers this country has ever known. Yet their pensions have been turned into 401k’s, often to their detriment. And the “entitlements” they have paid into all their lives are now under threat.
     Mega corps are now sitting on trillions. 
    I wonder… is there a connection there??

    • William

      Just look what Obama said about the business owners with his famous “you did not build that” speech. That type of attitude is just so childish. Do you think a guy like that would be a good employee? loyal? or just bellyache all the time?
       And the sad thing is that his attitude is wide spread across the nation.
       Certainly there is always going to be a screaming boss, difficult job (just ask a truck driver or waitress), but at the end of the day most employers are fair and do their best for their employees.
       

      • Fredlinskip

        Of course you realize by now how the “build that” comment was taken out of context.
        I don’t meant to discount what you say in reference to small business.
        Practices of big business and megacorps, however ,have lead to huge unsustainable inequity in the American system.

        • William

          I listened to what he said and what Warren said so I think both are so out of touch with what a business owner goes through these days.
           I agree that huge companies are creating distortions in our market place. They seem to work very hard to keep smaller companies from gaining any traction and love to use the government as their enforcer via government regulations. 

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

        I’ll give you a dollar for some lessons in context.

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

      That’s hilarious: William’s “employees loyal to the company” is nigh unto a caste system where the proles are “good” if they’re loyal, but the economic uberlords need only look out for themselves.

      It’s a small step to today’s meme that “creative destruction” is good for the folks in suits, but workers, and only workers, are to be concerned today with not bankrupting the company in decades hence, by excessive salary demands.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Obama supporters actually hate Obama’s policies.
    The ignorance is kind of sad.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skw-0jv9kts
     

    • Gregg Smith

      Hilarious!

      • Steve__T

        You thinks that’s funny, I got this from one of your links.

         Mitt Romney is being accused of LYING under oath to protect the founder of Staples

        http://perezhilton.com/?p=281312I

        Guess you missed that.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Obama is being accused of being born in Kenya.

          See how that works.

          The Gloria Alred fiasco was an epic fail.

          • Steve__T

             That was ….? even for you. You can do better come on twist master give me something better than that, you’ve got a bunch of them come on I need a laugh.

    • JCR2012

      And true republicans really hate Romney but they are stuck with him. They try to ignore how much dislike there was for MR during the primaries from the republican party and they come up with excuses to justify their recent support of MR such as saying that he is a better candidate because he has a business background and this Nation needs someone to run it as a business. Its the weakest argument they have come up with to justify their support to MR over BO and be able to live with themselves. I think some republicans started liking MR more when he picked Ryan as his running mate because he is a real conservative and has a stance. I bet you they would like the ticket to be on the other side, where Ryan is the presidential candidate. Just based on the general republican sentiment this last year.

      • Gregg Smith

        That’s very astute, allow me to give testimony. I was a Newt supporter. I flirted with the notion of Bachmann and even Cain because of Newt’s baggage but I’ve followed him closely since ’94 and in the end I decided he was my choice. The primary is so late here in NC I usually don’t get to vote on the Republican side because it’s settled as in 2008 (I voted Hillary). But this time I did indeed cast a vote for Newt.

        Back in the day, Worried for the Country and I butted heads more than once. But even then, I made it clear I was voting against Obama. I would have voted for any of them… or a can of Alpo. Your point about Romney is fair. It is further bolstered (at least to me) by the fact Ryan was chosen. That was my real turning point although it would not be accurate to say my conversion from voting against Obama to voting for Romney hadn’t already begun. 

        Further to your point, I love the Tea Party. I loved the conventional wisdom shattering victories in 2010 by Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and many many in the House at the expense of establishment Republicans. I am not one who believes we need to soften the message to appease the middle. I believe people want the brutal truth. I think when Conservative principles are embraced Conservatives win. On top of all that, this election (as most) is about the economy and jobs. There, Romney is uniquely qualified IMO. Ryan is the numbers geek of all time and Romney knows how to use them. That’s really what the Tea Party has always been about. 

        I would not like to see the ticket flipped. I like Ryan but IMHO he is too young. He isn’t ready…yet. I do think he has the integrity and inner strength to lead if thrust into the position however. Romney is ready.

        As I’ve learned, studied, watched and read more about Romney my respect for him as a man of honor, intelligence and competence has grown immensely. I am enthusiastically casting my vote for Romney.

        • William

           I have liked Newt for years and there is no better person to take on the MSM.
           Romney was not my first choice but I think he has led an excellent life and raised a very good family. I hope he does not disappoint the Conservatives if he gets elected and makes the hard choices with respect to reducing spending and elimination of failed government agencies and programs.

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

            If Newt is taking on the MSM so hard, why does he keep getting invited back?

            He’s a huckster and full-fledged Beltway Inbred. His very spare moments of lucidity aren’t enough to fix the rest of him.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “The Progressive Case Against Obama”

    Bottom line: The president is complicit in
    creating an increasingly unequal — and unjust — society

    By Matt Stoller

    http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/

  • JCR2012

     You are going to have to do better than that to support your original argument. It doesn’t stand. I thought Romney was going to endorse Obama by the end of the last debate. He went from attacking BO on almost every single issue, to agreeing with him. That must have killed you, didn’t it!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      I didn’t see it that way.

      Obama was petulant and small.  Romney gave him the rope and Obama hung himself with it.

      It was brilliant!!

      • JCR2012

        Wao, really!!!
        You really have some strong paradigms in your brain that do not let you see things for what they are. This is not a matter of opinion, Romney agreed more with Obama in the last debate than Biden did during Operation Neptune Spear that killed bin Laden. What you call a rope was really a rape to the audience’s ears when Romney tried to deceive them and all of us, except you.

  • JCR2012

    You see, deep inside, Romney acknowledges BO is a
    better candidate and would like him to win but he has a show to run. The biggest problem MR has is that he doesn’t have an opinion that he sticks with and his ideas are mostly bad or incorrect. But that’s his problem, let’s not make it
    our Nation’s problem. From now on, I’m going to refer to Romney as MR for Morph Romney. Please, do not reply unless you are going to actually defend MR; don’t waste our time.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I’ve thought Romney would be a great President for over a year.  I don’t see any ‘morph’.

      If there was a morph I would be disappointed.  You are listening to too much Axelrod desperation spin.

      • Fredlinskip

        It’s interesting that the concept of “flippety- floppin”, so important to GOP in Bush-Kerry election apparently has no relevance to them 8 years later. 
        I guess GOP has sorta “flippety- flopped” on this issue.

      • JCR2012

        I’m an independent and quite honestly if Romney was today the same he was as a Governor and had stood his stance against the GOP’s agenda, I might have considered voting for him. But if you don’t see a spineless morph on Romney, you haven’t been paying attention to what has been happening this past year. You see, that’s what independent voters have over everybody else, we actually pick the candidate based on their abilities and capacities, not a party’s agenda. We do not find ourselves forced to vote for a particular candidate due to family ties or traditions. We actually see things for what they are. We don’t listen to Axelrod or any other politician, we come up with our own conclusion based on facts and candidate merits. I’m sorry you can’t.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          I’m an independent too.  Romney is the same problem solver he was as Governor.  We need real solutions in DC to rout out the corruption and bloat.  Obama promised to do that and he failed.

          Sorry, I’ve followed this election as closely as humanly possible.  I tortured myself and watched EVERY GOP debate.

          Social issues are a shiny object distraction planted by the Dems.  Sorry you can’t see that.

          The issues that Romney will tackle are the ones he is talking about:  economy, jobs, debt, peace through strength

          I guess the Dems are disappointed that Santorum didn’t win the nomination because then they would have a case to put social issues front and center.

      • nj_v2

        ^ Congratulations! Winner, Most Delusional Poster of the Month Award.

        Life is pretty interesting here on Planet Earth. You should come and join us sometime.

        • Gregg Smith

          .. said by the person who uses as an icon the image representing someone isolated on an island.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    I’m not a big poll guy other than to observe trends.  There is a lot of discussion about polls and momentum these days.

    Today, Romney has expanded his lead in the swing states (in aggregate) — especially with independents.

    Rasmussen swing state poll (7-day) has Romney +6, 51-45. Romney up 15 w/ independents. It’s Romney’s biggest lead (6%) and day (51%) yet. 

    The Ras swing states are: CO, FL, IA, MI, NV, NH, NC, OH, PA, VA, WI.

    • JGC

      Oh, but you are a big poll guy if you follow and report in this sort of detail!  You may think and hope you are an independent, but we know you have drunk the tea. 

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

      Mentioning Rasmussen proves that, yes, you are not a big poll guy.

  • ExcellentNews

    Romney 2012! Because we want a President who will FORCE you to bear the child of your RAPIST.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       FALSE.  Why spread lies?  Because Obama is losing?

      • ExcellentNews

        Because it is TRUE. This is not about Obama losing, it is about the 99% losing.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           The only losers when Obama goes down are the hacks.  And they won’t be losers in the long run since Obama is killing the golden goose.

          Romney will bring prosperity for the 100%.

          http://www.usdebtclock.org/

          • DrewInGeorgia

             Wait a minute! There’s a Golden Goose? I thought that wealth was infinite and it was created by benevolent financiers? You hear that Financial Sector? Time for you all to teak a permanent break from all that hard work ya’ll have been doing. Have a great vacation!

        • StilllHere

          If they exist, they should blame Obama.

          • Steve__T

             You think 99% of the country doesn’t exist? OMG

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      “If you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare the voters. If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things.”

      -Barack Obama August 28,2008

      • ExcellentNews

        That was Obama talking ABOUT the McCain/Palin campaign in 2008. Trust the corporate-sponsored GOP machine to twist his words. Speaking of fresh ideas – yeah, lets give another tax cut to the billionaires who exported 12,000,000 US jobs between 2000-2008.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Words, just words.

          • StilllHere

            Nicely done, you got him.

        • Steve__T

           It’s OK he knows it. He’s the resident twist master, he thinks everybody forgets what people say and the context under what it was stated. If you want a real laugh just scan through some of his post, between him and stillhere I just LOL at most of them.
          I think I’m most hated by them because I shoot back. Sometimes I have to hold back.

          • StilllHere

            You shoot blanks and who are you kidding, you’ve got nothing to hold back.

          • Steve__T

             LOL I hold back a lot most times you aren’t worth replying to.

  • ExcellentNews

    Of course Romney will deliver BIG CHANGE. Since 2000, working Americans have had just a foretaste of what it is to live in a third world oligarchy. The GOP needs to finish the job our CEOs started, racing to the bottom for the cheapest third-world slave-labor.

    You middle class folks better learn how to forage in dumps, like you’ve seen on National Geographic documentaries – because these are the people Romney and his CEO pals would love to create jobs for…

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Obama’s doing a pretty good job killing the middle class and the golden goose.

      • ttajtt

        “WHAT IF” it could’ve been MCCain what a change then and now.  may be the same plan. 

    • notafeminista

      So, you’re paid or a volunteer?  I’d heard of stuff like this happening but assumed it was rumor, scuttlebutt…you know, gossip mongering.  Unfortunately, this post and subsequent posts from this name and riotgrrrrrl seem to indicate otherwise. 

      Go back to your drum circle.   Your practices and theories are unsustainable – Josef and Mao already tried.

      • ExcellentNews

        Neither.  Actually, I am one of the 1%, but do not want to live in a country where I have to hire private security to keep me safe from the 99%. The GOP policies are taking us to become a ______ (fill your favorite third world “low cost” labor haven or slave-labor dictatorship here). No sane American should want that.

        • notafeminista

          I call bovine excrement.  You’re no more part of the 1% than the man in the moon.

          • Gregg Smith

            And the notion the “occupiers” represent 99% is equally absurd.

          • jefe68

            Funny I find the same words to describe everything you post.
            How presumptive of you to know what this persons income is.

            Are you really this obtuse to think all people who are in the 1% income bracket are regressive right wingers such as yourself?

  • Steve__T

     Nailed it.

  • Steve__T

     I do not disagree with that statement.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Is anyone following the lawsuit Dr. Michael “hockeystick” Mann has filed against Mark Steyn and the NRO?

    This guy makes Humphrey Bogart in the Caine Mutiny look sane.

    Here is Mark Steyn’s response:
    “So we’re being sued for loss of reputation by a fake Nobel laureate. Hilarious.”

    You gotta see the photo of his ‘fake’ Nobel prize that he posted on Facebook.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/23/breaking-mann-has-filed-suit-against-nro/#more-72909

  • riotgrrrl999

    Tom,
    I’m a journalist too, and I find it uncircumspect for your guests to
    refer to the presidential election, should the results be unclear, as
    “fun.” Many people see the outcome of this election as deadly serious in
    terms of the very real consequences to their lives. I’m glad these
    gainfully employed journos are having a good time, tho! la-de-da!

  • Fredlinskip

    In reply to Jon Boston below.
    Interesting points.
    You seem perhaps capable of thought, instead of blindly repeating misinformation, which puts you one up on many.
    Let’s address you’re points.
    “..income disparity between ..top and … bottom has been going on for 30 years ..”
    Hmmm, what coincides with beginning of this “30 year” period you mention? Didn’t concept of trickle-down (I affectionately refer to as “trickle-up”) economics begin around then?
    This concept is centered around the imbecilic idea that if we can just find ways to funnel more income to those who already have too much to know what to do with, it will be better for all. Brilliant!
    This concept also was supposed to eliminate debt and deficit and as we all know had the opposite effect. At end of Reagan admin, unable to make progress in this regard, GOP were cheerfully uttering witticisms such as “deficits don’t matter”.

    “…and is a function of a global economy that….” 
    I would argue that the disparity is in part due to the “Misinformation Age”. For one, Americans were informed that we were now too good to work at menial jobs, such as construction and manufacture. One consequence of this was that this left a vacuum of demand filled largely by immigrants, largely illegal, which would create greater stresses on our economy and employment in long run.  
    “Ours no longer is a manufactured driven economy”. America used to make stuff- now they don’t- you say this like it’s a good thing. If America consumed it’s own products, our economy would be healthier- Economics 101. American businesses have been incentivized to send jobs overseas.  How bout a tax code that incentivizes them to reinvest here.
    Public sector employees- we both agree there is a need for such things? I am only trying to say that public sector employees earnings should be more closely pegged to private sector in times of good and bad- So there is not resentment and so that good people (such as teachers) are drawn to public sector. 

    Your statement “your belief that the wealthy are sharing a smaller income tax burden is wrong… compared to other wealthy nations” might have a ring of truthif these folks actually paid those rates.

    • JONBOSTON

       Psychologists call it projection. You blindly repeat misinformation or outright mistake your opinion as fact. Sorry but from reading your post you apparently know little about macroeconomics and economic growth, next to nothing about the federal corporate income tax code, and absolutely zilch about business.  You take isolated facts such as Reagan’s economic program with increased income disparity and somehow argue a causal connection when you have no basis of proof. Reagan’s economic policies generated nearly 30 years of sustained economic  growth, greater family income in all income groups, and spectacular job growth. Unfortunately spending increased exponentially, thereby generating deficits.

      The lifeblood of our capitalist system is capital. And when those with surplus capital ( the wealthy , banks, etc) make investments and take risks, everyone benefits. New companies are formed, people are hired ,  and innovative new products are produced. It is not imbecilic. What is imbecilic is when government takes taxpayer money and bets on individual companies in favored industries (hello Solyndra). Backing of particular companies and industries typically squanders taxpayer resources and stifles sustainable growth (think ethanol). 

      Your point about America consuming its own products is simplistic. A competitive America does not mean competitive success for every American industry.The economic principle of comparative advantage allows each country to concentrate its energies on the particular goods and services that it is relatively productive at compared to the rest of the world. The countries then export those abroad, and in exchange import other goods and services produced relatively more efficiently abroad. Comparative advantage (free trade) drives much of globalization and its economic benefits and raises standards of living for everyone.

      The IRS code does not incentivize with favorable tax treatment the movement of jobs overseas. Obama demonstrated the same confusion during the first debate. The cost of moving overseas is a business expense like any other  “ordinary and necessary” business expense. There is no special deduction or tax treatment for these expenses. If anything , the US code encourages US companies to park earnings abroad rather than repatriate profits and be subject to US tax  (on top of the host country tax). A globally competitive America must invest overseas as well as export there. If US companies want access to foreign markets , they need to be there. Foreign investment tends to support hiring and exports back home.

      Finally ,only if a public sector employee can do more with less (ie increased productivity and efficiency) should they merit a wage increase. This is the way the dreaded private sector operates. You don’t just get paid more for showing up on the job. When you factor in job security,number of hours worked ,and fringe benefits , there is no comparison. And, please don’t tell me about  level of education and other nonsense. Get real….

      • JGC

        Reagan’s policies did not give greater individual income.  If the family income was increasing, it was because by the 1980s, families were gravitating toward a two-earner income situation. 

        • JONBOSTON

          Even if so, at least Reagan’s policies created employment opportunities such that a husband and wife could each find a job. Not so today….

      • Fredlinskip

        Tell me what you really think.
        First of all I’d like to apologize to comments page- 
        I did not wish to engage in book long discussions with participants.
        And as such may edit above comment a bit.
        Nor do I wish to project that I and only I have all the answers.
        Jon – I’m glad you think you’re arguments are so airtight.
        Glad you think that Reagan’s policies were so beneficial for America. Most Americans would probably agree with you. It seems you fail to make the connection between “30 years of sustained economic growth” with “spending increased exponentially.. generating deficits”.
        Most of the gains made during those years went to a precious small segment of society. 
        Yes family incomes grew. Median income not so much. And wages stagnated.
        Now, a fantastically disproportionate amount of wealth is concentrated into hands of tiny fraction of the population. This you claim is healthy so that these folks can make investments- take risks.
        You’ve a right to your opinion. Sorry – I don’t agree.
        It seems we had a healthier economy, lower unemployment, stronger foundation (manageable debt), and less polarization during the 4 decades leading up to Reagan.
        Who do you feel currently hold more sway over American system presently? Corporations sitting on trillions or government trillions in the red?

           I get your point that if someone can make it cheaper elsewhere than we can pay less. Don’t like it- but get it. My point about Americans consuming their own products is meant to be simplistic. Consumer spending is responsible for over 70% of U.S. economy. If we can make it here it and buy it here local economy profits- not rocket science.
        I’m not sold on the “Information Age”or “service economy” concepts. I think America can do better.
        “If anything, US code encourages US companies to park earnings abroad rather than repatriate profits and be subject to US tax”- Yes businesses find ways not to avoid tax and deficit grows. Can’t blame businesses for that, can we?
          Since I repeated verbatum what you said concerning education, but coming form me it was wrong- Hmm. okay.
        Let’s save the public sector debate for another day.

        • JONBOSTON

          You harken back to the good old days post WWII. Back then US manufacturing benefited with much of Europe and Japan’s infrastructure destroyed by war. Times have changed and we now have a global economy where US manufacturing must compete with foreign low cost manufacturing. This is the essence of competition. Ignoring that reality by setting up trade barriers is what brought on the great Depression.

           You sound like someone who has never been exposed to the private sector or international business. Money earned by corporations overseas is taxed by the host country. If the earnings stay there , it is not subject to US tax. But if it is repatriated to the US , it is taxed at the corporate rate of 35% ( with a credit for host taxes, if lower). So what would you do  if you owned that company? You’d keep that money overseas and invest it there rather than bring earnings back to the US. And that is what corporations do. If this money was brought back here without the threat of a US corp tax , it would be an enormous stimulus to the US economy that wouldn’t cost taxpayers a cent. So who opposes this? Obama, despite his own economic advisers supporting this common sense idea.

          I did not say that the income disparity is healthy. It is not..It’s just that wealthy people are not the problem and dumping on them is not the remedy. It would likely make things worse. People aren’t poor because of the wealthy and Obama’s demonizing rich and class warfare demagoguery is disgusting and ultimately counter productive. The problem is how to make life better for those less fortunate and it will not be done by dragging down those that are succeeding. Unfortunately there aren’t any immediate easy solutions.

          Last comment: Liberals paint corporations as “bad”. This has never made any sense to me. Corporations are organizations of people–they are not run by machines. They hire people, buy goods and services from people, and provide products and services that people value. One of many reasons I find Obama to be an awful president and unqualified to serve another term is that he has spent the past 4 years bashing business. At the end of the day , it’s the private sector that creates wealth and employs people in good sustainable jobs. Not government.  Government can only re-distribute wealth.

  • hennorama

    The last time most of Mr. Romney’s idea were tried was during the Reagan  administration.  This stuff is called by various names – trickle down, supply-side, and Reaganomics.  According to one of the architects of “Reaganomics,” William A. Niskanen [1]:
    “Reagan’s 1981 Program for Economic Recovery had four major policy objectives: (1) reduce the growth of government spending, (2) reduce the marginal tax rates on income from both labor and capital, (3) reduce regulation, and (4) reduce inflation by controlling the growth of the money supply. These major policy changes, in turn, were expected toincrease saving and investment, increase economic growth, balance the budget, restore healthy financial markets, and reduce inflation and interest rates.

    Does this sound familiar?  Mr. Romney’s proposals (“Mitt’s Plan”[2])
    are:

    Tax: Fairer, Flatter, and Simpler (same as (2) above)Regulation: Cutting The Red Tape (same as (3) above)Trade: Open Markets on Terms That Work For AmericaLabor: Free Enterprise, Free Choice, Free SpeechHuman Capital: A 21st Century WorkforceSpending: Smaller, Simpler, Smarter Government (same as (1) above)

    He hits the first 3 pillars of Reaganomics, and is silent on the 4th,
    likely due to the fact that inflation is so low at present.

    Unfortunately for Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan, Pres. Reagan’s budget director and one of the main proponents of Reaganomics, David Stockman, is not a fan of Mr. Romney, nor his running mate Paul
    Ryan’s budget.

    See:
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/14/david-stockman-mitt-romney-and-the-bain-drain.html

    http://www.businessinsider.com/david-stockman-paul-ryan-budget-2012-8
    The following is data, without comment, for your consideration:

    Negative results under Reagan (select Obama results) [3,4]:

    Unemployment averaged 7.5%. (most recent = 7.8%)Spending averaged 22.4% of GDP. (most recent = 22.9%)Public debt rose from 26% of GDP in 1980 to 41% of GDP by 1988. (just over 50% of GDP in 2009 to most recent 73%)Public debt roughly tripled. (up 52.4% to date under Pres. Obama)Job growth averaged 2.1% per year. (negligible growth)Poverty ranged from low of 13.0% in 1980 & 1988 to 1983 high of 15.2% (most recent = 15%)8 straight years of deficits (4 so far)

    Positive outcomes under Reagan:

    Annual increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending fell from 4.0%
    under Carter to 2.5%.  Still grew, just a bit more slowly.
    Reduction in economic regulation started by Carter continued, but at a slower rate.  Not a resounding success.

    Significant reform of the Federal tax code.
    Real GDP per adult increased at a 1.8% rate.
    Business sector output/hr grew average of 1.4%.
    Manufacturing sector output/hr grew average of 3.8% (peacetime record)
    Unemployment rate dropped from 7.0% to 5.4% (but averaged 7.5% due to
    the Reagan/Volker Recession.  Peak was 10.8% in 1983).
    Inflation dropped substantially from 13.5% in 1980 to 4.1% in 1988.

    I highly recommend these articles, as they give a broad perspective:
    All sources by order of use in the above:

    [1] http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/Reaganomics.html
    [2] http://www.mittromney.com/jobs
    [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
    [4] http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2012

    • JGC

      Thanks for researching and posting all these resources.

      • hennorama

        You’re welcome. This is important stuff.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       The real David Stockman by an economist who worked with him on the OMB transition team.

      Given to you without comment.

      http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331128/david-stockman-vs-bain-capital-alan-reynolds

      • hennorama

        Thank you for your response.

        Mr. Stockman’s vanity, self-promotion and peccadillos are widely known.  My mention of him and his critiques of both Romney/Bain Capital and the Ryan budgets was to provide a counterpoint from someone who was inside the Reagan admin. and oversaw the implementation of Reaganomics.  I did this due to the fact that the Romney/Ryan proposals very closely resemble Reaganomics.

        Various founders of Reaganomics have had legal and financial difficulties and significant disagreements with the Bush II policies as well as with the current Republican candidates.

        William A. Niskanen’s widow was sued by the Koch bothers over ownership of the Cato Institue.[1]  These lawsuits were settled in June.  Many viewed this as an attempt at a hostile takeover of Cato by the Koch brothers and an attempt to convert the Cato Institute from from being non-partisan to being overtly political.

        Paul Craig Roberts called for Pres. Bush’ impeachment for for lying to Congress in the runup to the invasion of Iraq.  His opinion of supporters of George W. Bush is that they “are brownshirts with the same low intelligence and morals as Hitler’s enthusiastic supporters.”  He has also criticized both the Bush and Obama administrations for weakening/destroying civil liberties in the wake of 9/11.[2]

        Arthur Laffer (of Laffer Curve fame) was recently sued in a Texas court (Jan. 11) for alleged involvement in a Ponzi scheme.  This was not the first time he has been sued over his business dealings and using his name to enhance the credibility of a business.  He has been associated with Ponzi schemes, pyramid schemes and multi-level marketing at least three times to date.[3]

        For another summary of Reaganomics and its outcomes, this is a fine article:

        http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Reaganomics.aspx

        Sources:
        [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2012/03/01/koch-brothers-sues-think-tank-that-they-founded/
        [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts#Biography
        [3] http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs/news-ticker/2012/jan/15/economist-laffer-sued-again/

      • jefe68

        Typical right wing response. If it does not fit your narrative it’s not legit and then try to discredit the author. David Stockman has written and excellent expose on Bain Capital and the reality of Mitt Romney’ background which flies in the face of the narrative Mitt Romney is presenting now.
        The man is a fake as a three dollar bill.

    • Gregg Smith

      I’d certainly settle for a Reganesque recovery right now.

      Look at historical debt as a percentage of GDP but make sure you’re sitting down. More Obama means more debt.

      • nj_v2

        Uber-partisan Hack-a-tron Greggg continues to churn out his smarmy chum.

        Scroll to the appropriate chart here

        http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/politics/USA_debt_2009.html

        and note what the curve has done starting around 2009.

        • Gregg Smith

          I’m tempted to put your insanity up top. First, I referred to the GDP to Debt ratio, not GDP. Our debt is over 100% of GDP. That has not happened since WWII. It’s a big deal.

          But look at your own link again. You obviously did not read the heading.

          “2009-2014 estimated, Source: WhiteHouse”

          And you call me the hack-a-tron. You haven’t a clue.

      • hennorama

        Be careful what you wish for.

        Debt will continue to grow regardless of who is in the White House next year.

        Mr. Romney says he may be able to balance the budget in 8 to 10 years. Mr. Ryan’s says his proposals will do it in 28 years.

        The conditions during the early Reagan years were clearly much different than they are today – high inflation and a top tax rate of 70%, to name just two.

        Reagan’s initial reforms were massive failures. The Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) enacted in mid-1981 introduced huge marginal tax rates cuts. ERTA failed miserably by creating massive budget deficits and weakening the economy. The resulting severe recession lasted through 1982.

        Reagan saw his error, and responded in late 1982 with TEFRA (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act). The economy clawed its way back, and TEFRA wisely reversed many of the massive tax cuts in ERTA. TEFRA was the largest peacetime tax increase ever signed into law by any president. The irony is that it was a Republican, Ronald Reagan, who signed it into law.

        • Gregg Smith

          Obama has yet to see his errors or listen to the American people via the 2010 mandate. He has undone parts of welfare reform and our immigration laws by executive order. He say’s he’ll be “more flexible” after the election. He has no plan other than a 20 page rehash of the same ol’ and half the pages are pictures of him.

          I’d settle for a Reaganesque recovery.

  • JGC

    If Romney is elected, the far right Tea Party types will be at first elated, but then eventually have their hopes thoroughly crushed.  It will be a magnitude 100x over how the left felt about Obama brushing over some of their concerns in his first term, because yes, some or many are upset about these concerns, especially larger environmental and immigration issues, and the kid-glove treatment of the Banksters.    

    Romney’s big gift to the Tea Party faction will be the appointment(s) of Supreme Court judges who tow the originalist line. (Hello expansion of Citizens United! Bye-bye Roe v. Wade) But after that Romney is only concerned with the Investor Class. I thought some more about his 2008 statement about Detroit, letting it undergo a managed bankruptcy, even though there was no private financing available at the time.  I think that with our plutocracy stashing their funds secretively and overseas, Romney was on board to blow up our manufacturing sector, and then as per usual to Bainthink, come in a scoop up the remnants at below firesale prices and start anew, with only upside accrued to the Investor Class.  It wasn’t enough to go through managed bankruptcy; to be at its most successful to the Investors, Detroit had to experience creative destruction at the level of nuclear holocaust.  And if anyone thinks the Delphi unit would have survived that on the upside, now who is delusional?

    • notafeminista

      Well you can always hope.

  • ttajtt

    so heard, romney studied he’s script for weeks ahead of the first debate to remember he’s lines.  acting words or tonguing it words?  where is his true minds thinking at, needing to remember what HIS / THIER thought wordings, or are / is not to say / speak of.  body language can be trained with the word and body emotion expressions.  Or is this how Mormons are raised to be like?  action in deeds, or to incorporate the despeption by the want of a republication house too just to say “they sent it to me”.  via the corporate take over laws of our jobs, companies, retirements, 401′s… he is skilled at it.

  • ttajtt

    heard said Romney studied his words in what to say or speak in saying.  not his own thoughts of what he (Can) will do.   republicans like Reagan for he’s acting ability.  body emotion with words, acting body language persuasion too that is what i get out of the debates. he needs a house to send the corporate take over laws, retirements, 401, 12 mil jobs  

  • JGC

    With the Jimmy Saville scandal in the U.K.,  and with the recent conviction and sentencing of former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky, and the suppression of Boy Scout documents to   name men involved in child abuse, and the ongoing fallout of the Catholic clergy with young children entrusted to their care and attention,  does anyone still need convincing that unfortunately:  an  altruistic person who likes to be involved with young people and help them through their difficult circumstances, is more rare than a unicorn and should be observed with the greatest of skepticism and cynicism?  A child should never be left alone with even the most trusted of society’s agents.   

  • JGC

    It sound like both Rep. Harry Reid and a daughter of Sen. Marco Rubio were both in serious vehicular accidents this week.  I hope they recover fully, and it is my wish that everyone have access to the same health care as their families when there are crises like these. 

    • Gregg Smith

      I heard Reid is doing fine, I’m not sure about Rubio’s daughter. I hope they both recover quickly. 

      As of now Congress is exempt from Obamacare so ….

  • DrewInGeorgia

    William wrote “True. We have to entitlement programs that are bankrupting us and we create another one.”

    We have to entitle programs that are bankrupting us and create another one?

    Was that a Mourdock Moment or typos?

  • Marco Ringo

    Concerning Murdock: No matter how much clarification occurs by Murdock, or by anyone supporting Murdock, there can be no denial that IF God intended for the product of a rape to enter into the world, then God intended for the rape to occur. How can I say this? Because: IF God is omnipotent he could have created the fetus to enter the world through a different means other than rape. The indication is that this fetus must come into the world. It is God’s intent. So, God pushes this fetus into the world. Now…look at the means whereby God pushes this fetus into the world.

    • notafeminista

      You didn’t continue the “thought experiment” – since you are going to presume to know the mind of God and His intent, then consider the why.  Your premise is that God so desperately needs this particular fetus to enter the world that He is willing to permit a woman to suffer a rape for it.  For what purpose?  Presumably since He is God, this particular fetus must have significant import to Him, no?  Are you willing to say that God needs this soul to enter for evil purposes?  After all, you are saying He is willing to permit evil to occur to allow this fetus to enter – are you willing to say He does so for evil reasons?  For that’s all you’ve got left now.

       

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    When Obama called the Seals they got Bin Laden; when the Seals called Obama help was denied.

  • Gregg Smith

    I was met with widespread agreement a few days ago when I commented about how truly nasty Republicans are. Here’s the best example yet.

    http://www.futurechildrenproject.com/

    Is this connecting with anyone?

    • Steve__T

       Totally.

      • Gregg Smith

        I’ve done it before. I want everybody to see the depth of desperation.  

        • Steve__T

           All I see is yours. Sad.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Exhibit A for child abuse.

      Never use children as props.

  • Fredlinskip

      If Romney believed it would boost his campaign, he would air the following message:  
      “I’m the biggest flippety-flopper that ever ran for public office. 
      I’m MR and I approved this message”.

        If he did, he might win some respect for finally making an honest attempt to speak truth. 

    • JONBOSTON

       I laugh when I read posts like this…….Obama has changed positions on same sex marriage ( for twice , against once); Bush’s anti -terror program– Guantanamo , Patriot act, rendition, military tribunals (previously against, now for) ; increasing national debt ( against, now for) ; raising taxes on 1% ( previously against , now for) ; financing of public campaigns ( for , now against); transparency in govt (previously for, now  it’s a joke -witness Bengazi ;lobbyists).
      Are these flip flops?

      • Gregg Smith

        Absolutely, the most recent example is sequestration. It’s a good idea to the DesMoines Register one day and a bad idea at the debate the next day. BTW, The DMR endorsed Romney and they always endorse the Democrat.

      • Fredlinskip

        Some valid points.

        Truth be told, I haven’t much someone who changes position, if new information should come to light. It takes guts to admit one may have been wrong and can admit it. 
        It’s called learning- part of what being human is about. That said, I am deeply disappointed concerning Obama’s stance on some of theses issues- The GOP alternative however would be much worse- 

        • Gregg Smith

          But they were lies. There was no chance he was ever going to close Gitmo. We knew that. He was never going to let the tax cuts expire, ever. 

        • JONBOSTON

          I give you credit for having an open mind unlike so many of the left wing ideologues who frequent this blog and engage in nothing more than emotional irrational diatribes against Mitt Romney, Republicans , and anyone who they disagree with.  Mitt Romney is a moderate republican who would never have been elected governor in Massachusetts if he hadn’t been. He is not an ideologue –which is why he struggled so long in the Republican primary. The disgusting campaign conducted by Obama’s slime merchants (Plouffe, Axelrod and Cutter) went up in smoke as soon as the nation was introduced to the real unfiltered Romney at the debates.

          Maybe you should reconsider your support of Obama. He is a pretend president –he enjoys the trappings and respect associated with the office but understands little else. And he’s done nothing in his first term to enhance respect for the office… I think he’s the worst president of my lifetime, unqualified and  undeserving of another term. Compare Obama 2008 vs 2012. His campaign this year is disgusting, divisive and hyper-partisan. He’s incompetent and clueless about how to grow the economy and create jobs. His obvious lying about Libya or dereliction of duty as C-in-chief is just the latest reason to get rid of him. Worst of all, he fails the test of presidential leadership. In the military and business  results matter and excuses and good intentions aren’t tolerated. With Obama , there’s always another person or event to blame. Whatever happened to the “buck stops here”? Truman must be rolling in his grave….America deserves better.

  • Gregg Smith

    Obama has a new ad continuing the virgin theme.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSxDE1QCHA4&feature=player_embedded

    • Steve__T

       Thats Sick

  • nj_v2

    This is not newsto anyone.

  • hennorama

    For anyone wishing to compare unemployment and job creation, gross domestic product (GDP) growth, inflation, the deficit, and tax receipts under various Presidents, this is a great easy-to-use, objective, “just the facts” site.  It contains partial info on the Obama years as well, on a separate page due to the fact that he has yet to complete one full term.
     
    http://economyinperspective.com/home

  • nostoppingprogress

    Let’s see how many states request federal disaster area status in the wake of Sandy. Big Guv always seems like a good idea then.

  • JGC

    I am worried about the impact of Hurricane Sandy on folks in the Atlantic states.  Vermonters,for example, haven’t even recovered from last year’s Irene. 

  • Pingback: ‘Frankenstorm’ Sandy Becomes Campaigns’ October Surprise | Egypt

  • http://freeourfreemarkets.org/ steve banicki

    It is puzzling why Mitt Romney refused to release his tax returns beyond 2010 and 2011. One would think that the grief he put up with by not releasing an additional three years of returns is greater than anything showing up on the returns. I just had an epiphany where the above rationale would not be accurate. Here are some facts.

    Mitt Romney had a close relationship with Goldman Sachs while he was heading up Bain. Goldman was very much involved in the subprime housing boom and bust over the last decade that brought down the economy. They profited by creating subprime loans, bribing credit rating agencies such as S&P and Moody’s to give an investment grade rating on the securities, securitizing the loans and selling them at huge profits. Then, when the economy collapsed Goldman got huge bailouts from the government while the consumer got nothing.

    Per Opensecrets.org Goldman employees have contributed more than $990,000 to Romney’s bid for the presidency. Since Romney was a big client of Goldman it would be only natural to recommend Romney buy these high yielding, highly rated investments. When the subprime business was collapsing it would also be somewhat natural for Goldman to tip off Romney that he should be onloading these securities. This would have occurred in 2008 and 2009 and show up on his tax returns…. http://j.mp/FF1210grt1

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 29, 2014
The U.S. Senate is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, July 16, 2014. (AP)

The “Do-Nothing” Congress just days before August recess. We’ll look at the causes and costs to the country of D.C. paralysis.

Jul 29, 2014
This April 28, 2010 file photo, shows the Colstrip Steam Electric Station, a coal-fired power plant in Colstrip, Mont. Colstrip figures to be a target in recently released draft rules from the Environmental Protection Agency that call for reducing Montana emissions 21 percent from recent levels by 2030. (AP)

A new sci-fi history looks back on climate change from the year 2393.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 28, 2014
U.S. Secretary of War Newton D. Baker watches as wounded American soldiers arrive at an American hospital near the front during World War I. (AP Photo)

Marking the one hundredth anniversary of the start of World War One. We’ll look at lessons learned and our uneasy peace right now.

 
Jul 28, 2014
This June 4, 2014 photo shows a Walgreens retail store in Boston. Walgreen Co. _ which bills itself as “America’s premier pharmacy” _ is among many companies considering combining operations with foreign businesses to trim their tax bills. (AP)

American companies bailing out on America. They call it inversion. Is it desertion?

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
This 15-Year-Old Caller Is Really Disappointed With Congress
Tuesday, Jul 29, 2014

In which a 15-year-old caller from Nashville expertly and elegantly analyzes our bickering, mostly ineffective 113th Congress.

More »
Comment
 
Our Week In The Web: July 25, 2014
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

Why the key to web victory is often taking a break and looking around, and more pie for your viewing (not eating) pleasure.

More »
Comment
 
The Art Of The American Pie: Recipes
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

In the odd chance that our pie hour this week made you hungry — how could it not, right? — we asked our piemaking guests for some of their favorite pie recipes. Enjoy!

More »
Comment