Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Jun 25, 2018, 10:11 AM
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 12   Go Down
Author Topic: The Presidential Election In The USA..........  (Read 52208 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #60 on: Oct 19, 2012, 07:37 AM »

Bill Clinton Slams Romney and Exposes the Top 4 Things that Mitt is Hiding

By: Jason Easley and Sarah Jones October 18th, 2012   

At a grassroots event today in Parma, Ohio, President Clinton said that Mitt Romney’s hiding the truth from the American people.

    PRESIDENT CLINTON: Now, the last thing could say is, I had a lot of fun down at the Democratic Convention talking about arithmetic. But I listened very carefully to the Vice Presidential debate and to the second Presidential debate, and Mr. Romney says, I’m going to do all of this, I’m going to just cut taxes for the middle class, I’m not interested in rich people, they’ll pay the same percentage of tax they pay now. What does that mean? He thinks we’re dumb.


    If you cut everybody else’s taxes and people in my income group pay the same percentage, it means we get a tax cut too. Right? We have too. You cut everybody else’s taxes, and I say that my percentage should go up if you freeze my taxes. So, in the debate, without saying so, he got caught with a fact. He hates to get caught admitting anything. And so, we keep saying, show us your budget. Where are your numbers? The President has given you a budget. He said you won’t like all of it. It adds to two and a half dollars of spending cuts for every dollar of new revenues, but we’ve got to do something about the debt. It will take the debt down $4 trillion. Here are my numbers. Where are your numbers? This guy ran Bain Capital and is a business guy, and he’s hiding his budget? That ought to tell you something. He – well, he’s hiding his taxes, too, but he’s hiding his taxes in the years when he earned ordinary income. He’s given us two years when he was just running for president. And, he’s hiding whether he would have signed the Lilly Ledbetter act. He’s hiding everything. He doesn’t want you to think about him. He wants you to think, oh this economy is terrible. “I’m a jobs guy.” And as President Obama said in the debate, if I brought you a deal to Bain Capital and I said, fund my new business, I’ll give you the budget sometime in the future, just trust me on that – you wouldn’t give me one red cent, and we should not give him one vote on that.

According to Clinton, Romney is hiding:

1). The fact that his tax plan cuts taxes for the wealthy.

2). His budget

3). His tax returns

4). The fact that he doesn’t support equal pay for women.

In all the media appearances and campaign stops that President Clinton has done, this is closest that he has come to flat out calling Mitt Romney a liar.

Bill Clinton is too smooth and polished to do something as crass as calling Romney a liar. Instead, he presented the facts in his own common sense folksy way, and let the audience draw their own conclusions about Romney’s honesty.

Former President Clinton was correct. Romney does think that the American people are stupid. After using up everything in his bag of tricks during the first presidential debate, Romney was left with nothing but criticisms of Obama, and his used car salesman promise that America should trust him to fix the economy.

While Mitt Romney is trying to sell you a lemon, Bill Clinton is checking under the hood.

The Republican nominee won’t let you take a test drive, but President Clinton is making sure that Ohio, and the rest of the country, doesn’t get stuck with another clunker.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #61 on: Oct 19, 2012, 07:39 AM »

Richard Clarke: Romney’s Libya Questions Reveal Someone with No Experience in Terrorism

By: Sarah JonesOctober 19th, 2012

Richard Clarke Calls Romney Out for Asking Novice Questions about Libya

Richard Clark weighed in on Mitt Romney’s attacks on Obama over Libya. Clarke, whose resume gives him far more credence on the issue than most people’s– including by far Mitt Romney’s, wrote for the New York Daily News, “Mitt Romney seems fixated on why Washington did not know with better clarity and sooner what went on during a terrorist attack. It is the kind of question that comes from someone who has no experience dealing with terrorism crisis management or, indeed, combat.”

You might recall Richard Clarke as the guy who issued the August 6, 2001 Daily Briefing Memo, entitled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US” that George W Bush ignored, which warned that Al-Qaeda was going to strike the US. (The Bush administration tried to argue that the memo didn’t actually discuss being attacked in the U.S. in order to redact it, but it did.) Clarke is a national security expert who worked under Reagan and Bush – he’s no partisan hack. After Clarke objected to invading Iraq, his character was assassinated by the Bush regime, but he was proven correct with time.

Clark continued, “I dealt with scores of incidents and military operations over 30 years in the Pentagon, State Department and White House. I never saw a case where there was initial and accurate clarity about what happened.”

Boom goes Mitt Romney’s wishful talking point about Libya.

Clark indicts Romney, “If there were not a presidential campaign going on, a campaign in which the incumbent (Obama) has a stellar record of fighting terrorism, I doubt Romney would care about the details of what happened in Benghazi. In 20 years of running for office, he has never demonstrated any expertise or even real interest in the details of national security.

But it is politics to rush out with a press release critical of the President’s handling of a crisis while the crisis is still going on, while American diplomats are still under fire. The Romney campaign did just that and got many details wrong in so doing.”

Romney’s foreign policy team is made up of former Bush Cheney neocons. They are desperate to clear their names from the WMD lie and the failure to read intel.
Unlike Romney’s rush to judgment, the 9/11 Commission and subsequent investigations and outings have proven that Bush ignored the intel and that we were led into war on a false premise. It took so long for us to learn these facts that Bush won a second term before the public knew what had happened.

Yet Romney and Republicans expect that this administration would know the second something happened in Libya exactly who, what, why, and how. And not only know, or suspect, but deem it safe for all (including the CIA base the Republicans outed in their “investigation”) to disclose this information to the public.

What happened in Libya is a tragedy, but there is no evidence that the administration withheld any information. In 30 years, Clarke never saw a situation where the intital intel was correct. Maybe, just maybe, this is why there was conflicting information in the beginning and new info trickling in still.

This line of attack by Romney is clearly a Rovian political strategy by a man who couldn’t even manage to show up at the Summer Olympics without insulting our greatest ally by suggesting that their security wasn’t ready for the games, because that’s what all terrorist experts recommend — get on international TV and tell the entire world that you are not prepared and cannot defend yourselves now, at this particular time and place (not). This is also not so good for tourism (read: economy). That’s our Mitt.

It has yet to occur to Mitt Romney that perhaps caution is warranted when making public statements about acts of terror or the possibility thereof. His own behavior demonstrates that he sees no need for caution — he just rushes to the nearest microphone to blurt out whatever info he thinks he has about a situation he doesn’t understand.

Romney wasn’t done stumbling through national security and foreign policy like an eager, panting puppy. He later broke protocol and security by revealing his secret meeting with M16, Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service. Romney sounded like a hyper active kid who got to sit at the grown ups’ table. Once was probably enough for M16.

Romney has no experience with terrorism or combat, whereas Obama’s record on getting the bad guys is a devastating rebuke to Republicans. This won’t stop Romney from trying to smear Obama with Bush’s failures at the next debate, which will be centered around foreign policy. Romney promised his wealthy friends that he would take advantage of any hostage-like situation, and he is doing just that.

* romneyrobot.jpg (47.25 KB, 262x394 - viewed 305 times.)
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #62 on: Oct 19, 2012, 08:58 AM »

Romney Economic Policy Director Was Lobbying For Wall Street Three Months Ago

By Travis Waldron on Oct 18, 2012 at 2:15 pm

A recently hired economic policy director for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign was a top lobbyist for JP Morgan Chase, Wall Street’s biggest bank, and federal documents show that he lobbied Congress and federal regulators this year on issues ranging from the implementation of new financial regulations to corporate tax reform.

Pierce Scranton, who became Romney’s economic policy director in August, is listed as JP Morgan’s executive director of the bank’s lobbying department on public federal documents filed in 2012. Those documents show that between January and July of this year, Scranton oversaw lobbying activities on a host of economic issues, including legislation dealing with home mortgage modifications and foreclosures, Chinese trade and currency manipulation, the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act and other financial regulations, the Jumpstart Our Small Businesses (JOBS) Act, and corporate tax reform.

Scranton, according to the documents, lobbied Congress and federal regulatory agencies on legislation regarding the “implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act.” Scranton and JP Morgan, at the time, were lobbying for a loophole in a regulation that limited risky trading; months later, the bank lost billions of dollars on risky trades that would be prohibited without such a loophole. Scranton lobbied on four pieces of legislation dealing with Dodd-Frank’s regulation of the derivatives market, according to the documents. He also met with Treasury officials in January of 2011 regarding Dodd-Frank, according to the Sunlight Foundation.

JP Morgan has been an ardent opponent of many of the rules contained in Dodd-Frank, including the regulation of the derivatives market. JP Morgan has spent nearly $10 million lobbying since the beginning of 2011, much of it aimed at Dodd-Frank and regulations it includes.

Romney pledged to repeal Dodd-Frank early in his presidential campaign. He has offered vague support for “enhanced capital requirements” and the regulation of derivatives and has said he plans to replace Dodd-Frank with a “streamlined regulatory framework,” but the only specifics he has offered are already in Dodd-Frank (which he admits in his plan).

While Scranton oversaw JP Morgan’s lobbying, the bank also lobbied against legislation meant to address Chinese trade and currency manipulation. JP Morgan and other banks and financial services companies lobbied against the bill. Romney, however, has talked openly about signing an executive order on his first day in office that would declare China a currency manipulator.

Scranton also “discussed the issue of corporate tax reform” and a special tax break for banks’ offshore profits, according to the documents. Corporate taxation has also been a prominent issue for Romney’s campaign. His tax plan cuts the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent and would institute a territorial tax system that would exempt American corporations from paying taxes on the profits they earn abroad.

The Romney campaign did not respond to Think Progress’ request for comment.


Romney Cites Study Based On Repealing Almost All Middle Class Tax Breaks To Bolster His Tax Plan

By Pat Garofalo posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Oct 19, 2012 at 10:02 am

Mitt Romney has been desperately trying to refute a study by the Tax Policy Center showing that he can’t mathematically achieve his goals of reducing income tax rates while shielding the middle class from a tax increase and not adding to the deficit. If Romney is committed to his rate reduction and deficit neutrality, he would have to raise middle class taxes by $2,000, even under the most generous assumptions.

Romney has been pointing to “six studies” that he claims show that his tax plan work. However, those “studies” (which are mostly blog posts and op-eds) show no such thing.

So now the Romney campaign is touting a 2006 study from the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation that he claims vindicates his approach, telling Roll Call the study shows “how a ‘Romney-style tax plan’ could bolster growth.” According to the study, tax reform that eliminates deductions and loopholes and reduces income tax rates will slightly increase economic growth over a decade. But the study assumes that nearly all middle class tax breaks — including those for children, mortgages, and employer contributions for health care — are repealed in their entirety:

    Under the proposal, all personal exemptions, itemized deductions, personal credits except for the earned income credit, and all above-the-line adjustments to income except for retirement savings deductions and the deduction for self employment taxes would be repealed. The largest categories of deductions repealed are present-law deductions for home mortgage interest expenses, State and local taxes, and charitable contributions. In addition, the exclusions for certain employee fringe benefits, such as employer contributions for health and life insurance, would be repealed. The standard deduction would remain.

The study also found that such a plan would result in the “redistribution” of income tax liability from high-income earners to the middle class. And the promised job growth is only between 1 and 2 percent over ten years (one to two million jobs), while Romney promises that his tax plan will create seven million jobs over four years.

Romney’s claims about job creation under his tax plan are almost entirely fabricated. An economic adviser for both the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations said this week that Romney’s tax plan won’t create jobs.


New Proposal Doesn’t Stop Romney’s Plan From Giving A Huge Tax Cut To The Rich

By Travis Waldron posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Oct 18, 2012 at 6:16 pm

During Tuesday’s second presidential debate, Republican nominee Mitt Romney floated a new idea to pay for his tax plan, which provides nearly $5 trillion in tax cuts. Romney introduced this proposal after analysts showed that Romney can’t mathematically achieve his goals of reducing income tax rates by 20 percent while not increasing middle class taxes or adding to the deficit.

But a Tax Policy Center analysis found Romney’s idea, to cap the amount of deductions each taxpayer can take advantage of at $25,000, also fails to make his plan add up.

And as the Center for American Progress’ Seth Hanlon noted in a column on Thursday, Romney’s plan would still provide a massive tax cut to the wealthiest Americans, even if a deduction cap were in place. After they hit the cap on deductions, members of the top one percent would get tax cuts totaling more than $105,000. And for wealthier taxpayers, the breaks get even bigger, Hanlon found:

The tax cuts from Romney’s plan would come on top of the reductions they received from extending the Bush tax rates, which Romney wants to make permanent. According to Citizens for Tax Justice, the average millionaire would save more than $250,000 a year when the Bush and Romney tax cuts are combined, even if Romney eliminates all of their deductions.

Romney also floated another idea: capping deductions at $50,000 instead of $25,000. That plan would indeed make the tax cut for the rich smaller, but it would also reduce the amount of revenue gained, making the math of Romney’s plan even worse. And it would render the idea of capping deductions almost irrelevant, since the average member of the top one percent claimed just over $43,000 in tax deductions last year.

* RomneyTaxChart.png (41.19 KB, 620x451 - viewed 316 times.)
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #63 on: Oct 19, 2012, 02:33 PM »

Obama Mocks Romney’s Lies and Flip-flops by Coining the Term Romnesia

By: Jason Easley October 19th, 2012

While speaking at George Mason University today President Obama coined the term Romnesia to describe Mitt Romney’s shifts, flip-flops, and lies.

Here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8BBEXB1Wf9c

Obama said,

    But now that we’re 18 days out from the election, Mr. “Severely Conservative” wants you to think he was “severely kidding” about everything he’s said over the last year. He told folks he was “the ideal candidate” for the Tea Party, now suddenly he’s saying, “what, who, me?” He’s forgetting what his own positions are, and he’s betting that you will too.

    I mean he’s changing up so much – backtracking and sidestepping. We’ve gotta name this condition that he’s going through.. I think it’s called “Romnesia.” That’s what it’s called. I think that’s what he’s going through.

    Now, I’m not a medical doctor but I do want to go over some of the symptoms with you because I want to make sure nobody else catches it.

    If you say you’re for equal pay for equal work, but you keep refusing to say whether or not you’d sign a bill that protects equal pay for equal work – you might have Romnesia.

    If you say women should have access to contraceptive care, but you support legislation that would let your employer deny you contraceptive care – you might have a case of Romnesia.

    If you say you’ll protect a woman’s right to choose, but you stand up at a primary debate and said that you’d be “delighted” to sign a law outlawing that right to choose in all cases – man, you’ve definitely got Romnesia.

    Now, this extends to other issues. If you say earlier in the year I’m going to give a tax cut to the top 1 percent and then in a debate you say, I don’t know anything about giving tax cuts to rich folks – you need to get a thermometer, take your temperature, because you’ve probably got Romnesia.

    If you say that you’re a champion of the coal industry when while you were Governor you stood in front of a coal plant and said, this plant will kill you – that’s some Romnesia.

    So – I think you’re beginning to be able to identify these symptoms. And if you come down with a case of Romnesia, and you can’t seem to remember the policies that are still on your website, or the promises you’ve made over the six years you’ve been running for President, here’s the good news: Obamacare covers pre-existing conditions.

    We can fix you up. We’ve got a cure. We can make you well, Virginia. This is a curable disease.

    Women, men, all of you. These are family issues. These are economic issues. I want my daughters to have the same opportunities as anybody’s sons. I believe America does better, the economy grows more, we create more when everybody participates, when everyone’s getting a fair shot, everybody’s getting a fair shake, everybody’s playing by the same rules, everybody’s doing their fair share. That’s why I’m asking you for another term as President of the United States. I need you to help me finish the job.

President Obama has coined a new and humorous way to call Mitt Romney a liar. Not only was Obama calling out Romney for not telling the truth, he also threw a jab in there about this being a “preexisting condition.” That was a little hint to voters that the political shape shifting and lies they are currently seeing from Romney is who the candidate really is.

If there was any doubt left about just how much President Obama dislikes Mitt Romney, that should be erased now. Throughout the 2008 election and his presidency, Obama has never openly mocked an opponent in the manner that he has with Mitt Romney. John McCain deserved the respect that Obama gave him in 2008, and no matter how nasty things became during the Obama/Clinton Democratic primary, then candidate Obama never showed his feelings about Hillary Clinton as openly as he does when it comes to Romney.

Of course, Mitt Romney has a way of bringing this out of people. Newt Gingrich, John McCain, and Mike Huckabee all openly loathe the guy. It seems that anyone who has ever shared a political stage with Romney comes away with an intense dislike for him.

The Obama campaign seems to have an endless supply of nice or humorous ways to call Mitt Romney a liar without sounding mean, nasty, or negative.

His sense of humor is one of the reasons that many Americans find President Obama to be so likable.

It turns out that behind the charm the million megawatt smile, the Obama sense of humor can also be a dangerous political weapon.

Obama has the permanent cure for Romnesia, and it is going to be administered in about 17 days.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #64 on: Oct 19, 2012, 02:37 PM »

Bipartisan Mitt Myth Busted: As Gov, Romney Didn’t Even Know Legislators’ Names

By: Sarah JonesOctober 19th, 2012

During a press conference call Friday afternoon, Democratic Massachusetts state Senator Karen Spilka debunked Mitt Romney’s claims of bipartisanship. She said many legislators– including Republicans — would say that Mitt Romney not only wasn’t bipartisan, but he didn’t even know where that aisle was.

Sen. Spilka recounted that at one point, after she had been working with Romney for weeks, he still didn’t know who she was. Romney then came to her district and still didn’t know who she was. In retelling this to a Republican colleague, the colleague told her not to feel bad because Romney didn’t know who the Republican legislators were either. He said, “Karen, don’t feel so badly. He doesn’t know who we are either.”

The picture painted by Senator Spilka is not one of a hard working Governor, much less a bipartisan one. Spilka said contrary to the fairy tale Romney is selling the public about how he convinced the lions to lay down with the lambs and used his business experience to bring everyone together, the Mitt Romney they know from Massachusetts belongs in a “Grimm Fairy Tale”. She said it was clear by the end of year two that Mitt Romney was more interested in running for president than anything to do with Massachusetts. He was gone 417 days from Massachusetts, prompting the New York Times to dub him the “absentee” governor.

Spilka repeated the often echoed charges that Romney was aloof and distant to such an extent that he had stationed police around his office so that the legislators and public couldn’t get in to see him. According to her, no other governor before or since has done that. She said, “He treated us like employees.”

A reporter from the Wall Street Journal brought up the bipartisan healthcare reform law passed under Romney as an example of him working across the aisle. The Senator explained that they had been working on that for years, “We had been talking about reforming healthcare in the early 2000′s. Romney embraced it. This is his major achievement in helping getting it through.” However, she continued, “As soon as it was signed, he ran away from it – went around the country and mocked it. It is the single example of Romney actually sitting down, rolling up his sleeves, working with legislature. In all other instances, he wanted to tell us what should happen. When there was other dialogue, it was his way or the highway.”

The Senator charged that Romney failed to deliver on his promises of jobs and a balanced budget, noting that even as the national economy was growing, “We were sinking.” Spilka added, “He promised to balance budget, but he left his successor with billion dollar deficit.” Businessman Romney also left the highest debt per person of any state in the country.

The Senator is correct about the deficit Romney left in Massachusetts. Massachusetts’ long-term debt increased by 16.4 percent, or by $2.6 billion over four years. [Source: Massachusetts Office Of The Treasurer] and Romney left behind a billion-dollar deficit when he left office. [Source: Boston Globe, 12/30/06]

With job creation, income and wages lagging well behind the rest of the country, 222,000 residents left the state, the third-highest rate of population loss in the country. In 2007, the Boston Globe noted that under Romney, “We were one of only two states to have experienced no growth in its resident labor force.”

Additionally, her other charges regarding Romney’s economic record are also accurate. According to Think Progress:

    Under Mitt Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts ranked 47th among the 50 states in job creation.

    During Mitt Romney’s tenure, Massachusetts’ job growth was at 0.9 percent, far behind the national average of over 5 percent.

    A Northeastern University economist found that Massachusetts lagged on virtually every economic indicator while Mitt Romney was in office.

    Mitt Romney called for taxes on the poor, saying low-income Americans having no income tax liability is “a problem” that will “kill the country.”

The Boston Globe confirms the Senator’s story about the troopers being used to cut off access to the governor, “During Romney’s four years as governor, the troopers reserved one of the two elevators outside the Corner Office solely for Romney’s use. They also erected velvet ropes in front of his office, allowing only those approved to enter. The beefy men and unflinching women of the detail ensured that few approached the governor who were not expected.” (Boston Globe, 2/3/12)

Mitt Romney didn’t even know the names of Republican legislators, let alone the Democrats. It’s not just that Romney failed to be bipartisan, but that he was so absent he didn’t even know the names of some of the Republican legislators.

Senator Spilka pointed out, “Why would anyone think he would be any different as president? We’ve seen the real Mitt Romney we know his record. Massachusetts knows Mitt Romney more than anyone else in the country, and Massachusetts is voting for Barack Obama.”
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #65 on: Oct 20, 2012, 07:14 AM »

Mitt Romney is the Tip of the Republican Religious Extremist Spear

By: Rmuse October 19th, 2012

It is always fascinating that a country responsible for stunning technological advancements, groundbreaking scientific research, and engineering marvels is painfully slow to change on social issues. American conservatism at one time preferred gradual to abrupt change and believed defending civilization from modernistic culture was crucial to social stability. America has made gradual social changes over the past 50 years, and conservatives fought to preserve the status quo every inch of the way, but since 2009, a new form of conservatism is threatening to take this country to late-17th Century America where the rule of law is the Christian religion and social progress is eradicated making the concept of maintaining tradition highly desirable. There have always been crackpots and religious fanatics preaching the virtues of biblical rule, but between growing numbers of Christian conservatives in Congress, and the Republican presidential ticket, Americans are precariously close to living under scriptural edict that will make the Taliban look tame.

Religious extremists directing Republicans have sought to impose their worldview on all Americans and are a stark reminder of the need to enforce the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause which keeps religious groups from controlling the government. A perennial example in Congress is Louis Gohmert who recently said slavery was an ugly moment in the nation’s history, but the situation now is even worse. Gohmert said America was coming to the “end of its existence” as evidenced by leaders and citizens neglecting to remain true to biblical teachings, and that the situation is worse because “the entire nation  is far away from God’s teaching and so openly rebelling, even from the top, against God’s teachings in the Bible.” Gohmert is an extreme example, but he is not far removed from Willard Romney and Paul Ryan’s vision of America under a bible-inspired set of rules dictating how Americans conduct their personal lives.

Both Romney and Ryan signed the National Organization of Marriage (NOM) pledge agreeing if they reach the White House, they will appoint U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges and an attorney general who reject the idea the Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage into the Constitution. They will also defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) vigorously in court, and establish a presidential commission on religious liberty to investigate reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections. Although every part of the NOM pledge is offensive on its face, it is the last section that portends danger for any American who supports same-sex marriage, because if there is one thing Christian conservatives and Republicans have made an issue of, it is their claim of persecution when they are prevented from exercising their religious liberty to impose bible edicts on the rest of the population. Don’t believe it?

In August, the Family Research Council and Liberty Institute released a joint report entitled “The Survey on Religious Hostility in America” which is a “collection of more than 600 cases, detailing religious bigotry throughout America.” Extremist Christian David Barton commented on the alleged persecution of Christians saying People For the American Way (PFAW) and other groups have created a “toxic” and “hostile” environment where public officials are pressured into persecuting Christians. Translation; the Constitution prohibits Christians from imposing their beliefs on the government and rest of the population. A Romney presidency that appoints a commission to investigate and regulate so-called “persecutors” will become a 21st Century American Inquisition to ferret out and punish same-sex marriage supporters.

The gay community faces more trouble if Romney appoints federal judges and Supreme Court justices who agree with current Justice Antonin Scalia who recently said, “outlawing homosexual sodomy is a no-brainer.” Scalia wrote that nowhere in the Constitution does it say “homosexual sodomy is a ‘fundamental right, and that Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, scoutmasters, teachers, or boarders in their home. They are protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle they believe to be immoral and destructive.” This attitude falls directly in line with Romney’s pledge to propose a constitutional amendment defining marriage according to Christian tradition and vigorously defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Interestingly, on Thursday the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals became the second federal appeals court to strike down DOMA as an unconstitutional violation of equal protection. However, with Christian bible dogmata replacing the Constitution, the concept of equal protection will be a distant memory.

Women should be most frightened of Romney and Ryan’s religious fundamentalism that abhors a woman’s right to choose their own reproductive health. Romney said he strongly supported “personhood” measures since they were introduced several years ago, and he supports a constitutional amendment that would establish the definition of life at conception.  His position has been consistent, clear, and far outside the mainstream as well as a serious threat to women’s health. Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, cosponsored the bill, with Todd Akin,  that presented America the despicable term “forcible rape.” Ryan and Akin also cosponsored a federal personhood bill, the Sanctity of Human Life Act, that declares a fertilized egg is entitled to the exact same legal rights as an adult human being. If Ryan’s bill became law, the likely effect would be to treat killing a fertilized egg as the same thing as homicide. Subsequently, nearly all forms of contraception would become murder weapons and the law would effectively ban contraception in the United States.

It would be a tragic mistake for any woman, or man for that matter, to think if Romney and Ryan were elected they would tack to the center and relax their religious tendencies to impose biblical dogma on the nation. Romney and Ryan have been consistent in opposing abortion in any situation as cited in a disturbing instance of Romney pressuring a Mormon woman to have a baby despite a life threatening condition where both doctors, and even the Mormon Stake President, recommended an abortion. The woman’s father said Romney pressured them mercilessly and that he had “never been so upset about anything in my life; Romney is an authoritative fellow who thinks he is in charge of the world.” It is important to remember that Romney’s religion dictates that if he wins the White House, he will be in charge of the world and one of his duties is imposing his religious beliefs on the American people; especially women.

This election is crucial in many respects, but none as important as maintaining the separation of church and state. With a growing number of legislators subscribing to the Christian bible as rule of law mindset, and a presidential ticket replete with hardline religious fanatics who signed a solemn pledge to enforce biblical ideology on all Americans, there is no demographic that will be safe; especially women and gays. It is one thing for conservatives and their Christian fanatics to prefer gradual change and maintain traditions, but this new conservative is harkening back to the pre-Constitution era more in line with the Salem witch trials of 1692 than 21st Century America.

The religious right, Dominionists, and theocracy proponents pose a clear and present danger to all Americans regardless of their religious persuasion. There are historical instances of entire populations being caught up in religious-like frenzy and sweeping away all those who stand opposed, and it is certain that in pre-Nazi Germany, good German people had no more reason to assist in the slaughter of six million Jews than they would exterminate their own children, but when incited to action borne of fear-mongering and state-sponsored hate, there are no groups that can remain safe. America is nearing that point, and Republicans have fallen in line with extremist Christian fanatics whose sole intent is replacing the Constitution with the Christian bible, and America’s worst nightmare is a Romney presidency bolstered by conservative Christians in Congress and a bible-based Supreme Court that outlaws homosexuality, contraception, abortion, and gives full Constitutional rights to a single-celled organism. America does change slowly, but a Republican victory in November will bring a rapid change taking America into Dark Ages when there was no Constitution, no equal rights, and the bible’s Old Testament was the law of the land.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #66 on: Oct 20, 2012, 07:16 AM »

In a Devastating Turn for Romney, Swing State and Home State Papers Endorse Obama

By: Sarah Jones October 19th, 2012

Major papers in two swing states (Florida and Colorado) endorsed President Barack Obama for a second term, and in Utah – considered by some a home state of Mitt Romney’s – the Salt Lake Tribune has also endorsed President Barack Obama.

In the heart of Utah (one of Mitt Romney’s many home states), the Salt Lake Tribune endorses President Barack Obama for a second term. The self-described “largely Mormon, Republican and business friendly state” is going for the incumbent Democrat. They conclude, “(O)ur endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term.” The Salt Lake Tribune:

    Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state…

    In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem-solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.
    Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.

The Florida Tampa Bay Times cites Romney’s “fanciful math” that would increase taxes on the middle class. They conclude, “Obama has capably steered the nation through an incredibly difficult period at home and abroad, often with little help from Congress.”:

    In contrast, Romney would transform Medicare into a voucher program that likely would force many future seniors to pay more for less coverage. He rejects raising even $1 of new revenue for every $10 in spending cuts, and he promises to cut taxes by $5 trillion but won’t say which loopholes or tax breaks he would end to cover the cost. Meanwhile, he wants to reduce the federal deficit while increasing spending on defense beyond what even the Pentagon requests — even though the United States spends nearly as much on its military as the rest of the world combined. This fanciful math could only add up to deep cuts in spending on education and other domestic programs — and tax increases on the middle class.
    We wish the economic recovery was more vigorous, and we would like the president to present a sharper vision for a second term. But Obama has capably steered the nation through an incredibly difficult period at home and abroad, often with little help from Congress. The next four years will not be easy for whoever occupies the Oval Office, but Obama has been tested by harsh circumstance and proven himself worthy of a second term.
    For president of the United States, the Tampa Bay Times recommends Barack Obama.

In Colorado, The Denver Post cites Romney’s troubling comments about the 47% painting him as someone who won’t bring his party closer to the center where it needs to be right now. They conclude, “Obama, on the other hand, has shown throughout his term that he is a steady leader who keeps the interests of a broad array of Americans in mind.”

    And though there is much in Mitt Romney’s résumé to suggest he is a capable problem-solver, the Republican nominee has not presented himself as a leader who will bring his party closer to the center at a time when that is what this country needs.

    His comments on the 47 percent of Americans who refuse to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives” were a telling insight into his views and a low point of the campaign.

    Obama, on the other hand, has shown throughout his term that he is a steady leader who keeps the interests of a broad array of Americans in mind.

    We urge Coloradans to re-elect him to a second term.

Romney didn’t get any primary love from his home state of Massachusetts, where he was governor for four years. The Boston Globe, the biggest Massachusetts paper, endorsed Jon Hunstman over Romney in the primary. No word yet from Michigan’s the Detroit Free Press, but the state where Romney grew up is polling solidly for the President, as is Massachusetts where the President’s lead is in double digits.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #67 on: Oct 20, 2012, 09:05 AM »

Republicans are Engaging in a Concerted Illegal Effort to Hijack the Election

By: Rmuse October 20th, 2012

There is a debate within psychology that is concerned with the extent to which particular aspects of behavior are a product of either inherited (genetic) or acquired (learned) characteristics referred to as nature versus nurture. It is difficult to look carefully at human behavior and succumb to one or the other side in the nature v. nurture debate, and it is reasonable to conclude that both inherited and personal experiences shape a human being’s character and behavior. There are some behaviors that appear to be innate in groups, and the persistent reports of voter fraud specific to Republicans leads one to wonder if it is a learned or natural behavior to commit fraud on the electorate at such high frequency. It certainly appears that cheating to win elections is intrinsic to Republicans, and especially the GOP’s standard bearer, Willard Romney. After observing Romney over the past ten months, it is obvious his megalomania and mendacity did not come from his father, and it leads one wonder if Willard taught his sons that, in the pursuit of power and greed, nothing is out of bounds.

With all the reports of GOP voter fraud and attempts to suppress the vote, it appears that cheating is endemic to Republicans and apparently, Willard Romney. Any questions about the legitimacy of Romney’s campaign were answered when a recording surfaced where he asked business owners to pressure employees to influence their votes. Intimidation, restricting voting access, and disposing of voter registration forms are all despicable attempts to fix an election, but Romney, his wife, son, and brother have taken the next logical step and bought electronic voting machines used in Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and Colorado. Apparently in politics, electoral fraud is a learned behavior inherent to Republicans, especially those named Romney.

On Wednesday this column reported that Romney’s Bain Capital business partners owned electronic voting machines in Ohio through H.I.G. Capital that took over Hart Intercivic last year.  H.I.G. employees contributed to Romney’s campaign, and two H.I.G. Directors are major Romney fundraisers that should have raised the alarm and a Department of Justice investigation. Now it is confirmed that “through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Romney, his wife, son, and brother are major investors in H.I.G. Capital that holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic,” the electronic voting machine company.

The Romney gang investments are through the private equity firm Solamere Capital run by Tagg Romney, Willard’s eldest son. Recent revelations and disclosures from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) link Willard and Tagg Romney to Solamere Advisors, a company that maintains ties with the Ponzi-linked firm, Solamere Advisors. Romney invested $10 million in Tagg’s Solamere Capital venture, which suggests Willard has a financial relationship with fraudsters involved in a Ponzi scheme. In May, Willard and Tagg Romney were implicated in an $8.5 billion Ponzi scheme with Wall Street investors Allen Stanford and James M. Davis.

Romney’s problems with Ponzi scheme corruption notwithstanding, with the help of his family and Bain Capital connections, appears to be more than willing to try to take the White House through illegitimate and highly unethical, if not specifically illegal means. However, he is not alone among Republicans attempting to hijack the election. In Ohio, despite the Supreme Court upholding two lower court rulings that Secretary of State John Husted cannot restrict early voting, he quickly limited early voting hours on the three days before the general election to just 16 hours. In Virginia, a 23-year-old man working for the Virginia Republican Party, Republican National Committee, and prior to that, as an Intern for Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa), was charged with attempting to destroy voter registration forms by tossing them into a dumpster behind a shopping center in Harrisonburg. The man, Colin Small, was “working as a supervisor as part of a registration operation in eight swing states financed by the Republican National Committee.” There is no end to the voter fraud at the highest levels of the Republican establishment and coupled with the Romney family’s ownership of electronic voting machines in multiple states, a petition was created for concerned citizens who believe an electoral emergency exists and are appealing to the Department of Justice for intervention and to save free and fair elections in America.

The petition is to be delivered to The Honorable Eric Holder, Attorney General, United States of America and The Honorable Thomas Perez, Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Civil Rights and it reads;

Nullify the vote count from Hart Intercivic voting machines tied to “Romney Bundlers,” disqualify Romney’s candidacy based on the Republican Party’s massive pre-election illegal activities and conflict-of-interest in voting machine ownership. The petition outlines the massive fraud on democracy and ends poignantly with a plea for “Restoration of Democracy in the United States, beginning with Restoration of ACTUAL ELECTIONS rather than Fraudulently Manipulated Elections in the United States of America.”

It is a sad time in America when a major political party undertakes a concerted, illegal, and fraudulent effort to deny the American people the right to participate in free and fair elections. The corruption and fraud is a learned behavior that found success in 2000 and 2004, and if the Department of Justice had done due diligence under the Bush administration, perhaps Republicans would think twice before blatantly suppressing and denying American citizens the right to vote. However, as corrupt and scandalous as the Republican Party is, they pale in comparison to Willard Romney’s encouraging business owners to intimidate their employees, and his family’s back-door purchase of electronic voting machines to be placed in critical swing states to affect the outcome of the general election.

America cannot survive as long as wealthy corporations, vulture capitalists, and the entire Republican Party have the ability to subvert democracy with impunity, and it is why it is crucial for the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law every last Republican, investor, and Republican candidate for president for electoral fraud, voter suppression, and destroying voter registration forms. With just over two weeks before the election to decide whether America continues making economic progress after suffering 8 years of Republican malfeasance that lead to a world-changing economic recession, it is critical to pressure the Justice Department to, once and for all, put a stop to Romney, Republicans, and their Super-PAC’s illegal electoral fraud and restore America’s storied ‘free and fair” elections. The question the mainstream media and all Americans should be asking is; if Willard Romney has the innate gifts he claims, why does his family buy voting machines, lie, and go to illegal lengths to try to win the election?

Please sign and distribute the petition to hold Romney and the Republican Party responsible for their illegal voter suppression tactics and electoral fraud because it may be the final opportunity to have your voice heard; especially if your vote is hijacked by the Romney family’s voting machines.

* fraudalert.jpg (8.09 KB, 241x209 - viewed 299 times.)
Very Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 347

« Reply #68 on: Oct 20, 2012, 07:32 PM »

Hey Rad and All,

I saw this circulating on Facebook tonight and hope you'll appreciate it as much as I did.  Really gave me a good laugh! and still is...

This is also a great YouTube video about Women's Reproductive Rights, encouraging voters to vote for reproductive rights:


« Last Edit: Oct 20, 2012, 07:41 PM by Wendy » Logged
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #69 on: Oct 21, 2012, 07:01 AM »

October 19, 2012

A World of Harm for Women

NYT Editorial

If Mitt Romney and his vice-presidential running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, were to win next month’s election, the harm to women’s reproductive rights would extend far beyond the borders of the United States.

In this country, they would support the recriminalization of abortion with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and they would limit access to contraception and other services. But they have also promised to promote policies abroad that would affect millions of women in the world’s poorest countries, where lack of access to contraception, prenatal care and competent help at childbirth often results in serious illness and thousands of deaths yearly. And the wreckage would begin on Day 1 of a Romney administration.

Mr. Romney has pledged that, on his first day in the White House, he would reinstate the “global gag rule,” the odious restriction that has been used to deny federal money for family-planning work abroad to any organization that provided information, advice, referrals or services for legal abortion or supported the legalization of abortion, even using its own money.

Merely talking about abortion could cost groups not only federal money, but also useful technical support and American-donated supplies of contraceptives, including condoms for distribution in the communities they serve.

The gag rule, also known as the “Mexico City policy,” was imposed by the last three Republican presidents, beginning with Ronald Reagan in 1984. It was rescinded by President Bill Clinton in 1993, then reinstated by President George W. Bush in 2001. President Obama, fulfilling a campaign pledge, signed an executive order lifting the global gag rule shortly after taking office in 2009.

The gag rule did nothing to prevent use of government financing for abortions because that was already illegal under federal law. But it badly hampered the work of family-planning groups overseas, forcing clinic closures, reduced services and fee increases. It also violated principles of informed consent by requiring health care providers to withhold medical information from female patients. And, by stifling political debate on abortion-related issues and violating free speech principles, the gag rule badly undermined America’s credibility as it tries to promote democracy abroad.

Republican opponents of family planning and women’s reproductive autonomy in Congress have been trying to reinstate the gag rule by legislation. If elected, Mr. Romney has said he would do so with a stroke of the pen.

Mr. Romney also vows to renew another of George W. Bush’s shameful policies (which was ended by President Obama), which blocked the United States from contributing to the United Nations Population Fund. That fund supports programs in some 150 countries to improve poor women’s reproductive health, reduce infant mortality, end the sexual trafficking of women and prevent the spread of H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS. Like Mr. Bush, Mr. Romney has embraced the bogus charge that the Population Fund supports coerced abortions in China, ignoring a State Department investigation that found no evidence for that claim. In fact, the fund has helped promote a voluntary approach to family planning.

The annual federal contribution to the fund is now down to $35 million, compared with $55 million in fiscal years 2010 and 2011; overall support for international family planning and reproductive health programs stands at $610 million — far short of the need. Even so, this amount of money pays for contraceptive services and supplies that reach more than 31 million women and couples, averting 9.4 million unintended pregnancies, 4 million abortions (three-quarters of them unsafe) and 22,000 maternal deaths annually, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

House Republicans want to cut the nation’s investment in international family planning severely. Mr. Romney’s record of bending to suit the most extreme elements of the Republican Party suggests that he may well go along on this critical issue as well.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #70 on: Oct 21, 2012, 07:33 AM »

Cleveland Plain Dealer Endorses Obama, Criticizes GOP Belligerence and Swagger

By: Sarah JonesOctober 20th, 2012

The largest newspaper in the swing state of Ohio, The Cleveland Plain Dealer, endorsed President Obama for a second term today, citing his policies as best for Ohio, noting that’s he’s been met with unbending resistance and belligerence from Republicans and sounding the alarm on etch-a-sketch Mitt Romney’s domestic and foreign policies.

They write:

    Much of what beset America during Obama’s first term lay outside his direct control. The bobsled slide into recession was in full motion when he took office. The economic calamity has been global; recovery, sporadic and weak. Obama’s attempts to reach across the aisle politically were met with unbending resistance, even belligerence…

Not impressed with Romney’s ever-changing domestic policies or his inability to reign in the extreme elements of his party (Ohio is very aware of Ryan et al’s obstruction to Speaker Boehner’s deficit and debt deals), it’s Romney’s blustering, swaggering foreign policy that raises even more alarms:

    Romney’s tendency to bluster on foreign policy provides more cause for doubt. With tens of thousands of young Americans still in harm’s way in Afghanistan, the United States cannot afford to be drawn into new wars without clear national interests at stake or to sap its resources in further open-ended conflicts. The Benghazi killings reveal the risks of an “Arab Spring” in which terrorists have gained new weaponry and new freedom to operate. But these challenges require inventive diplomacy and international engagement, not slogans or swagger.

On the auto bailout, they praise Obama’s auto rescue plan and explain the differences between what Romney advocated for and what Obama did, saying Obama’s plan was gutsy as it was unpopular at the time – and it worked:

    Public opinion opposed another bailout. Romney urged the companies to file for traditional bankruptcy — at a time when private-sector credit was frozen even for healthy firms.

    Obama told the companies to restructure using the Bankruptcy Court and set conditions for government financing: GM’s chairman had to go. Excess plants and dealerships had to close. Chrysler had to be bought out by Fiat. Contracts had to be renegotiated… It was unpopular but gutsy. And it worked. That’s leadership that deserves a chance to finish the job. Re-elect President Obama.

Newspaper endorsements might not seem important in the larger context of an election, but they can have an important impact locally, where they are viewed as a trusted source of information. This is just one of many endorsements flooding in for the President this week, and they’ve all been thoughtful, important reads in the sense that they provide an overview of how newspaper editors, who follow politics closely, view the actions of our elected officials.

Editorial endorsements offer us a chance at the big picture, instead of the 24 hour cable news cycle race. For this reason alone, it’s worth noting how many of them mention the President’s calm, steady leadership, the obstructionism of the Republican Congress (specifically the House where Ryan resides), the unnerving changes of Mitt Romney’s positions on domestic issues and his damaging swagger on foreign policy.

Another swing state paper has endorsed Obama, and they did it by explaining the auto rescue in a way that debunks Romney’s talking points. This isn’t good news for the Romney campaign.

Click to read their full endorsement:

Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #71 on: Oct 21, 2012, 07:41 AM »

How to be a Foreign Policy Bumbler Like Mitt Romney in 5 Easy Steps

By: Jason EasleyOctober 20th, 2012see more posts by Jason Easley

Print Friendly

With the third and final presidential debate happening on Monday, the Obama campaign has helpfully put out a video that can teach all of America how to be a foreign policy bumbler like Mitt Romney.

Here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=x-jY7ZkRqb4

The 5 steps are so easy that anyone (who watches Fox News) can do them.

Step 1: Get the facts wrong;
Step 2: Undermine long-lasting relationships with your allies;
Step 3: Frequently highlight your lack of experience;
Step 4: Assemble a team of ideologues committed to endless war;
Step 5: Mistake your enemies (“C’mon, Mitt…think!”)

As you can see Mitt is batting a perfect 5 for 5. He consistently gets facts wrong, which is a polite way of saying that he is lying. For example, in the second presidential debate, Romney claimed that Obama never called the Libya attack an act of terror, when the president did exactly that.

Step two takes some real skill, but Romney managed to knock that one out of the park when he insulted everyone in England on the eve of the Olympics by questioning their security for the event. Romney has also been amazingly efficient at bragging to the world that he knows nothing about foreign policy. He checked step three off his list by claiming that, “a president is not a foreign policy expert.”

Step four was the easiest one of all of for Romney. Seventeen of Romney’s 24 special advisers on foreign policy served under Bush. This is why every single foreign policy address that Romney has given has been obsessed with war in the Middle East. The face at the top is different, but the policy of preemptive war remains the same. Step five was easily satisfied by Romney expressing his Rocky IV foreign policy that Russia is the US’s biggest geopolitical enemy.

Mitt Romney has a foreign policy problem. He doesn’t know anything about foreign affairs, and the only policies that he does have, come verbatim from the rejected presidency of George W. Bush. Mitt Romney’s debate strategy will likely be to attack Obama on foreign policy, while trying to pivot back to the economy as often as possible.

Never has a party’s candidate for president demonstrated as much foreign policy incompetence before an election as Mitt Romney has. Romney has been completely inept at every turn. It leads one to the conclusion that the Romney foreign policy has been informed by Fox News, and is being guided by the failure twins George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Mitt Romney isn’t just a return to the past. He is the past trying to look like the present.

Haven’t we had enough of bumbling foreign policy presidents who start wars and get Americans killed?


Originally published October 20, 2012 at 8:44 AM | Page modified October 20, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Romney rips Russia, at least on campaign trail

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney calls Russia the No. 1 foe of the United States and promises to stand up to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But if he's elected president, he might find that he'll need Moscow's help.

Associated Press


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney calls Russia the No. 1 foe of the United States and promises to stand up to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But if he's elected president, he might find that he'll need Moscow's help.

Russia plays a critical role in facilitating the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. The United States also needs Moscow's cooperation on keeping nuclear materials away from terrorists and American adversaries, and preventing gridlock at the U.N. Security Council, where both countries have vetoes.

While Romney has criticized President Barack Obama's "reset" - his administration's policy for improving relations with Russia - he has not said what exactly he would do differently beyond taking a tougher approach. Given U.S. interests in a cooperative relationship with Russia, some analysts think Romney may have to tone down his rhetoric if wins the White House.

"He may discover the value of Russia as a partner on some issues," says Andrew Kuchins, the head of the Russia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

U.S.-Russian relations, like international affairs in general, have not been major issues in a presidential campaign dominated by the economy. But they are an area of sharp disagreement between the candidates and could be an issue in Monday's presidential debate, which will focus on foreign policy.

Obama administration officials see improved relations with Russia as a foreign policy success after years of tension during George W. Bush's presidency. They cite the opening of a supply corridor to Afghanistan, the signing of a major arms control treaty, known as New Start, and progress on trade issues, including Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization.

While Russia has often blocked Western initiatives in the U.N. Security Council, it has gone along in key instances. Last year, Moscow abstained in a vote allowing military intervention in Syria, though Russian officials later accused the U.S. and allies of abusing the council's mandate. In 2010, Russia also backed new sanctions against Iran after a compromise. However, it has opposed further sanctions aimed at curbing Iranian nuclear ambitions.

Recent heated disputes over Syria and Iran and missile defense show that the relationship remains testy and may be getting tense. In a sign of faltering ties, Russian officials said recently that they would not extend a 20-year-old program for U.S. help securing Russia's nuclear stockpile unless it was substantially overhauled. The Nunn-Lugar program is considered one of the hallmarks of post-Cold War cooperation.

Also, last month, Russia ordered U.S. foreign aid workers out of the country, charging that they were inciting unrest by supporting government opponents.

Romney advisers say Obama has conceded much to Russia and received little in return. They accuse Obama of being weak with Putin, whom they see as bent on undermining democracy at home and abroad and harming U.S. interests wherever he can. They cite Russian opposition to U.S. and European efforts to reign in Iran's nuclear ambitions and to bring down the Syrian government.

"On every major issue, we have received nothing but intransigence, obstruction, counterproductive behavior," says Romney foreign policy adviser Alex Wong.

Romney has criticized Obama's decision to scrap a Bush administration plan for a European missile defense system and replace it with one that was less threatening to Russia. He says this offended important allies like Poland and the Czech Republic, which were to host the original system, and won nothing from Moscow. Indeed, Moscow continues to oppose Obama's missile defense plans.

Romney also says the New Start treaty accomplished little because Russia's arsenal was already below treaty limits. The Obama administration says the agreement allowed a resumption of U.S. inspections of Russian weapons facilities that had ceased when a previous treaty expired.

If elected, Romney "will reset the reset," his campaign website says.

Obama's backers say Romney's comments are overblown and reflect his lack of foreign policy experience. For instance, they say, in naming Russia as the worst U.S. foe, Romney skipped over al-Qaida and Iran.

"The goal of the reset was to not let our disagreements with Russia prevent us from working together on our shared interests," says Spencer Boyer, a national security adviser to the Obama campaign. "That has been a success."

For all his tough talk, it's not clear what Romney would change, especially considering the potential consequences. A rupture in relations with Russia could prevent a smooth exit from Afghanistan. A supply corridor that runs through Russia and Central Asia is one of only two possible routes for the millions of tons of military equipment that the U.S. needs to bring home. The other one runs through Pakistan, which once closed it after a NATO airstrike killed Pakistani soldiers.

Advisers say Romney would proceed with the Obama administration's missile defense plans if they are effective, while retaining the option to revert to the Bush administration plan. In a foreign policy speech this month, Romney said he wouldn't allow Putin any flexibility on missile defense, a jibe at Obama, who was caught on a microphone telling then-President Dmitry Medvedev last March that the U.S. would have more flexibility to work on missile defense issues after the election.

Romney's campaign website says he would review the New Start treaty. When asked what that means, Wong said that Romney will review everything when he gets into office.

It's not unusual for presidential candidates to talk tough about an adversary during a campaign only to become more pragmatic in office. In fact, Putin stoked anti-American sentiments in his presidential campaign. Yet one of his first moves was to approve a transit facility for NATO at a Russian airbase.

Still, Romney's blunt talk has been noticed in Moscow. Putin said in a TV interview last month that it justified his opposition to U.S. missile defense plans, which he says could undermine Russia's nuclear deterrent.

But he also said he could work with Romney.

"We'll work with whichever president is elected by the American people," Putin said. "But our effort will be only as efficient as our partners will want it to be.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #72 on: Oct 21, 2012, 07:43 AM »

At this point, a Vote for a Republican is an Endorsement of Election Fraud

By: Adalia Woodbury October 20th, 2012

Republicans are at it again. This time, a man from Pennsylvania was arrested in Virginia after he dispensed with some voter registration forms. According to Ryan J. Reilly of Talking Points Memo,
The investigation of 23-year-old Colin Small began when he was spotted throwing a folder of voter registration forms in a dumpster behind the shopping center where he works.

    Prosecutors charged him with four counts of destruction of voter registration applications, eight counts of failing to disclose voter registration applications and one count of obstruction of justice.

According to several reports, Small worked for a company called Pinpoint. According to the New York Times, Small had previously worked for Strategic Allied Consulting. Pinpoint was a subcontractor to Strategic Allied Consulting.

Yes, the Strategic Allied Consulting that is owned by longtime Republican “strategist” Nathan Sproul. This is the same Strategic Allied Consulting that was embroiled in similar conduct in Florida and the Republican Party said they were firing because they don’t tolerate Election Fraud.

This is the same Nathan Sproul who was paid millions of dollars in previous elections to provide similar services.

Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Pat Mullins said that he was “alarmed by the allegations” and that Small was “fired immediately” when the allegations surfaced. “The Republican Party of Virginia will not tolerate any action by any person that could threaten the integrity of our electoral process,” Mullins said.

Right. Where have we heard that before?

The fact that Small was charged is some consolation. However, in the eyes of those who make the decision to engage in systematic election fraud, Small and others like him are just casualties in their war against the vote. Perhaps there will be some more Colin Smalls and more shell companies “fired” by State and National Officials of the Republican Party. Perhaps there will be more statements of zero tolerance for election fraud and assurances that this is an isolated incident.

I’m reminded of a previous time, with a previous president, albeit with a very different problem. When we first heard about Abu Graib, then President Bush “assured” us that the torture in that prison was an “isolated incident” committed by “a few bad apples.” Eventually, we learned about the Torture Memos, and the wide spread torture. To this day, they are still referring to that program as “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Let’s get back to the republican crime du jour: election fraud. Maybe another of Sproul’s numerous shell companies may go down, only to be replaced by another one. Sproul will continue to profit from election fraud and Republicans will continue to protest that they really don’t tolerate election fraud.

The problem doesn’t end with Nathan Sproul. Republican officials at the state level are doing all they can to suppress the vote. Jon Husted, fought to the Supreme Court in an effort to restrict early voting in Ohio. When that didn’t work, he cut the hours during which Early Voting will be available. Rick Scott and his henchman in Florida utilized purge lists, as well repressive voter ID laws; restrictions on voter registration drives. Other states, including Wisconsin and Pennsylvania established repressive new Voter ID laws, though the courts struck them down.

In addition, the Tea Party’s True to Vote group is out there establishing its own purge lists, and promising to intimidate voters in Democratic strongholds across the country.

Then, of course, there are the voting machines in which the Romney family has both a political and financial stake. No appearance of a conflict of interest there right?
This will continue unless all those involved in the decision making process are held accountable. Actually, not only will it continue, it will get worse should Republicans be given the opportunity. At this point, I can only see a vote for a Republican candidate as a tacit endorsement of election fraud and voter suppression, in addition to the Republicans’ attacks on everything that doesn’t benefit the 1%.
There are so many reasons to throw these people out. Their involvement in election fraud is one of the more serious reasons. It isn’t the only reason. It isn’t even the only serious reason.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #73 on: Oct 21, 2012, 07:46 AM »

Romnesia Spreads to Paul Ryan as He Forgets Romney’s ‘Coal Kills’ Record

By: Sarah JonesOctober 20th, 2012

Paul Ryan was stumping for his ticket in at campaign rally Saturday in Moon Township, Pennsylvania when he attacked President Obama’s record on coal as part of the Romney campaign’s “Pennsylvania crush”. Speaking to a few hundred supporters, Ryan said, “He’ll keep his war on coal going. Not only are these policies wrong, they are keeping us from having a boom. They are keeping us from having jobs.”

Paul Ryan must have Romnesia. This is bad news, because it means Romnesia is, indeed, contagious. For those inoculated, Ryan’s running mate Mitt Romney said coal kills back when he espoused the dangers of acid rain. Standing in front of coal plant, Romney said, “That plant kills people.” He then regulated carbon dioxide.

Here’s Mitt Romney saying coal kills in 2003:


Danny Kanner, campaign spokesman for Obama for America, came back with, “Congressman Ryan either doesn’t know his running mate’s record or he’s just not telling the truth about it. As Governor, Mitt Romney said a coal-fired plant ‘kills people’ and touted his power plant regulations as the ‘toughest in the nation.’”

This is true.

    Just after he (Romney) took office, in 2003, he had attended a news conference at Salem Harbor, Mass., vowing to close an aged coal-fired power plant and declaring: ‘That plant kills people.’ His administration went to work on what would become the nation’s first regulations on the emission of carbon dioxide, and helped launch negotiations on a Northeast regional compact to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.” [Wall Street Journal, 11/11/11]

Furthermore, Romney used the exact same coal plants as the Bad Guy in 2003 for failing to meet Massachusetts clean air standards. He said “Massachusetts was under siege from ‘acid rain and air pollution from the Midwest’ and that it ‘would be wrong, even hypocritical’ not to pursue upgrades to ‘antiquated coal combustion technologies.’” Now, Romney calls those same emissions standards that he was calling for a “war on coal”.

If Romney really believed that coal killed in 2003, what are we to make of his latest policy of let them do whatever they want? Is he saying that he now doesn’t care if coal kills Americans — have at it coal, because he’s being funded by the Appalachian Koch brothers?

Kanner pointed out that coal jobs are at a 15 year high, “But under President Obama, employment in coal mining hit a 15 year high in 2011 while he’s making historic investments in clean coal research and development.”

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan don’t want to explain that their energy policy was written by oil and gas industry executives, so they couch their policy gifts of further deregulation in obscure “jobs” language. No one ever asks them how deregulation, which leads to offshoring and outsourcing, actually works to create jobs here, in the United States instead of Romney’s preferred labor market of China.

Romney promises to create 12 million jobs, which is the exact amount economists predict will be created if we do nothing but continue at the current recovery. But Romney/Ryan also believes that government can’t create jobs. This is Ryan’s excuse for voting no on Obama’s jobs bills, so it’s anyone’s guess as to how their base can buy a promise that flies in the face of their championed laissez-faire economic policies.

Perhaps Republicans love that Romney is running on the issue of our time by claiming, “I will do nothing about jobs. Laissez-faire!” Somehow that’s not as appealing, especially when contrasted with President Obama’s Bedford Falls vision of America where we pass laws to encourage manufacturing here in the U.S. and hard work is rewarded while the rich pay their fair share.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan can’t talk about their jobs plan because they don’t have one, unless you call doubling down on Bush’s trickle down tax cuts and deregulation a jobs plan — in which case, please go explain to the workers at Sensata just how that’s working out. So instead, Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney will continue spreading Romnesia to as many people as possible.

Beware the Republican tea.
Most Active Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 27900

« Reply #74 on: Oct 21, 2012, 10:13 AM »

What is wrong with about half of the voting age population in America ?

Mitt Romney is the Executioner Who is Leading His Supporters to the Gallows

By: Rmuse October 21st, 2012

In the Aesop fable, “The Ass and His Purchaser,” the moral of the story is that you are known by the company you keep, and it suggests that an adult is apt to be judged by their friends, associates, and heroes, but it does not mean they have to choose to be like them. It is related to another message in “The Farmer and the Stork” whose moral is “birds of a feather flock together,” and it is apropos to who one supports in the upcoming general election. The choice Americans make in November informs they either identify as associates of warmongers, racists, corrupt corporatists, and phony Christians, or as citizens of a country founded on equality and fairness.

At this late date in the campaign, it is unfathomable that any American would associate themselves with Republicans or Willard Romney. Romney promises to lead the GOP in cementing their reputation as enemies of the people and friends of corporations and the wealthy elite, and the idea that half of America yearns to cede government control to corruption and religion is beyond the pale. However, the past eleven years has proven that a large segment of the population is stupid enough to wildly cheer as their executioners lead them willingly to the gallows, and defines the sad state of affairs America appears unlikely to escape.

There is no demographic that supports Romney that is not inexorably linked to their own destruction and unfortunately, to their family members, friends, and this country’s future. Republicans have panted to turn government over to corporations, religion, and the wealthy since their man-turned-god, Ronald Reagan, was president.  For three-and-a-half years, Republicans actively and with malice aforethought worked to retard economic recovery and keep millions of Americans unemployed and hungry while they fought to increase entitlements to the wealthy, oil industry, and Israel. One hoped Republican supporters were not willing participants in inflicting damage to their fellow citizens and this country, but the 2010 midterm elections were proof positive that a majority of Americans thought so little of their countrymen and government, that they elected the most vindictive and incompetent representatives in the nation’s history.

What boggles the mind is the groups supporting Republicans and Romney know exactly what awaits them if they are victorious in November. Senior citizens who support Romney and Ryan know they intend on ending Medicare in its present form, and guarantee its insolvency by 2016. Veterans who support the current Republican ticket know the Veteran’s Health Administration faces steep cuts as Romney promotes giving Veterans a coupon to buy private healthcare insurance as well as cutting their benefits. Women supporting Republicans are crying out for lower pay, discrimination, allowing Christian men to dictate their reproductive health, and to become birth machines to produce cannon fodder for perpetual Middle East wars.

One may think that Romney supporters may have forgotten the devastation their champions caused this country during the Bush presidency, but that is highly unlikely because it has only been two years since Republicans toured the nation promising their focus was creating jobs, jobs, jobs, only to begin the 112th Congress attacking women, women, women. Despite high unemployment and several jobs bills sitting idle on John Boehner’s desk, he led House Republicans on a campaign to ban contraception, drastically slash social safety nets, and strive to make America number one with the highest child poverty rate in the entire world. It must make Republican supporters proud that they are associated with harsh overlords influenced by religious fanatics and corporate cash. However, it is the number of Americans identifying with Willard Romney that associates them with racism, religious extremism, and corruption.

Willard Romney is a pathological liar with a business history steeped in corruption and fraud as he destroyed entire companies and consorted with the likes of disgraced junk bond king Michael Milken, his son Tagg’s Ponzi schemers, and foreign countries he contends are enemies of the state. Americans love a success story, but Romney’s support informs that they also love his un-American tactics that raided employees’ pensions, shipped jobs to China, and sent his ill-gained wealth offshore to avoid paying taxes. Romney’s supporters may claim that accusations of his malfeasance are historical, but how many corruption accusations does it take before an intelligent human being thinks, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire?”  The only conclusion one can make is that a large segment of the population loves associating with liars, economic traitors, and tax evaders and still call themselves “real Americans.”

It is incredibly curious that so many Americans identify with a party of anti-government corporatists and corrupt businessmen and claim to be good Americans, and it is incomprehensible why they support a Republican candidate with a shadowy business record, hatred for at least 47% of the population, and fallaciously claims to be a Christian. For the record, Jesus Christ never condoned lying, restricting healthcare and food for the poor, children, and seniors, or advocated for war, and yet that is Romney’s appeal to the American people; particularly the religious right.

It is troubling to portray Romney supporters as pathetic sycophants yearning for Dark Age social policy and government by theocratic plutocracy, but the alternative explanation is worse; racism. That is what this election is coming down to and it has been the driving force behind Romney’s popularity and the ease at selling a Draconian corporatist agenda to the American people. Over six months ago during an interview with four retired middle class men, the question was posed; “do you really want a government controlled by corporations and religious extremists?”   The spokesman’s reply was instantaneous; “We’d rather have a corporate theocracy than a n*gger in the White House,” as his compatriots nodded in agreement and patted him on the back. That one statement defines Romney supporters and a great portion of America. This is America drives a large segment of the population to forfeit Medicare, contraception, and peace, and they will give up economic freedom willingly to see a white man, even a corrupt white man, in the Oval Office.

A large number of Americans are disappointing in their bigotry and willingness to see friends, family members, and neighbors suffer just to defeat an African American President. What is most disappointing though, is their inclination to associate with a false Christian, corrupt business man, and coward who will send their children to die in the Middle East to satisfy his allegiance to Bush warmongers and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Based on their support for Romney, one can only conclude that by association, a large number of Americans want corruption, lying, greed, and racism to define America, and it is another sign this country will never be exceptional until every American is afforded the same deference as the hallowed white man with a Cayman Island bank account, a bible, and wrapped in an Israeli flag.

* willardVote.jpg (8.79 KB, 290x174 - viewed 267 times.)
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 12   Go Up
Jump to: