Pres Obama Says Thank You; Former Gov Romney says Obama Won because of Free Gifts

At the end of the day, you have what it was about from the beginning -- Obama caring about all Americans including the 47% versus Romney caring about the wealthiest and his southern strategy of earlier GOP campaigns to bring out the southern white vote.  Americans were not fooled as the majority of us knew which candidate cared about all Americans -- Barack Obama.  In the end, it wasn't even close with Obama getting 332 electoral votes to Romney's 206 with Obama getting over $3M more popular votes.  
As I watched this video after the election with the President thanking the people in Chicago, I was struck at the diversity of his workers in the main campaign office which is a microcosm of what we saw on the campaign trail -- young, middle age, older, men, women, minorities, and whites all working together to elect Barack Obama.  There is no one specific group who supported the Obama campaign but a lot of different groups who wanted to make sure that he was reelected and had a chance to finish what he started.  They knocked those doors in battleground states with a huge ground game.  Unions have discovered that a campaign needs people more then the money and were part of that ground game.  
Romney tried to buy the election with the big donors and Super PACs while Obama's campaign focused on a huge ground game to Get Out The Vote.  Obama campaign held a lot of fundraisers and brought in a lot of money from big donors along with the Democrat Super PAC but in the end, it was the millions of small donors who bought a piece of his campaign and worked hard to elect him that won the day.
When I got this in email yesterday along with another email to take a comprehensive survey about the campaign, it hit me that the President understands Americans by reaching out to all people of America not just a select few wealthy.  In fact he has very much at home in almost all situations except maybe having to deal with the Party of NO in DC.  Must be refreshing to get outside the beltway and deal with regular Americans not those inside the beltway who have a false sense they are the most important people who the world revolves around.  

As I watched this Thank You, I was reminded of how I felt waking up on the morning the day after the election with a smile on my face knowing I had voted for the right person to be President.  
In 2008, I supported John McCain who I wouldn't support today for dog catcher after his actions last week with his comments on Libya.  He is very bitter and you have to wonder what Romney promised him -- was it Secretary of Defense which he has wanted for years?   The fact is if he took over at DoD, the exit out the doors by senior ranking officers would be huge. 
As Romney made more of a jerk of himself this week with the 'free gifts,' it shouldn't have shocked anyone as he meant that 47% comment.  He is arrogant, pampered, and never wants to be told NO which the American people have done in fairly large numbers.  When you have a southern strategy in today's America to go after the white southern vote, you have a real problem.  Then toss in the Neanderthal thinking of the 50's and your problem becomes huge.  Women, minorities, gays, and anyone who doesn't agree with the hard right is supposed to sit down, shut up, and let them decide things.  News to Romney people -- it doesn't work that way.  Paul Krugman from the NY Times summed up the GOP under Romney/Ryan and today's hard right GOP:

There are, let’s face it, some people in our political life who pine for the days when minorities and women knew their place, gays stayed firmly in the closet and congressmen asked, “Are you now or have you ever been?” The rest of us, however, are very glad those days are gone. We are, morally, a much better nation than we were. Oh, and the food has improved a lot, too.    

Couldn't believe when I read yesterday, the Romney campaign depended on negative ads which they flood the airwaves and mailings to get their support and their money from smaller donors. (sarcasm)  That was a 50's/60's campaign outreach.  I can vouch for the snail mail as some weeks I would get 10-12 pieces of mail from the campaign which ended up in the trash.  I received two snail mails from Obama -- one with my bumper strip and one with a magnet for donating.  
Two campaigns run very differently -- Obama was in 2012 with using the internet to max out his potential base.  His emails asking for small donations was perfect as they asked for donations starting at $8, saved your information, and all you had to do was click on what amount to give.  Started giving $8 or $10 when Romney and/or his surrogates would irritate me with their comments which in many cases were tinged with racism or attacks on women, minorities, veterans, teachers, fire, police, civil service, and other groups.  Romney's campaign was stuck on the 50's/60's mentality of how to run a campaign with mailout letters, etc.  Not even fancy mailouts that local candidates send out but actual snail mail.  I was shocked at their lack of progress running elections.  Almost as dumb as the RNC sending out $1 bills asking for donations -- talk about throwing money away.
The Obama campaign couldn't have had a better campaign to have as an opponent then Romney/Ryan who had problems with the truth as they spouted Fox News/Limbaugh mistruths and outright lies.  They spent almost as much time fundraising in the last month as campaigning.  Ryan was pulled off the trail to go fundraise in the last month which was odd for a campaign spouting they were winning.  What gets me is that they believed the likes of Fox News, Rush, Rove, Morris, and their little group of people who said they were going to win big.  During the last two weeks, I kept wondering why the Romney camp was getting their information as people I knew were saying it was going to Obama and don't believe polls like Gallup.  Kept telling people that national polls mean nothing in the end but the state polls are what counts.  But even then some state polls were far off and missed the fact so many minorities were going to vote and women were turned off by Romney/Ryan.
My favorite outcome of the election was Missouri where Akin went down to defeat big time when polls showed it close right up until the election with McCaskill.  Turns out women didn't want to say outright they wouldn't vote for the Neanderthal but they showed on election day when he lost by over 15 points, they wanted no part of the hard right Akin who the Tea Party supported.
Over the months, I have had friends ask me how I ended up supporting Obama even though they knew I refused to support Romney after 2008 and vowed never to support the arrogant man.  I learned my lesson but many in the GOP did not and their 'he is such a nice man' mantra doesn't fly either when you have seen up close how nasty he can be at Town Halls when asked the wrong question.  
My path to voting for Obama started with my looking at former NM Governor Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, to support until discovering that he was also an Ayn Rand disciple like the Romney VP candidate Paul Ryan. That did it for me as I cannot believe these people  follow the writings of an atheist who writes fiction.  That decision not to support Johnson (couldn't have voted for him as OK GOP made sure he wasn't on the ballot) led me to Republicans for Obama where I found a home with like minded individuals who had decided that the GOP had gone too far hard right.  They had come to the conclusion that Obama was the better candidate then Romney had gone hard right who was 'severely' conservative.  
Many of the people there had supported Obama against McCain in 2008 which I can fully understand.  The people at Republicans for Obama are not hard right which made it even better.  None of the 'my way or no way' crowd was involved except for the occasional poster who posted to irritate people and actually made me laugh with their stupid postings that were right out of Rush and Fox News.
Then after being part of Republicans for Obama, I decided to ask the campaign how I could help in a Red State.  This election travel was out but I could use my blog to get out the facts to help elect Barack Obama for a second term.   Those doubts about supporting Obama at the beginning were quickly washed away as I realized that I had been swallowing the GOP/pundit koolaid about Republican candidates for sometime which when shown the light of day didn't add up.  All of a sudden when I saw the House stall the veterans job bill and the farm bill, I knew that the Democrats were right and the House GOP since 2010 had become the Party of "NO" even when it hurt the American people.  They didn't want good jobs numbers as it would help Obama.  You could say I woke up and frankly don't like what I was seeing out of many of today's Republicans who seem to have the integrity of gnat in Congress putting Party over Country.
Today as I was putting this together I found an article by Paul Krugman which sums up the state of today's Republicans IMO no matter what face they are trying to wear today -- that core of the GOP that is hard right is still driving the bus as I think you will see with the House Republicans in the days ahead.  This part of his article drives home what is wrong with the Republican Party today and their nostalgia for the 1950's:

The Twinkie ManifestoBy PAUL KRUGMANPublished: November 18, 2012 

The Twinkie, it turns out, was introduced way back in 1930. In our memories, however, the iconic snack will forever be identified with the 1950s, when Hostess popularized the brand by sponsoring “The Howdy Doody Show.” And the demise of Hostess has unleashed a wave of baby boomer nostalgia for a seemingly more innocent time.
Needless to say, it wasn’t really innocent. But the ’50s — the Twinkie Era — do offer lessons that remain relevant in the 21st century. Above all, the success of the postwar American economy demonstrates that, contrary to today’s conservative orthodoxy, you can have prosperity without demeaning workers and coddling the rich.   

(snip)

Squeezed between high taxes and empowered workers, executives were relatively impoverished by the standards of either earlier or later generations. In 1955 Fortune magazine published an essay, “How top executives live,” which emphasized how modest their lifestyles had become compared with days of yore. The vast mansions, armies of servants, and huge yachts of the 1920s were no more; by 1955 the typical executive, Fortune claimed, lived in a smallish suburban house, relied on part-time help and skippered his own relatively small boat.  

The data confirm Fortune’s impressions. Between the 1920s and the 1950s real incomes for the richest Americans fell sharply, not just compared with the middle class but in absolute terms. According to estimates by the economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, in 1955 the real incomes of the top 0.01 percent of Americans were less than half what they had been in the late 1920s, and their share of total income was down by three-quarters. 

Today, of course, the mansions, armies of servants and yachts are back, bigger than ever — and any hint of policies that might crimp plutocrats’ style is met with cries of “socialism.” Indeed, the whole Romney campaign was based on the premise that President Obama’s threat to modestly raise taxes on top incomes, plus his temerity in suggesting that some bankers had behaved badly, were crippling the economy. Surely, then, the far less plutocrat-friendly environment of the 1950s must have been an economic disaster, right? 

Actually, some people thought so at the time. Paul Ryan and many other modern conservatives are devotees of Ayn Rand. Well, the collapsing, moocher-infested nation she portrayed in “Atlas Shrugged,” published in 1957, was basically Dwight Eisenhower’s America. 

Strange to say, however, the oppressed executives Fortune portrayed in 1955 didn’t go Galt and deprive the nation of their talents. On the contrary, if Fortune is to be believed, they were working harder than ever. And the high-tax, strong-union decades after World War II were in fact marked by spectacular, widely shared economic growth: nothing before or since has matched the doubling of median family income between 1947 and 1973. 

Which brings us back to the nostalgia thing. 

There are, let’s face it, some people in our political life who pine for the days when minorities and women knew their place, gays stayed firmly in the closet and congressmen asked, “Are you now or have you ever been?” The rest of us, however, are very glad those days are gone. We are, morally, a much better nation than we were. Oh, and the food has improved a lot, too.    

Along the way, however, we’ve forgotten something important — namely, that economic justice and economic growth aren’t incompatible. America in the 1950s made the rich pay their fair share; it gave workers the power to bargain for decent wages and benefits; yet contrary to right-wing propaganda then and now, it prospered. And we can do that again. 

Excerpt:  Read More from Paul Krugman at the NY Times 

Will GOP leadership get the message or stay the course of the hard right after President Obama's Huge Win Last Night?

My first time voting for a Democrat for President was a success as President Obama won handily not only in the electoral college but in the popular vote proving conservative pundits wrong.  A strong message was sent by voters to the Republican Party that going hard right is not going to win national elections and becoming the all white party is a huge mistake.  The question is whether or not the GOP will learn the lesson.  Senator John Cornyn last night calls for 'period of reflection and recalibration' for Republicans as the Hard Right Tea Party Senate candidates that wanted to redefine rape went down in flames.  Shame Senator McConnell couldn't have said similar words as his statement was defiant not congratulating the President on his win or offering an olive branch.

Now we are starting to hear from conservative pundits that the GOP lost because Romney was a Massachusetts liberal.  How can Republicans/Conservatives be so stupid?  Many of us were saying that when Romney ran and the hard right started supporting him.  The RNC went all in for Romney and the GOP/Rove/Morris/Fox News kept lying about Obama to the stage a group of us joined Republicans for Obama as we could not take the lies any longer refusing to be part of a group that supported a man who thought 47% of us were worthless.

If the GOP continues going to the hard right, you can put a fork in them for national elections.  The days of the white voters being the determining factor are coming to a close especially when you realize that a lot of white women won't vote for Republican Neanderthals.  White male blue collar works in the old 'rust belt' states stood up for Obama against Romney.  The unions didn't make the huge monetary contributions to candidates but they provided something more tangible -- boots on the ground.  In states that Obama won, his campaign turned out the volunteers in big numbers, his donations were fueled by small donors who bought into his campaign, and his message was heard loud and clear as he stood on his record saying there was more to be accomplished.  Many liberal leaning pundits thought he was giving the wrong message but in the end the Obama strategy was correct.  The American people were willing to give him four more years to get the job done.  This time if the Republicans obstruct, they will be out on their ears in 2014.

Romney had the huge donors who spent over $1B, but he had to hire people to make calls and door knock, had very few small donors relying mostly on the wealthy and little GOTV in operation as Rove and company thought they could buy this election with negative ads that lied and little ground game.   The American people said NO to a candidate trying to buy an election and to vote suppression.

GOP is now trying to blame the hurricane and Gov Christi, but they are wrong IMHO.  The day Romney lied about Jeep moving everything to China which was repudiated by Chrysler and General Motors, was the day he lost the rust belt states.  Romney doubled down keeping up with the lies and even made a campaign ad which ran in the 'rust belt' states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa.  The worst part was seeing Republicans I trusted spring to Romney's defense on Jeep.  Finally Ohio Governor Kasich broke with Romney on Jeep but Senator Portman doubled down along with others.

Rudy Guiliani made an absolute fool of himself in the end calling for the President Obama to resign, be impeached, or voted out for his incompetence over Libya and his response to Hurricane Sandy which made no sense but he lost it completely and with it the respect of a lot of us who had worked for his 2008 election.

I have included this email below from MSNBC this morning that breaks down the demographics and shows just how bad off the Republicans are in the future if they don't change.  They had better look to Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio where voter suppression didn't work.  Cutting voting hours to help Romney or making it hard to get a voter ID, only added to the disgust of many minorities but also to life long Republicans like me.  The very idea that Rick Scott cut voting hours so drastically should get him kicked out of office as the Florida Governor in 2014.  Americans want voting laws that encourage people to vote -- no one should have to stand in line for 7-8 hours to vote.  Anyone involved in this voter suppression we witnessed should be charged IMHO.

The whine coming out of Karl Rove last night was actually funny as he couldn't believe Fox News had declared Ohio for Obama.  Rove went into a meltdown talking about his numbers, his numbers when it was Cleveland and Cincinnati where votes which were still out -- no way was Romney going to win in either county.  Rove was demanding that Fox News pull back their call of Ohio for Obama, but they refused.  Then there was the right wing media:

Right-Wing Media React To Obama's Re-Election: War, Impeachment, Revolution

It is time the GOP wake up and realize that they need to be reaching out to minority voters or in the years ahead they are going to be the real minority party left with a bunch of neanderthal ideas trying to go back to the 1950's.  Whether that hard right Tea Party and social conservative coalition wants to admit it, they lost big last night.  Only a matter of time, until AZ, TX, and GA start turning blue with their large minority populations.  GOP either changes and embraces the change or they can be stubborn like Minority Leader McConnell and start demanding.

The question is, "Will GOP leadership get the message or stay the course of the hard right?"  When you read the demographics of voters in the email below, they had better wake up or the GOP as we know it will go down in flames as the hard right party of white male Neanderthals with a bunch of wealthy donors who were repudiated even if they won't admit it today.  The American people in fairly large numbers are sick and tired of social issues at the National level, but social conservatives cannot seem to get it through their heads that the majority of Americans don't care about the hard right positions -- they are in the minority on those positions no matter what they say.

When you read this email about demographics, it says it all.  America has now become a true melting pot. The Republican Party to survive needs to embrace the change not throw them under the bus.  We have a whole generation of young people who will add a lot to America if given the chance and embraced.  President Obama is correct -- Time to Move America Forward!

First Thoughts: Obama's demographic edgeWednesday, 07 November 2012 06:12:44 PST 

Obama’s demographic edge… And the GOP’s demographic dilemma… Breaking down last night’s results… Do status-quo election results = status-quo governing?... Obama’s swing-county swagger…His tactical dominance…  And lots of history was made last night.  

By NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Brooke Brower 

*** Obama's demographic edge: Yes, the auto bailout mattered in Ohio. Sure, Hurricane Sandy helped the president. And, yes, the economy was the No. 1 issue. But make no mistake: What happened last night was a demographic time bomb that had been ticking and that blew up in GOP faces. As the Obama campaign had assumed more than a year ago, the white portion of the electorate dropped to 72%, and the president won just 39% of that vote. But he carried a whopping 93% of black voters (representing 13% of the electorate), 71% of Latinos (representing 10%), and also 73% of Asians (3%). What’s more, despite all the predictions that youth turnout would be down, voters 18-29 made up 19% of last night’s voting population -- up from 18% four years ago -- and President Obama took 60% from that group. The trend also played out in the key battleground states: The president won about 70% of the Latino vote in Colorado and Nevada, and he won 60% of it in Florida (a high number given the state’s large GOP-leaning Cuban-American population). On Monday, we wrote that demography could determine destiny. And that’s exactly what happened. While the campaign’s turnout operation deserves all the credit for getting these voters to the polls, the most significant event of this presidential contest might very well have been the 2010 census. 

*** And the GOP’s demographic dilemma: Obama’s demographic edge creates this dilemma for the Republican Party: It can no longer rely on white voters to win national elections anymore, especially in presidential cycles. Indeed, according to the exit poll, 89% of all votes Mitt Romney won last night came from whites (compared with 56% for Obama). So the Republicans are maximizing their share with white voters; they just aren’t getting the rest. And come 2016, the white portion of the electorate will probably drop another couple of points to 70%. Politico’s Martin puts it this way: “Battling a wheezing economy and a deeply motivated opposition, Obama still managed to retain much of his 2008 map because of the GOP’s deficiencies with the voters who are changing the political face of once conservative-leaning Virginia, Florida, Colorado and Nevada. Republicans face a crisis: the country is growing less white and their coalition has become more white in recent years. In 2004, George W. Bush won [about 40 percent] of Hispanics. Four years later, John McCain, the author of an immigration reform bill, took 31 percent of Hispanics. And this year, Romney captured only 27 percent of Hispanics.” 

*** Hard for the GOP just to turn to the Midwest: Now Republicans might argue, “Look, we can win back the Midwest -- Ohio, Iowa, and Wisconsin.” Yet those account for 34 electoral votes. But the Sun Belt states where Obama campaigned and which have more diverse populations (Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia) have a total of 57 electoral votes. And then there are Arizona, Georgia, and Texas. Do those states come into play in 2016? What about 2020? Come 2016, you could argue that Arizona and Georgia become for Democrats what Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania are for Republicans -- just slightly out of reach. 

*** Last night’s results: The morning after, here are the results (so far) from last night: Obama holds 303 electoral votes and Romney 206. (NBC News has yet to call Florida and its 29 electoral votes, but Obama leads there 50%-49%.) In the popular vote, it’s Obama 50%, Romney 48%. Also, Democrats have held on to their Senate majority and might add to it -- with undecided races in Montana (where Democratic incumbent Jon Tester leads 48%-48% with 77% in) and North Dakota (where Democrat Heidi Heitkamp is ahead by about 3,000 voters with 93% in). But Republicans held on to control of the House, holding 237 seats vs. 197 for the Democrats, plus-minus four seats. 

*** Does status-quo control = status-quo governing? So in the end, we got a status-quo result -- with Obama holding on to the White House, Democrats keeping control of the Senate, and Republicans maintaining their grip on the House. But here’s the question with the “fiscal cliff” negotiations coming up: Will the governing be status quo, too? Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell released this statement last night: “To the extent [Obama] wants to move to the political center, which is where the work gets done in a divided government, we’ll be there to meet him half way. That begins by proposing a way for both parties to work together in avoiding the ‘fiscal cliff’ without harming a weak and fragile economy, and when that is behind us work with us to reform the tax code and our broken entitlement system.” And House Speaker John Boehner makes a statement on the “fiscal cliff” negotiations at 3:30 pm ET. But who holds the mandate here? The GOP? Or a president who waged a national campaign on raising taxes for the wealthy, and who won? And here’s another question: Do Boehner and McConnell take advantage of the lame duck to compromise? 

*** Obama’s swing-county swagger: Turning back to last night’s presidential contest, Obama beat Romney in almost all of the swing counties (won by Bush in ’04 but by Obama in ’08). Indeed, Obama won three of four swing counties in Florida (Hillsborough, Pinellas, Osceola), four of six in Ohio (Hamilton, Wood, Ottawa, Sandusky), 11 of 14 in Virginia (including Loudon, Prince William, and Henrico), and all six in Colorado (including Jefferson, Arapahoe, and Larimer). And despite losing North Carolina, Obama may have proved that the state is changing, becoming more “Mid-Atlantic” but not quite all there, as Charlie Cook has said. Obama won nine of 13 swing counties in the Tar Heel State (including the large counties of Wake, Forsyth, Cumberland, and Buncombe). 

*** And his tactical dominance: But it was more than winning the swing counties for Obama; it was tactical dominance. Romney made inroads all across the country from previous GOP performance. What happened, however, was that the Obama campaign exploited the census and changed the margins. The best example of this was in Florida. 

*** Making history: Finally, it was an historic-making election. With Obama’s re-election, we now have the first time since Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe that Americans have elected three two-term presidents in a row… Tammy Baldwin will become the Senate’s first openly gay member… The Senate will have at least 19 female members -- the most ever -- and there’s a chance that number could increase to 20 if Heitkamp wins… Maryland and Maine became the first states to approve of gay marriage at the ballot box… And initiatives to legalize marijuana passed in Colorado and Washington state. 

Center Right Republican Supports Obama for Re-election

In 2008, I bought into the GOP/Conservative pundits koolaid about Obama which as I have learned over the past four years was mostly lies and spin.  I held my nose and supported John McCain in 2008 even though I didn't think had the temperament to be President but I believed what I was told about Obama not being American, being hard left, apologizing for America -- the whole nine yards.  Then I began to slowly see the truth as I did the research for articles on here.  
When reading sources that ObamaCare was based on Healthcare Reform of the Republicans in the 90's and RomneyCare, I started to get a glimmer the GOP was not telling the whole truth.  The more I read and researched, I slowly  began to realize that I might be wrong about Obama, but I refused to believe a Party I had belonged to my whole whole adult life could be lying to the Country.  My defining moment was when the GOP overwhelmingly took the House in 2010 and made the Senate numbers closer for the GOP.  Slowly I began to realize that Republicans in the House and Senate were the problems when it came to the recession we were in by doing everything they could to obstruct Obama on issues they normally would have supported.
The more research I did for this blog in the last two years, the more I saw a pattern that if Obama proposed anything, Republicans were against the plan but would spin and lie about what was happening.  Then the primary season started where I couldn't believe Romney was running again as he could not beat McCain in 2008.  What I didn't count on was his run had been in the works for sometime as Romney had the big donors lined up to support him.  The Citizens United ruling finally tipped me over the edge even faster when I realized this was a Mecca for Rove and big donors to try and buy this election for Romney.  
RNC Chair Priebus with his changing rules in the states and orchestrating obvious leaning Romney debates led to candidate after candidate not getting a fair shake as the bully Romney took over the debates.  Anyone with compassion for those less fortunate like Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry, think TX Dream Act, got tossed under the bus.  That left us with Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, and of course, Romney.  The nasty attack ads and verbal attacks by Romney left me totally disgusted with him, Rove, and the RNC.  His attacks were so over the top in the primary in FL with lies against Gingrich that I started to look at Obama and do the research.
Finding lie after lie that had come from Republicans about Obama started made me search even more for the truth.  The final nail for Romney and Republicans was when I discovered that a group of House and Senate members including my Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn had met on the night of the inauguration to plot how to make Obama a one-term President.  That did it for me so I started answering the call by donating $8 at a time, then $10 to support Obama in race against the most flawed candidate I can ever remember who has lied over and over again even after being fact checked.  Fact Check doesn't matter to Romney or the GOP in this election.  As we have witnessed with voter suppression and the outright lies, this group of hard right led by Romney will lie, cheat, and steal to win.  They have a good teacher in Karl Rove. 
In the first debate, Romney showed what an arrogant bully he was catching Obama off guard when he changed his stances completely.  In the second debate, Obama was ready for Romney and was willing to take him on and came out the winner especially when Romney lied about Libya.  Obama was masterful in that debate.  Then came the foreign policy debate where Romney went spineless and became me too, me too. When Obama corrected Romney, the hard right got up in arms that he was picking on poor Mitt.  That was laughable after the jerk Romney was in the first debate.
Most amazing thing is to see ads by Obama that look like they come from Republican ad makers who make some very professional ads versus the nasty ads from Romney which mirror the nastiest ads I have ever seen -- think LBJ.  This video from Obama shows the ordinary Americans who support him and why he needs four more years to finish the job of bringing America all the way back.  Without the GOP obstructionist, our economy would be much farther along and more people back to work like veterans where the House GOP stalled the veterans jobs bill.  This ad emboldens my belief of who Obama truly is -- someone who cares about America and its people deeply no matter who they are.  He represents the best of America and is a representative that the American dream is alive and well.
I fully support Obama for reelection on November 6th.  If the GOP continues to obstruct like they have especially the last two years, I will get out and work for Democrats to defeat the GOP at all levels in 2014.   Some of these State House GOP members already need defeated with their hard right agenda and voter suppression bills they passed.

Marco Rubio Throws in with Romney Against Deferred Action

Marco Rubio is putting the Republican Party ahead of Country once again with this lie:

"The mistakes that Republicans have made is that we have allowed conservatism to be defined as anti-illegal immigration," Rubio said. "In fact, conservatism is pro-legal immigration."

Conservatives are the home of the anti-illegal immigration crowd.  Just go check out the states with the toughest laws on illegals and you will find those laws were put in place by hard right legislators along with Republican dominated legislatures voting for those hard right illegal immigration laws.  Governor Perry was taken out in the primary by the far right because he supported the Texas version of the Dream Act started by then Governor Bush and then carried on by Governor Perry.  How can you tell students who have been in the US in our schools most of their lives that they don't qualify for in-state tuition.  Some do not speak very good Spanish because they have been here their whole life.

With all the Romney lies, Rubio wants us to believe he would do something about illegal immigration that would help them?  What he would do is probably deport since one of his advisors is John Bolton along with some other hard right anti-illegal immigration people.  In fact some of his advisors are not too keen on legal immigration as they attempt to put them all in one box.

But the idea that Romney would be able to pass other reforms into law by the time he repeals the deferred action policy seems removed from the political realities of immigration in Congress. And Rubio himself seemed to acknowledge that Republicans need to approach the concept through a different frame and mindset. 

Marco Rubio is not doing the Cuban community where he came from any favors with throwing in with Mitt Romney.  Believe Romney will use him and throw him under the bus because he is not a rich Republican -- we have seen it happen more than once.  Why are Rubio and other Republicans willing to work with Romney but never would work with Obama on illegal immigration?  Shows they only care about the Party winning not the Country which has made a lot of center right Republicans really disgusted with the Congress.  Noted that some of the people who want to work with Romney were at the meeting the night of the Inauguration like Dr. Coburn (R-OK) who started working on details to obstruct that night.  I thought Dr. Coburn had more integrity then that but I guess I was wrong not only about him but Marco Rubio.  

Marco Rubio On Mitt Romney, Deferred Action: Not Upset That Program Will Be Ended

By  Sam Stein Posted: 10/16/2012 11:54 am EDT Updated: 10/16/2012 12:12 pm EDT 

NEW YORK -- Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said Tuesday he was comfortable with Mitt Romney's decision to end President Obama's deferred action program upon entering office because he believes the Republican nominee will put in place other reforms by the time the program expires. 

The senator, one of the leading Republican voices on immigration reform, has called for a reform plan that many say prompted Obama's policy, which grants a special two-year deportation reprieve to young immigrants between the ages of 16 and 30 brought here as children illegally, provided they have a clean criminal record and are currently attending or have graduated high school. But even with Rubio's philosophical support for the concept of deferred action, he chose to bite his tongue Tuesday when asked if he was upset that Romney would end the policy, while respecting those temporary stays that have already been handed out. 

"What I'm really comfortable with is that [Romney] says he wants to find a permanent solution and, in fact, has now openly begun to talk about the idea that we were working on," Rubio told a group of reporters at a Bloomberg View event. "So, not to put words in his mouth, but what I'm fairly confident about is that if Mitt Romney is elected president, we will have a willing partner in the White House to find a solution to this issue along the lines of what we were working on." 

"We are going to replace [Obama's program]," he added. "I think his point is, we are not going to give out new permits because we are going to replace the system with a new one. And I think that is very promising." 

"I don’t know about hypotheticals," he said, when ased what would happen if a new system wasn't in place by the time Obama's program was revoked. "Irrespective of it we have to do this. It is not like this is going to expire in ten years. It is going to expire in less than 24 months. So either way we are on the clock."  

Rubio has criticized Obama routinely for "poisoning the well" on immigration reform by going forward with his deferred action concept without input from the Congress. He hammered that point home once more during his sit down with journalists Tuesday, noting that several unexpected Republicans -- Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), along with Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) -- had expressed openness to working with him on immigration legislation.

(snip)

This story has been updated to clarify details of Obama's deferred action program.

Source:  Huffington Post 

A good friend told me I should support Charlie Christ over Rubio as Rubio was not the most honest candidate -- I should have listened.  Learned some valuable lessons in the last few years since those Republican blinders have come off.  Taken a lot to admit that the Republican Party is not the Party I grew up in but a party in this election of liars and pandering to wealthy donors.  They will lie just like Romney and obstruct bills for veterans jobs, farmers who have gone through a major drought, and all kinds of job bills to hurt Obama putting Party over Country.  Is this what the hard right is all about -- 'my way or no way' and if you choose not to follow what they say, then they won't cooperate in any way?  Is this the new Republican Party?

Ohio Secretary of State Appeal denied -- Early Voting Remains

Maybe it is because I grew up in Ohio where I cut my teeth on politics with my Uncle who was very active in Republican politics not only local and statewide but also nationwide, because I have been more livid then normal at what I have seen out of the Ohio Secretary of State  John Husted.  Doesn't take a genius to figure out that he is trying to do voter suppression in Ohio to give Ohio to Romney.  It is not working and now with this ruling all Ohioans not just Republicans will be able to vote the weekend before the election.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Leaves Early Voting In Place In Ohio | 

Earlier this month, a unanimous panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down an Ohio law cutting back early voting for most Ohio voters. Today, the Supreme Court rejected a request by the state to stay this decision. The Court’s denial of the stay did not explain the justices’ reasoning and did not include a dissent. Moreover, because their order only concerned the request for a stay, it is possible — if unlikely — that the justices will still decide to hear this case at a later date. Nevertheless, today’s order means that the new restrictions on early voting almost certainly will not be in effect during next month’s election.

Couldn't believed he appealed the unanimous ruling by the panel of Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.  Read that -- UNANIMOUS ruling and yet Husted cost the state even more money appealing to the SCOTUS.  So happy to see that the SCOTUS rejected the appeal.  For two elections Ohio has had extended early voting but along comes Romney running for President against President Obama and Husted has put up a roadblock every step of the way.  One of the most obvious ones was when he was going to allow Republican counties to have more hours to vote then Democrat ones.

Secretary of State in Ohio needs to be ousted in 2014 but frankly with his dirty tactics and then he falsely accuses democrats for being the problem should oust him from office early.  He is sworn to uphold the laws of the State of Ohio not the Romney campaign.  He fired to long time County Board of Election people in Montgomery County because the lawyers told them there was nothing to prevent them from having longer hours in what they read of the SoS ruling, but when they wouldn't back down, he fired two of them.  Know that area well.  Husted just messed with a County that is pretty heavy Democrat, and IMHO they will prove it on November 6th when the numbers come in.

I have found the voter suppression in Ohio to be an insult to the people who have worked their whole lives to make the Ohio Republican Party vibrant again after years of losing Senate elections.  Now with one partisan Secretary of State, he has wiped years of good will away.  I think Sherrod Brown is going to clean the ultra-conservative Josh Mandel's clock on November 6th.  Mandel is an Aiken/Ryan clone IMHO.  I cannot believe I am saying this but if I still lived in Ohio, I would not only vote for Sherrod Brown but I would be out working for his election.  Brown is leading a crusade to get Citizens United overturned to take the huge amount of wealthy donor money out of trying to buy elections.

Romney has taken it to a new low level of dishonesty with his big donors who are routinely breaking the law but they will send in amended returns AFTER the election.  Anyone with a brain can see the Romney reports for his campaign are including money meant for the RNC.  Also never saw a campaign with so little data on donors -- far outside the norm.  This is part of what Sherrod Brown wants stopped along with identifying all major donors so no one can hide behind a group where they don't have to reveal donors.

Republicans are proving that when there are no campaign finance rules in place, they take full advantage including groups who hide donors.  Rules no longer apply if you are a Republican.  I hope the voters of Ohio have the final say in sending Romney to defeat along with Josh Mandel showing that all the ads being bought in Ohio by the Super PACs mean zero, zip, nada.  Voters need to show the GOP that their votes are not for sale to all the negative Super PAC ads and vote their conscience by voting for the campaigns who tell the truth not lies which means their votes would go to President Obama and Senator Sherrod Brown.

Romney Gets Aggressive and Lies to Win Debate

These are 27 Myths also known as lies but it doesn't tell the whole story because in those 38 minutes Romney repeated some of the same lies.  The Romney aggressive style might have played well with the white male pundits but most women throughout America don't like that aggressive, school yard bully style out of men.  It came across to a lot of us that Romney was being so aggressive to cover up the lies.

Think Progress and other Fact Checkers had a field day last night because Romney with his flip flopping and lying kept them busy.  One study he cited was from a study that the Romney camp paid for but that was not revealed.  Funny how the light of day is shining on the fact that Romney lied to win the debate.  How is that a win when what you say is a lie?

Did you see the focus group from Fox News?  Mostly white males with a few white women thrown in and mostly older -- is this what Fox News considers the cross section of America?

Where are the young people, minorities, more women?  This was a white male dominated focus group and this is what Fox News used to tell us how Romney is winning voters.  They are no more a news channel then Letterman when you use a Focus Group like this to sell your candidate Romney.  Anyone who doesn't think that Fox News is in the tank for Romney just look at the picture.

Thanks to Think Progress for detailing the 'myths' of Romney with sourced material.

At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 MinutesBy Igor Volsky on Oct 4, 2012 at 9:08 am 

Pundits from both sides of the aisle have lauded Mitt Romney’s strong debate performance, praising his preparedness and ability to challenge President Obama’s policies and accomplishments. But Romney only accomplished this goal by repeatedly misleading viewers. He spoke for 38 minutes of the 90 minute debate and told at least 27 myths: 

• 1) “[G]et us energy independent, North American energy independent. That creates about 4 million jobs”. Romney’s plan for “energy independence” actually relies heavily on a study that assumes the U.S. continues with fuel efficiency standards set by the Obama administration. For instance, he uses Citigroup research based off the assumption that “‘the United States will continue with strict fuel economy standards that will lower its oil demand.” Since he promises to undo the Obama administration’s new fuel efficiency standards, he would cut oil consumption savings of 2 million barrels per day by 2025.
• 2) “I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.” A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions, would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amount to $5 trillion over the decade.
• 3) “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax corde that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.
• 4) “My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.” As the Tax Policy Center concluded, Romney’s plan can’t both exempt middle class families from tax cuts and remain revenue neutral. “He’s promised all these things and he can’t do them all. In order for him to cover the cost of his tax cut without adding to the deficit, he’d have to find a way to raise taxes on middle income people or people making less than $200,000 a year,” the Center found.
• 5) “I will not under any circumstances raise taxes on middle-income families. I will lower taxes on middle-income families. Now, you cite a study. There are six other studies that looked at the study you describe and say it’s completely wrong.” The studies Romney cites actually further prove that Romney would, in fact, have to raise taxes on the middle class if he were to keep his promise not to lose revenue with his tax rate reduction.
• 6) “I saw a study that came out today that said you’re going to raise taxes by $3,000 to $4,000 on middle-income families.” Romney is pointing to this study from the American Enterprise Institute. It actually found that rather than raise taxes to pay down the debt, the Obama administration’s policies — those contained directly in his budget — would reduce the share of taxes that go toward servicing the debt by $1,289.89 per taxpayer in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.
• 7) “And the reason is because small business pays that individual rate; 54 percent of America’s workers work in businesses that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax rate….97 percent of the businesses are not — not taxed at the 35 percent tax rate, they’re taxed at a lower rate. But those businesses that are in the last 3 percent of businesses happen to employ half — half of all the people who work in small business.” Far less than half of the people affected by the expiration of the upper income tax cuts get any of their income at all from a small businesses. And those people could very well be receiving speaking fees or book royalties, which qualify as “small business income” but don’t have a direct impact on job creation. It’s actually hard to find a small business who think that they will be hurt if the marginal tax rate on income earned above $250,000 per year is increased.
• 8) “Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half.” Oil production from federal lands is higher, not lower: Production from federal lands is up slightly in 2011 when compared to 2007. And the oil and gas industry is sitting on 7,000 approved permits to drill, that it hasn’t begun exploring or developing.
• 9) “The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.” This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.
• 10) “That’s why the National Federation of Independent Businesses said your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don’t want to kill jobs in this environment.” That study, produced by a right-wing advocacy organization, doesn’t analyze what Obama has actually proposed.
• 11) “What we do have right now is a setting where I’d like to bring money from overseas back to this country.” Romney’s plan to shift the country to a territorial tax system would allow corporations to do business and make profits overseas without ever being taxed on it in the United States. This encourages American companies to invest abroad and could cost the country up to 800,000 jobs.
• 12) “I would like to take the Medicaid dollars that go to states and say to a state, you’re going to get what you got last year, plus inflation, plus 1 percent, and then you’re going to manage your care for your poor in the way you think best.” Sending federal Medicaid funding to the states in the form of a block grant woud significantly reduce federal spending for Medicaid because the grant would not keep up with projected health care costs. A CBO estimate of a very similar proposal from Paul Ryan found that federal spending would be “35 percent lower in 2022 and 49 percent lower in 2030 than current projected federal spending” and as a result “states would face significant challenges in achieving sufficient cost savings through efficiencies to mitigate the loss of federal funding.” “To maintain current service levels in the Medicaid program, states would probably need to consider additional changes, such as reducing their spending on other programs or raising additional revenues,” the CBO found.
• 13) “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my opinion, a mistake. There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off $716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.
• 14) “What I support is no change for current retirees and near-retirees to Medicare.” Here is how Romney’s Medicare plan will affect current seniors: 1) by repealing Obamacare, the 16 million seniors receiving preventive benefits without deductibles or co-pays and are saving $3.9 billion on prescription drugs will see a cost increase, 2) “premium support” will increase premiums for existing beneficiaries as private insurers lure healthier seniors out of the traditional Medicare program, 3) Romney/Ryan would also lower Medicaid spending significantly beginning next year, shifting federal spending to states and beneficiaries, and increasing costs for the 9 million Medicare recipients who are dependent on Medicaid.
• 15) “Number two is for people coming along that are young, what I do to make sure that we can keep Medicare in place for them is to allow them either to choose the current Medicare program or a private plan. Their choice. They get to choose — and they’ll have at least two plans that will be entirely at no cost to them.” The Medicare program changes for everyone, even people who choose to remain in the traditional fee-for-service. Rather than relying on a guaranteed benefit, all beneficiaries will receive a premium support credit of $7,500 on average in 2023 to purchase coverage in traditional Medicare or private insurance. But that amount will only grow at a rate of GDP plus 1.5 percentage points and will not keep up with health care costs. So while the federal government will spend less on the program, seniors will pay more in premiums.
• 16) “And, by the way the idea came not even from Paul Ryan or — or Senator Wyden, who’s the co-author of the bill with — with Paul Ryan in the Senate, but also it came from Bill — Bill Clinton’s chief of staff.” Romney has rejected the Ryan/Wyden approach — which does not cap the growth of the “premium support” subsidy. Bill Clinton and his commission also voted down these changes to the Medicare program.
• 17) “Well, I would repeal and replace it. We’re not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.” Romney has previously called for full repeal of Dodd-Frank, a law whose specific purpose is to regulate banks. MF Global’s use of customer funds to pay for its own trading losses is just one bit of proof that the financial industry isn’t responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation.
• 18) “But I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank… We need to get rid of that provision because it’s killing regional and small banks. They’re getting hurt.” The law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations. If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers from having to pony up for a bailout.
• 19) “And, unfortunately, when — when — when you look at Obamacare, the Congressional Budget Office has said it will cost $2,500 a year more than traditional insurance. So it’s adding to cost.” Obamacare will actually provide millions of families with tax credits to make health care more affordable.
• 20) “[I]t puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don’t like that idea.” The Board, or IPAB is tasked with making binding recommendations to Congress for lowering health care spending, should Medicare costs exceed a target growth rate. Congress can accept the savings proposal or implement its own ideas through a super majority. The panel’s plan will modify payments to providers but it cannot “include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums…increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co- payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria” (Section 3403 of the ACA). Relying on health care experts rather than politicians to control health care costs has previously attracted bipartisan support and even Ryan himself proposed two IPAB-like structures in a 2009 health plan.
• 21) “Right now, the CBO says up to 20 million people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes into effect next year. And likewise, a study by McKinsey and Company of American businesses said 30 percent of them are anticipating dropping people from coverage.” The Affordable Care Act would actually expand health care coverage to 30 million Americans, despite Romney fear mongering. According to CBO director Douglas Elmendorf, 3 million or less people would leave employer-sponsored health insurance coverage as a result of the law.
• 22) “I like the way we did it [health care] in Massachusetts…What were some differences? We didn’t raise taxes.” Romney raised fees, but he can claim that he didn’t increase taxes because the federal government funded almost half of his reforms.
• 23) “It’s why Republicans said, do not do this, and the Republicans had — had the plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan, a bipartisan plan. It was swept aside.” The Affordable Care Act incorporates many Republican ideas including the individual mandate, state-based health care exchanges, high-risk insurance pools, and modified provisions that allow insurers to sell policies in multiple states. Republicans never offered a united bipartisan alternative.
• 24) “Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.” Only people who are continuously insured would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.
• 25) “In one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that’s about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives.” The $90 billion was given out over several years and included loans, loan guarantees and grants through the American Recovery Act. $23 billion of the $90 billion “went toward “clean coal,” energy-efficiency upgrades, updating the electricity grid and environmental clean-up, largely for old nuclear weapons sites.”
• 26) “I think about half of [the green firms Obama invested in], of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.” As of late last year, only “three out of the 26 recipients of 1705 loan guarantees have filed for bankruptcy, with losses estimated at just over $600 million.”
• 27) “If the president’s reelected you’ll see dramatic cuts to our military.”Romney is referring to the sequester, which his running mate Paul Ryan supported. Obama opposes the military cuts and has asked Congress to formulate a balanced approach that would avoid the trigger. 

This debate was very poorly handled by the moderator Lehrer but that is what we have come to expect from him after going through the GOP Primary debates where Romney was allowed to be the school yard bully with his aggressive style and interrupting the other candidates.  Kept wondering how many times that Obama counted to 100.  If this debate swayed voters then they will be voting for an accomplished liar in Mitt Romney.  Cannot wait to start seeing ads comparing what Romney said outside the debates with the lies he told in the debates.

This reminded me of 2004 in the Bush/Kerry debates where in the first debate GW was thrown off his game by Kerry who lied, flip flopped, and became aggressive.  What is it with MA candidates and their flip flopping and lying.  Moderator didn't do much then either.  In last night's debate there were a total lack of questions and the debate format left Romney free to bully and bluster out as many words as possible like he knew what was coming but then Lehrer has never my favorite moderator.  He lets debates get out of hand and in this instance as usual favored the challenger.  He should be retired along with the group who sets up these debates when they leave out other candidates like Former NM Governor Gary Jones and Former Rep Virgil Goode both running from recognize parties.  This type of debate was going to favor the challenger as he had over 20 debates in the last year while Obama has been doing his job as President.

One thing I have learned from this election and posting on various sites is that most people from the left are nicer to all posters versus the nastiness of the right with attacks on anyone who disagrees with them.  Some of the most vile posters are from the Romney camp who reflect that hate attitude which permeates the GOP today.  Now the RNC is out with their lies saying that Obama had the smirk but it was Romney with the big smirk not Obama.  For years I have fought the Democrats when they say Republicans lie all the time but I am beginning to rethink after this campaign and the lies we are seeing from Republicans.

My bottom line is when you have to win by lying, it is no win at all!  How many people want an aggressive liar with a smirk dealing with foreign leaders?  Not me -- I will take the calm, cool, collected Obama to represent the United States around the world.

Tonight's Presidential Debate Fact Checkers

Was looking for what organizations were going to Fact Check the debate tonight and found this video from the Obama campaign:

In addition to the Obama campaign's Fact Checking, found these sources who will be Fact Checking:

• NPR

• NY Times

• Politico

• Washington Post

• The Hill

• CJR  (Columbia Journalism Review)

• Free Press

There must be more Fact Checkers but these are the ones who show up on search.  Looks like the Obama campaign has taken a page from the George W Bush campaign as they are going to be Fact Checking during the debates like the Bush 43 campaign did in 2004.  Amazing how hard right the GOP has become from the days of Bush 43 only four years ago.  Now some of the hard right candidates want to go back in time on issues of gender and race before the Voting Rights, Civil Rights, and Equal Pay Laws were passed along with the Roe v Wade SCOTUS Ruling.  In less than four years the Republican Party which had been growing as the center right party has lost 5% in the last month of Republicans who will admit they are Republicans to pollsters.  This GOP no longer believes in Fact Check for Republican candidates as they have stated many times.    

Now in 2012, only eight years from when GW Bush ran his last campaign, we have another Massachusetts flip flopper like in 2004 but this time it a Republican Mitt Romney who has taken flip flopping and outright lies to a new low level.  We had vote fraud with ACORN in 2004, but now we have it with Republicans along with voter suppression which is out in the open by some of the Republican controlled State Legislatures and Governors in 2012.  It seems when the GOP went hard right starting right after the 2008 election, it also threw away honesty and integrity along with fact checking.  Today it is only the narrative that counts for Republicans who have put Party over Country.

The contrast between the Obama and Romney campaigns couldn't be more clear in 2012.  Believe you will see the results tonight in the debates. Obama has a well run, well oiled machine with great spokespeople who are not running out correcting what he said like the Romney camp has been doing.  There is so little class out of the Romney campaign that I have a hard time believing it is a Presidential campaign.  You know you are in trouble when you send Sununu out to speak for your candidate Romney and make him your Co-Chair for your campaign when he was fired by the Bush 41 Administration by his son George W. Bush.  I was so happy when he was jettisoned by Bush 41 because I thought he was a poor reflection of GHW Bush and his White House team.  Today you have Stephanie Cutter speaking for the Obama campaign who is very articulate and to the point using facts and you have John Sununu, former NH Governor, representing Romney inferring that Obama is not an American and doesn't know how America works. 

One very good reason not to vote for Romney would be to keep John Sununu away from the White House and in New Hampshire.  Maybe this is one reason so many Republicans especially Bush supporters doubt Romney's judgement with the people he has brought on board starting with John Sununu.   Just say NO to Romney and Sununu on November 6th, 2012!

Ralph Reed's Conservative Group Claims Obama Has ‘Communist Beliefs,’ Compares His Policies To Hitler’s

Every time I think that Republicans cannot stoop any lower, along comes Ralph Reed and his 'survey' which should be roundly condemned but he is a 'friend' of Mitt so most Republicans are sticking their heads in the sand once again.

Every day the hard right is making it much harder for those of us center right to remain Republicans.  Count this as another one of those check marks.  Read this survey and ask yourself how any Christian could possibly put out this trash but this is Ralph Reed who is tied to the Abramoff scandal.

Usually not at a loss for words but trying to find the words that register my utter disgust toward Ralph Red and his group are hard to find.

Conservative Group Claims Obama Has ‘Communist Beliefs,’ Compares His Policies To Hitler’s

By Annie-Rose Strasser posted from ThinkProgress Election on Sep 25, 2012 at 9:09 am 

Romney and Reed 

A conservative religious group is sending its members a ‘survey’ that compares President Obama’s policies to those of Nazi Germany, and asserts that the President has “communist beliefs.” 

The mailer, a product of the Faith and Freedom coalition, is titled the “Voter Registration Confirmation Survey.” But its questions have little to do with registering to vote. Rather, the survey asks a host of leading inquries into how its members view the President’s record.
The options prompt the most extreme answers — with very few moderate or supportive possibilities: 

As Mother Jones, who obtained the survey, points out, the Faith and Freedom coalition and particularly its head Ralph Reed are leading the effort to turn out Evangelical voters for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. The group plans to spend over $10 million for this purpose.

Romney has praised Reed for his turnout efforts, saying, “Ralph Reed is doing a great job here with the Faith & Freedom Coalition. This is going to make a big impact across America and I appreciate the work you are doing here.” The Presidential candidate even gave Reed the ultimate honor of sharing a hotel with him during the convention. 

You can view the full survey here.

Paul Ryan Booed Throughout AARP Speech; Obama Received Friendlier Reception

Have to give credit to former Senator Santorum who thinks that if you are smart, you won't be a conservative.  After Ryan's speech at the AARP and Romney 47% comments for starters, I have to agree with that statement.  Also, how many common sense people get a fake spray tan like Romney to speak to Univision?  Heard of pandering but that was so far over the top, it was laughable.  Every time he turned his head you can see where the spray tan only went so far.

Waited to post this until the Obama speech was up on You Tube where he took questions and laid out how Romney/Ryan were lying about Obama taking money from Medicare when he was getting savings due to more efficient system and catching the Medicare fraud.  Right now there is a partial video.

Cannot believe what Ryan had to say at the AARP that drew the boos.  Did he do it on purpose like Romney did at the VFW so he could shore up the base who opposes AARP?  Most divisive duo ever to run for President/Vice President IMHO!  Their lack of caring about ordinary Americans has been duly noted by the American Middle Class.

TPM2012 

Paul Ryan Booed Throughout AARP Speech (VIDEO) 

Paul Ryan’s speech to AARP’s national conference in New Orleans did not go over too well with the audience. 

The Republican vice presidential nominee, who has led his party in proposing a privatization plan for Medicare, drew repeated jeers and catcalls as he made the case for Mitt Romney’s platform on entitlements. 

Easily the worst moments came as Ryan discussed repealing the Affordable Care Act, which increased prescription drug and preventive service benefits for seniors. 

“The first step to a stronger Medicare is to repeal ‘Obamacare,’” Ryan said, prompting a chorus of boos. After the outcry, he said: “I had a feeling there would be mixed reaction, so let me get into it.” 

He drew a second wave of disapproval for saying the president’s law “turned Medicare into a piggy bank for ‘Obamacare.’” Ryan was referring to $716 billion in Medicare savings enacted by the ACA — savings he himself has included in two budgets — that largely came out of payments to insurance providers. 

Another tough response from the crowd came as Ryan attacked Obama as a cynical failure for not negotiating changes to Social Security cuts with Republicans. 

“Time and again the president has ducked the tough issues,” Ryan said. “He put his own job security over your retirement security. Of course he said he would be willing to work with Republicans, but he has not moved an inch closer to common ground. When it comes to bipartisanship, it’s easy to talk the talk but there is only one man running for president this year who has actually walked the walk: that man is Mitt Romney.” 

This is the partial video/audio from You Tube of President Obama's speech this morning. Full speech will be updated when available:


Additional Comments from TPM article:

President Obama drew a friendlier audience earlier in the day when he spoke to the group via satellite. Appearing to reference Romney’s “47 percent” video, in which the Republican condemned Americans as “victims” who were “dependent” on government health care, food and housing, Obama defended entitlements for seniors. 

“Given the conversations that have been out there in the political arena lately, I want to emphasize: Medicare and Social Security are not handouts,” Obama said. “You’ve paid into these programs your whole lives. You’ve earned them.” 

While Ryan’s reception was overwhelmingly negative, he had a few bright spots that earned applause, for example when he discussed how his Medicare plan would provide more generous subsidies for lower-income seniors to buy private insurance plans. He also got some cheers — after attacking Obama for most of his speech — for pledging bipartisan compromise if he and Romney are elected. 

“Our plan is to win this election, be magnanimous and work with those Democrats who want to work with us to save this critical program,” he said, adding that Republicans should not “demagogue” the other side. 

0
inShare

shareclose

StumbleUpon

Instapaper

Reddit

digg

Romney Uses Middle East Crises for Political Gain - Epic Failure

Romney while trying to look Presidential instead looks like a political opportunist who does not have the best interest of the United States at heart as only his own personal aspirations count.

Where did Romney learn about the American Embassy Memo release about the video and the fact that it could set off riots?  It is alleged he worked on the press release for several hours, they embargoed the release, and it came out right after the State Department had learned at least one person had been killed.  Did he get the information from the intelligence briefing that is given to official candidates?  If it was, then Romney should only receive an overview of a national security briefing in the future.  The Romney news conference was a sham and absolutely disgusting since it happened before the President spoke to the American people.  Romney and the RNC Chair comments both were wrong about Lybya and are an embarrassment.  

Romney just accused Obama of not being truthful when Romney is the one who lies all the time.  How can he even say such a thing?  We all know Romney lies and doesn't believe in fact checking -- that is a fact.  Looks like Republicans are tanking for a reason with a candidate with zero integrity and empathy.  All Romney/Ryan are doing right now is pure politics when we have an ongoing foreign crises.  Neither one deserves to be near the White House.  

As a Republican I find Romney/Ryan and their comments this week reprehensible along with Republicans like Portman and RNC Chair Priebus who defended his comments without the facts.  When Portman admitted he didn't know about the memo from the American Embassy in Cairo when questioned by Norah O'Donnell he continued defending Romney anyway.  Says all you need to know.  Romney surrogates are saying what they are told to say and in the process are losing any ounce of integrity they have gained over the years. (Note:  I don't normally use the Daily KOS as a source but since I saw this interview myself and their comments said what I saw I am using them.  Conservative sites are lying or I didn't see and hear what I saw and heard.)

Most of the diplomatic corp is made up of non-partisan foreign service officers who work for Administrations of both parties and stay on the job even when there is a change at the Ambassador level.  Here is what a Foreign Service Officer has to say about the thought of a Romney becoming President:

09.14.2012 — 09:33 AMA Foreign Service Officer’s LamentFrom a Foreign Service Officer  

It’s probably not a surprise. But can I just say that if Mitt Romney wins in November, he is going to have a very chilly reception from his employees every time he goes abroad? I don’t think I can quite state the rage we’re all feeling towards him.

Josh Marshall 

Today Romney finally got around to condemning the anti-Muslim film or as Josh Marshall put it Apologizing to the Muslim Rioters which is what he accused President Obama of doing:

09.14.2012 — 11:20 AM

BREAKING: Romney Apologizes to Muslim Rioters 

AKA, condemns the anti-Muslim film now roiling the Middle East, like the White House and State Department did. 

Josh Marshall

Finally someone took on Sean Hannity who thinks he is a foreign policy expert -- he couldn't even carry McCain's briefcase IMHO.  Hannity, Rush, Levin and others should have used some common sense and lowered the rhetoric in the middle of an ongoing crises in the Middle East but they piled on the President treating him like he had no policy.  The one without a policy is their candidate Romney.  Finding the conservative media for the most part disgusting, unethical, and refuse to acknowledge the truth just like Hannity did with Senator McCain:

McCain to Hannity: Fox 'wrong about Libya'
By MACKENZIE WEINGER |
9/14/12 3:23 PM EDT 

Sen. John McCain on Thursday night clashed with Sean Hannity, telling the Fox News host that he and others on the network “were wrong about Libya.” 

McCain's remarks came after Hannity claimed he had accurately predicted that the Muslim Brotherhood would take control of Egypt, and pressed the Arizona Republican on why the Obama administration was not able to foresee this week's attacks on U.S. diplomats in North Africa. 

“How is it that Sean Hannity and a few others of us out here predicted with pinpoint accuracy that the Muslim Brotherhood would be in charge in Egypt? Their first task when they took over the Parliament was to declare Israel, our closest ally, an enemy. First, their number one enemy,” Hannity said. “How is it that the administration with all their intelligence and all the money we spend to help them and the CIA — how is it that they didn’t see this coming? And they kept telling the American people, this is democracy. Democracy. I don’t view the Muslim Brotherhood as democracy. They want Sharia law implemented now in Egypt.” 

McCain pushed back, telling Hannity that “that’s not clear that that’s true” and that he and Fox News were wrong with their take on the elections in Libya. 

“But also it was you and people on Fox that said in Libya, ‘we didn’t know who they were and let’s not help these people.’ They had an election and they elected moderates. They rejected Islamists,” McCain said. “And yes, there are Al Qaeda factors and there are extremists in Libya today, but the Libyan people are friends of ours, and they support us, and they support democracy. So you were wrong about Libya.” 

“I don’t think I was wrong about Libya at all,” Hannity replied. 

McCain jumped in, telling Hannity, “Yes I do, I know you were.” 

“No, I was not,” the Fox News host said. 

“I know you were. They had a free and fair election, and a democratic non-Islamic government was elected. So you were wrong,” McCain said. 

Hannity then said he was surprised McCain wasn’t siding with him. 

“They didn’t think the Muslim Brotherhood would take over? This is a known terror organization. We say we’re fighting a war on terror, we’re apologizing, our government, to Egypt after they raid our embassy and rip our flag down?” Hannity said. “Frankly, Senator, I would think you are with me on this.” 

The interview wrapped after McCain replied, “I am not taking the side of the administration. I am saying that the largest nation in the Arab world is something we have to carefully calibrate our actions with.” 

Source:  Politico

The arrogance of Hannity that McCain should agree with him is more then disgusting, it is despicable.  Then you have Sarah Palin accusing the President of palling around with terrorists who made a fool of herself last night attacking President Obama.  Why is Fox News even interviewing Palin?  Her comments are always strange and show a lack of comprehension about the issues.

Then we have this article which words fail me that this man is involved in a Presidential campaign and is someone who Romney relies on -- these words by and adviser are beyond reprehensible.  Mitt Romney is despicable to keep people like this on his staff.  It shows Romney has no integrity at all left as he panders to the Tea Party and far right fringe by keeping someone like this on his staff:

Top Romney Adviser Faults Obama For Murder Of U.S. Ambassador, Claims Romney Would Have Prevented AttackBy Judd Legum on Sep 13, 2012 at 11:30 pm 

The Romney campaign has escalated their attacks on President Obama following the murder of four Americans, including the ambassador, in Libya. In an interview with the Washington Post, Mitt Romney’s top foreign policy adviser pinned the blame for the attacks squarely on Obama and flatly claimed they would not have happened if Romney had been president:
Advisers to Mitt Romney on Thursday defended his sharp criticism of President Obama and said that the deadly protests sweeping the Middle East would not have happened if the Republican nominee were president. 

“There’s a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you’d be in a different situation,” Richard Williamson, a top Romney foreign policy adviser, said in an interview. “For the first time since Jimmy Carter, we’ve had an American ambassador assassinated.”

Previously, Romney, his campaign and the Republican Party accused Obama of “sympathizing” with the terrorists who killed Americans in the hours after the attack. The accusation quickly recieved widespread, bipartisan condemnation. Romney then repeated the charge.  

Source:  Think Progress

Mitt Romney has no core so he has adopted the core of the Tea Party and far right fringe it seems by following the "Southern strategy" which he seems to be doing to get elected:

In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the Republican Party strategy of winning elections or to gain political support in the Southern section of the country by appealing to racism against African Americans

This Romney/Tea Party Republican Party is going to lose a lot of Republicans with this Southern strategy which has moved into the north with voter suppression.  When Republicans take their blinders off and see them for what they are -- a group of bigoted people, they are going to vote against this group.  I didn't like Palin in 2008 when she ran with McCain -- thought her comments were over the top time and time again.  I voted for McCain not Palin.

I am so happy I took my blinders completely off this time.  Thanks to Mitt Romney I am seeing today's Republican Party for what it is -- no core, no ethics, and bigoted.  Senator McCain called out the fringe elements in 2008 while Romney embraces them in 2012.

Ron Reagan said it best:  Romney does not look Presidential -- he has a lack of character and judgement!