Wednesday, 3/7/12, Public Square

About these ads

54 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

54 responses to “Wednesday, 3/7/12, Public Square

    • prairie pond

      Thanks for posting this, fnord. It goes hand in hand with the one about presidents and the size of the deficit that you posted earlier.

      Facts. They just phuck things up for the repukes, no? I guess that is why they are so adept at ignoring them!

  1. Well … Super Tuesday didn’t answer many questions. Republicans still don’t like any candidate well enough to coalesce behind him. So on it goes — maybe all the way to their convention at the end of August! :-)

    Romney is piling up the delegates without winning. All the problems counting, and the states and parts of states some candidates didn’t qualify to be on the ballot makes this ‘process’ … interesting.

    The republican candidates get lots of air time and voters have lots of opportunities to get to know them. Well, except for Ron Paul who mostly gets ignored. How many people like what they’re learning? Do you think these candidates are impressing the swing voters?

  2. prairie pond

    In regards to today’s graphic header…

    I know what I’d like to do to all the repukes with the pointy thingy, the arrow, from the male Mars symbol. You all know where it would fit nicely.

  3. In 2008 it was the first week of June before Hillary Clinton conceded to Barack Obama. I remember that as a gut-wrenching, exciting time, a bit nerve wracking. I remember heated discussions (arguments?) between democrats about which candidate would / should be nominated. I also remember the taunts from the republicans about the Democratic Party not being able to decide. They made it a negative back then, but now that it’s their turn it’s the way it’s supposed to be. :-) Of course at that time I was blogging at a different place and anything and everything brought personal attacks — every single post. And it wasn’t what I said that was attacked, it was me personally.

    We’ll never know what would have been different under a President Clinton. It’s difficult for any president to navigate these partisan divisions, and presidents don’t get their agendas enacted magically. Mrs. Clinton is a strong advocate of women and recently I’ve wondered if we would be seeing this War on Women and how it might be different if it were happening. It would be the same republican congress critters at both the national and state levels, they would be no less than the religious zealots they are so I imagine they would be introducing the same bills. They are one-issue ideologues who seem convinced morality can be legislated, shoving their religion down our throats will make everything better. I don’t know how they ignore the reality that abortions (without restrictions!) have always happened and making them illegal wouldn’t change that. I don’t have any clue into their lack of thinking when it comes to homosexuality. Again, laws won’t make it go away. I gave up trying to make sense of that kind of ?thinking? when I saw how far they’ll go to save blastocysts from research (so they can be destroyed out back in the incinerator). I know there is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

    Another thing I’ve been pondering is that I don’t think there would be a tremendous difference between a President Obama and a President Romney. When you ignore all the promises Romney makes that he can’t deliver on, and note other statements he is making that he won’t even attempt if elected because what he says is pandering for votes, you get down to a bunch of similarities.

    This blog opened March 21, 2009. We’ve come a long way! It’s a pleasure to meet my blogging friends here to toss around our thoughts and questions! :-)

    • If Hillary was President at this moment, the Rs would be making her the main target. No question about it. And they’d get away with it!

  4. prairie pond

    Fnord, you mentioned yesterday that the mittster has no foreign policy experience. Nay, I say, nay!

    He was a mormon missionary in France for 30 months. Now THAT is some foreign policy experience, according to his church and the repukes. That mission stay also allowed him to defer his draft eligibility during the Vietnam era. When he became eligible for the draft, again, he drew a really high number, ensuring he would never serve. Lucky sumbiotch once again. First he won the parent lottery, then he won the military draft lottery.

    I could use some of that luck!

    • There is no one eligible to be president who has the experience Barack Obama does. He’s learned a lot, some of that through poor decisions that led to better decisions. The pressures and the consequences of the decisions he’s faced probably can only be learned the hardest way. He certainly takes a serious measured look at our world and our relationships with other countries. When I hear anyone criticizing his foreign policy decisions and successes I just quit listening because they prove they don’t have even a single brain cell free of hatred for the man who is Commander in Chief.

      And, very important too is the fact that President Obama has Secretary of State Clinton which is a HUGE plus!

  5. prairie pond

    Yeah, not much difference between Barack and mitt, except the people they would appoint to fill vacant SCOTUS seats. THAT may be the final difference.

    And in other news from yesterday, in case you haven’t already heard, Dennis Kucinich lost in the Democratic primary to Marcy Kaptur. Hell, I didn’t even know he was in a race, and I pay attention to these things. Guess that one slipped by me and I wonder how many other people didn’t notice. isad.

    But the good news is that Mean Jean Schmidt lost her seat as well. The bad news is that she lost to a challenger from THE RIGHT!! WTF? How to do you get to the right of Mean Jean? She lost to a teabagger, and no democrat is expected to ever win that district. So we lost the wicked witch, but she was replaced by someone even worse?

    Jesus wept.

  6. If anyone finds the numbers on turn-outs at yesterday’s contests, or break downs on who voted for whom (I’m most especially interested in the womens votes), please direct me there. I want to see inside the numbers.

  7. prairie pond

    Jeebus, when rush makes John Deere double down on NOT advertising on his show, you know he’s in trouble!

    WTF? Does John Deere think they will lose farmer support by advertising on rush’s “show?” Now THAT is trouble! I first heard about rush from farmer buddies who listened to him on their tractor radios.

    If rush isn’t supported by those rednecks, well, I guess I’m speechless. Anyway, GO JOHN DEERE!

    http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/06/438817/four-more-advertisers-ditching-rush-limbaugh/

    • Capital One pulled their advertising.

    • I read a tweet that made me laugh –

      Writer Bilal Dardai tweeted, “If ‘slut’ ends up being what brings down Rush, it’s a bit like getting Capone on tax evasion. I’ll take it, but so many crimes unanswered.”

  8. I just saw that in Ohio republican women favored Mitten$ over Santorum 53 to 27 percent. This is republican women who aren’t buying Santorum’s warped ideas. :-)

    • prairie pond

      I also noted in Ohio, catholics supported… wait for it…. ROMNEY!

      Yep.

      According to Nate Silverman, this trend of catholics not supporting ricky was evident in Michigan, but it was even more pronounced in Ohio because, believe it or not, there are more catholic voters in Ohio than Michigan.

  9. As long as Romney and Santorum continue to beat the drums of war it won’t even matter if they stop talking about women’s health issues, because women think about having to send their children to war. And if they don’t beat those war drums what do republican men have to say? Then consider the moderates and independents who know the costs of war, who know we’ll be paying for Iraq and Afghanistan for many years to come and aren’t going to vote for war mongers. If the economy is an issue a voter worries about war mongers aren’t going to get votes. No person who values our troops will vote for them either.

    As long as all across the country at both the state and federal levels the republican zealots are working overtime on introducing bills that restrict women’s rights, and the republicans beat their drums of war they look like fools and they don’t attract votes to their party’s candidates.

    The republicans have put themselves between a rock and a hard place.

  10. prairie pond

    “And if they don’t beat those war drums what do republican men have to say?”

    Drill baby drill?
    Teh gays are coming to take your marriage?
    Obama will take your guns?
    Christianity is being persecuted?

    Hey, you just asked what they have to say, not what do they have to say that makes sense!

  11. The republicans support the BIG business of the war machine, and all the money that can be made by their ‘sponsors.’ To hell with America’s economy, to hell with other people’s kids is what I hear when they beat their drums of war.

  12. Is Boehner still working on a Blunt Amendment for consideration in the House? We need to watch this debate like we watched the debate of the same subject on the Senate floor.

    After it failed in the Senate Boehner vowed to get it passed in the House. It seems to be working well with both women and Catholics — this republican initiative to make sure private insurance people pay for with their own money doesn’t cover contraceptives.

  13. I’m still thinking about whether I will participate in this Saturday’s republican caucus. I think Santorum will win Kansas. I’m positive whoever becomes the republican candidate will get all six electoral votes this November. It seems kinda pointless and a waste of my time.

    • I just receied a phone call (513 area code) and it was a live person this time asking me if they can count on me to vote for Santorum.

      I replied OH Hell No and this guy stammered around and then said – okay and hung up.
      Did not even give me chance to tell him why – I should have started with – will Santorum stop his war on women? – and then tell him OH HELL NO….

      • Oh, I hope they call me! Now that I’ve been warned I can engage in conversation. I would have answered just like you did without the warning!

  14. Not sure whether to simply pack my bags and get the hell out of the U.S. or to LMFAO over this one.

    Eric Bolling: Obama Got Sandra Fluke To ‘Create A Controversy’

    Just how long did it take this (expletive) to think this one up?
    President Obama and his “allies in the press” were “trying to pull a fast one on you,” he said. Calling Fluke a “foot soldier” for the White House, he added, “President Obama, on the ropes with the economy and specifically with women voters, gets Mrs. Fluke to create a controversy, and the liberal media puppets play along as scripted.”

    O M G

  15. Seems Santorum continues to appeal to a voting bloc that he has already won over: Obama-hating, evangelical, and/or hard-right Tea Party types. Sounds like Kansas republicans, doesn’t it?

    Santorum won “very conservative” voters, which is how these gentlemen describe themselves, by 18 percentage points, but lost “somewhat conservative” and “moderate or liberal” voters—both larger groups—by 6 points and 14 points, respectively. In a head-to-head matchup with Romney, Santorum will win the right wingers every time. What he needs—what would boost his vote totals beyond the 37 percent he won in Ohio or the 38 percent he won in Michigan—is more support among voters who say the economy is their biggest concern.

    I don’t think he can help himself. His warped version of Christianity is who he is. He can’t avoid it.

    Then there’s Mitten$ who has been running for president for how many years, and can’t even beat Santorum.

    ‘Conservatives’ don’t like Romney and no one but ‘conservatives’ like Santorum.
    :-)

  16. prairie pond

    I heard someone today say the GOP is now the ARP.

    American Religious Party.

    God save the queen!

    • If there is anyone in their party still capable of acknowledging facts and they are disappointed in the lack of women supporting republicans, I suggest they don’t look at the lack of support from Latino voters. That might send them off the edge as it’s more dismal than the figures on women voters.

  17. About that American Religious Party. If Santorum gets the nod those religious righties can’t scream about the republican candidate not being far enough right. So it would be a contest where their ideas were well represented. In that scenario, when Santorum lost what would they use as their excuse?

    I’ll start with blaming the media. You know that’s gonna happen.

    What else will they say is the reason? You know it won’t be because they faced the truth that the majority of Americans, even those of great religious faith, know a Theocracy is not in our country’s best interests.

  18. There isn’t any War on Women

    sarcasm off

  19. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa — the chairman of the 2012 Democratic National Convention — said on Wednesday that he favors a gay marriage legalization plank in his party’s platform. Villaraigosa publicly announced he backs the national party taking a stance on marriage equality.

    “I do, I think it’s basic to who we are,” Villaraigosa said. “I believe in family values and I believe that we all ought to be able to have a family and marry if you want to. I don’t think the government should be in that business of denying people the fundamental right to marry.”

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73729.html#ixzz1oSMKyvuK

  20. R.D. Liebst

    It is all reminding me of the line from Abott and Castello LOL which of course a lot does remind me of it:

    Abott :::”How stupid are you?”
    Castello::: ” How stupid do you want me to be?”.

    • R.D. Liebst

      ad feedback

      Bud Abbott aka Peter Patterson: How stupid can you get?
      Lou Costello aka Freddie Franklin: How stupid do you want me to be?

  21. From everything I can find it seems most of the republican primaries and caucuses held this election cycle have seen lower turnouts. The republicans simply aren’t excited about the candidates.

    However, everyone says that will be different in November. No problem, they say! It just doesn’t matter who the republican candidate is they will vote for him this fall because it’s all about getting rid of Obama.

    I believe them — every hard-core republican will be more motivated to vote this November than they are now.

    But they don’t have the votes to win at the national level.

    Shouldn’t they be a teeny tiny bit concerned about the lack of excitement for their candidate? Do they not realize that if their candidate doesn’t excite them he probably won’t excite independents either?

    • R.D. Liebst

      that is so true, this crop is so lacking and seems to be seond and even forth class choices that it is not just the field but the voters that are divided into their own groups. I think there would be such a hard time getting the differing voters to vote for a candidate other then their own. There is only so far that blind partisan would go. I know I could never vote for someone like Newt his is so out of uniform outside of the one I can picture him in a S.S. uniform from WWII.

    • The most telling thing is this year’s numbers are being compared to the turnouts in 2008. In 2008, McCain was announced as the republican candidate on March 4th. So even after the candidate was chosen they had greater turnouts.

      wiki:
      On March 4, 2008, John McCain became the Republican presumptive presidential nominee when he obtained the 1,191 delegates necessary to receive the party’s nomination.[2] Mike Huckabee announced his withdrawal from the race later in the evening.[3] McCain’s last remaining competitor in the race, Ron Paul, withdrew on June 12, 2008.[4]

      Think about it.

  22. R.D. Liebst

    Rush is so lack luster about this crop that he has ran out out of viarga!

  23. Goldman Sachs is one of the U.S.’s most profitable companies, making, in the last three years, profits of $13.9 billion, $8.5 billion, and $4.4 billion, even as the country grappled with the effects of the Great Recession. But despite these sky-high profits, the state of Utah is still seeing fit to give the mega-bank tens of millions of dollars to create jobs.

    Goldman will receive an estimated $47.3 million from Utah over a 20-year period in the form of a 30 percent tax rebate, according to Governor’s Office of Economic Development.

    In exchange, the bank agreed to maintain at least 1,065 employees in Salt Lake City and pay them at least 150 percent of the average local county salary.

    State legislatures can’t seem to help themselves when it comes to doling out tax breaks in order to create or preserve jobs, but the history of such policy should act as a warning. For instance, Illinois doled out millions in subsidies to Sears, only to have the retailer layoff 100 workers last month. Boeing not only received a slew of tax credits from Wichita, Kansas, but had Kansas lawmakers lobby for it to receive billions in federal contracts: the company will leave Wichita at the end of 2013, costing thousands of jobs.

    And the list goes on and on.

    continue –

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/03/07/440219/utah-goldman-sachs-millions/

  24. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has decided that there’s not much percentage in attempting to continue a futile effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He might not have much going for him in the way of principles, but he is smart enough politically to understand that voters in 2012 are much more concerned about the economy.

    Unfortunately for McConnell, some big spenders on the Right don’t want to let that happen.

    One group, the Restore America’s Voice Foundation, plans to spend $50,000 to $100,000 per week on television ads pressing Senate Republicans to force a vote on repeal. [...]

    “For Republicans to be too timid to force repeated votes on repealing ObamaCare is political malpractice,” said Brian Darling, senior fellow for government studies at the Heritage Foundation. [...]

    Other groups that want Senate votes on full repeal include the Club for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform.

    “We should have a vote on repealing ObamaCare every week,” said Andrew Roth, vice president of government affairs at the Club for Growth.

    Back on planet earth, the most recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll [pdf] actually found that repeal really isn’t so popular after all. Fifty-four percent of respondents either want to keep the law as is (19 percent) or expand it (35 percent), while 18 percent say replace it with the as-of-yet nonexistent Republican replacement and 19 percent say repeal it. Republican math doesn’t really work like everyone else’s, but 19 percent does not make a majority.

    McConnell is smart enough to read the polls, though his caucus might not be. He’s going to continue to get a lot of pressure from these outside extremist groups, and from the fringe in his own caucus. He’ll likely bow to the pressure and keep on having disastrous votes like the Blunt amendment, already giving “moderate” Republicans heartburn. Good.