PoliticsView from the Center and Left

Previous 10 Next 10 
From: Dale Baker2/25/2012 7:41:19 PM
of 374600
Steven Rattner, the lead adviser on the Obama administration’s auto task force in 2009, smacked (Romney) down in a New York Times Op-Ed article for suggesting that the government “should have stayed on the sidelines” and allowed the companies to go through “ ‘managed bankruptcies’ financed by private capital.” As Rattner put it:

“That sounds like a wonderfully sensible approach — except that it’s utter fantasy. In late 2008 and early 2009, when G.M. and Chrysler had exhausted their liquidity, every scrap of private capital had fled to the sidelines. I know this because the administration’s auto task force, for which I was the lead adviser, spoke diligently to all conceivable providers of funds, and not one had the slightest interest in financing those companies on any terms. If Mr. Romney disagrees, he should come forward with specific names of willing investors in place of empty rhetoric. I predict that he won’t be able to, because there aren’t any.”

More of that delusional lying bullshit problem that seems to plague Romney's every statement.

Share KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (183687)2/25/2012 7:45:34 PM
From: Dale Baker
of 374600
Prolonged Race Forces Romney Campaign to Recalibrate

TROY, Mich. — Whether Mitt Romney wins or loses the Michigan and Arizona primaries on Tuesday, his advisers are warning donors and other supporters to prepare for a longer, more bruising and more expensive fight for the Republican presidential nomination that may not be settled until at least May.

That campaign trail reality is prompting a new round of intensified fund-raising by his financial team, which had hoped by this point to be collecting money for a general election match with President Obama. The campaign is increasingly trying to quell anxiety among Republican leaders, while intently focusing on the mechanics of accumulating delegates needed to secure the nomination.

Mr. Romney’s aides said they were confident that their sustained attacks portraying Rick Santorum as a Washington insider, and Mr. Santorum’s shaky debate performance in Arizona on Wednesday, had slowed their rival’s recent surge here in Michigan.

But Mr. Romney is by no means in the clear, they said, as he fights to avert a loss in the state where he was born and raised — and where less than three weeks ago he was expected to win handily, before Mr. Santorum’s surprise triumphs in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri.

On Saturday, both candidates made appeals to conservatives who were here for a gathering of the group Americans for Prosperity. Mr. Santorum, who was received with booming applause, lit into Mr. Romney, calling him a politically pliable elitist whose Massachusetts health care plan and selective support for bailouts — for Wall Street’s, against the auto industry’s — disqualified him to be the party’s standard-bearer against Mr. Obama.

“What you have with me is ‘what you see is what you get,’ ” Mr. Santorum said, “as opposed to ‘what you see today may be something different than what you get tomorrow.’ ”

Mr. Santorum is likewise preparing to fight on for weeks or months, enticed by new party rules that award delegates in early primaries and caucuses based on each candidate’s share of the votes. “The race is going to go a long time,” he said as he left the stage, promising to “fight fire with fire.”

At the same event, Mr. Romney answered with sharp criticism of Mr. Santorum’s support for earmarks and for former Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, a defender of abortion rights, and his statement at Wednesday’s debate that at times he had to “take one for the team” by voting, out of party loyalty, for provisions he did not agree with.

“This taking one for the team, that’s business as usual in Washington,” Mr. Romney said. “We have to have principled, conservative leadership, and I have demonstrated that through my life.”

The party’s new delegate system is a major contributor to the prolonged nature of the contest, along with the advent of supportive and well-financed “super PACs” that have helped Mr. Romney’s competitors stay in the delegate hunt when their candidacies might otherwise have withered without enough cash.

Still, for many Republicans, the question is not just whether Mr. Romney will eventually capture the nomination, but at what cost.

There is a growing sense among party leaders that the primary fight has gone on long enough and that continued attacks by the candidates and their allies have steered the conversation away from the economy and could damage the party’s prospects in the fall. But several Republicans said a diversion to social issues threatened to turn off independent voters, who will be needed to form a winning coalition in the fall.

“The general election prospects for Republicans certainly would be better served if more focus was spent on Obama’s policies and the failures of those policies,” said Haley Barbour, a former governor of Mississippi and longtime party leader. “There’s still time for that, but would it improve our prospects greatly.”

The acknowledgment that the intraparty competition will most likely continue into the spring would seem to sweep aside the Romney campaign’s hope that it could string together a series of early victories sufficient to claim the nominee’s mantle — symbolically, at least — and begin focusing exclusively on Mr. Obama.

As it happened, Mr. Romney’s victories have come in fits and starts amid intensely negative attacks from all sides, leaving the party facing chatter about a contested convention in Tampa, Fla., if none of the candidates have won the 1,144 delegates needed.

In interviews, Mr. Romney’s aides and supporters dismissed that notion, and said their campaign was built to be ready to go the distance if necessary.

“We’re just going to have to work a little harder, and this team will do it,” said Mel Sembler, a member of Mr. Romney’s finance team, adding it would be “ready to supply whatever he needs to win this primary” campaign.

“We’re all on the telephone again,” he said, “and we’re getting it done. It’s just going to take longer.”

Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana said Saturday that the Republican race would almost certainly not be settled by May 8, the date of the primary in his state. He said that he did not believe any new candidates would enter the race — he unequivocally declared he would not — and that the burden was on the current field to make its case to voters.

“The only problem that I would worry about, and have all along,” Mr. Daniels said, “is our side might not offer a bold enough and specific enough and constructive enough — and I would say inclusive enough — alternative.”

The Republican presidential race was a central topic as governors gathered in Washington for their annual meeting. The intense negativity in the campaign alarmed many of them.

Gov. Paul R. LePage of Maine, a Republican, said the candidates had “injured themselves and injured the party by not following what Ronald Reagan said: Never speak badly of another Republican.” He said delegates to the Republican National Convention should “pick a fresh face,” someone not in the race now.

Reflecting the unsettled outlook, aides to both Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum are playing down the importance of the Michigan and Arizona primaries. Those contests are preludes to the biggest day of voting in the Republican campaign on March 6, with 10 states and 437 delegates at play on Super Tuesday.

That terrain is far less hospitable to Mr. Romney than Michigan and Arizona, particularly a swath of Southern states, where polls suggest that he is trailing Mr. Santorum and Newt Gingrich. Mr. Gingrich is aggressively trying to revive his candidacy on Super Tuesday in Georgia, the state he represented in Congress, and a super PAC supporting Mr. Santorum is advertising across Ohio, another Super Tuesday state.

The better-financed super PAC that supports Mr. Romney, Restore Our Future, is already running advertisements attacking Mr. Santorum and Mr. Gingrich in Super Tuesday states. A senior official with the group said the intent was to “kill any comeback talk” in the event of major March 6 victories by either — or both — of them, particularly in the South, assuming Mr. Romney does well in Michigan and Arizona.

In Michigan, some Republican leaders expressed worries about the effect of an extended battle on the party’s prospects of winning the White House and suggested that the time had come for the party to rally around one candidate, however imperfect.

“I don’t have that spark behind any one candidate at the moment,” said Anna Mouser, the Republican chairwoman in Grand Traverse County. “But we do need to decide on our nominee. Some of these primaries are dragging out months and months and months, which leaves little time to raise money, unite and go out and defeat the Democrats.”

Share KeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Dale Baker who wrote (183650)2/25/2012 8:02:44 PM
From: Steve Lokness
of 374600
<<<<none of the Republican challengers gets anywhere close to 50% against Obama. Oops.>>>>

Obama is one Israeli bomb away from defeat. We are still in February and oil is shooting up - before the driving season. The economy which I give Obama credit for resurrecting, might be crushed for the reason Wharf Rat is constantly reminding us of - oil. I'm not predicting problems economically - way too many variables right now to do that. BUT, if some of those variables were to go against Obama, then we might get a Carter reelection result.

Share KeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Dale Baker who wrote (183687)2/25/2012 8:03:14 PM
From: T L Comiskey
of 374600
re... “should have stayed on the sidelines”

Maybe the gov should have placed their funds in an..

Off Shore Account.....

A most..NOBLE and ...Profitable activity

Share KeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Cogito who wrote (183674)2/25/2012 8:29:28 PM
From: epicure
of 374600
It's certainly not my cup of tea. But on the other hand, I do believe in letting adults do what they want to do- no matter how silly I may think what they are doing is. This falls in that category for me. Yes, I think it's dysfunctional, but it's every adult's right to be dysfunctional.

Share KeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Cogito who wrote (183666)2/25/2012 9:11:45 PM
From: Land Shark
of 374600
Refer that Virginia law to the courts... I don't think it would be upheld vis a vis Roe v. Wade. It unreasonably restricts access to abortion through the requirement of an invasive "examination". These pricks are always trying to drive society back to the stone age.

Share KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: T L Comiskey2/26/2012 7:51:40 AM
of 374600

Share KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Land Shark who wrote (183692)2/26/2012 8:28:21 AM
From: ChinuSFO
of 374600
I read "Letters to the Editor" in the Oakland Tribune. They ran a special on the abortion issue. Interestingly, of the 11 or so letters they published all, except one were by men. Of these men just one supported the idea of women having the freedom of choice for contraception. The lone woman said that she finds it strange that contraception for women is a issue when Viagara is covered by these insurance companies including the insurance companies of the Catholic church.

Barring this man and woman, the rest of them all opposed the idea with some making it a political issue by dragging in Barack Obama. I suppose Obama has succeeded in taking people's attention away from the jobs issue and having them focus on social issues.

Share KeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: Dale Baker2/26/2012 9:00:12 AM
of 374600
Romney has a tough sell Posted: Feb. 26, 2012 | 2:05 a.m.

Mitt Romney, meet Bob Ryan. To loosely borrow a construct from Frank Sinatra, if you can make Bob Ryan vote for you in November, you can make it anywhere.

But it's a big if, and it might be the key to a Romney victory.

Bob is a Las Vegas resident, a former Nevada state senator and staffer for U.S. Sen. Paul Laxalt. He's also one of an unknown number of disaffected, fiscally conservative Republicans put off by what he perceives as a long line of faux conservatives put up for president by the GOP.

Before there was a Tea Party, there were the Bob Ryans of American politics, looking for a post-Reagan standard-bearer to bring fiscal sanity to Washington, D.C., by curtailing spending, cutting taxes and reducing debt.

Ryan's critics in Nevada politics and media called him an "ultra-conservative." He rejects that.

"First, I never heard anybody called an 'ultra-liberal.' Second, it is sad that when all a person wants is a balanced budget they are called 'ultra-conservative.' Don't call me names, give me an argument."

With Mitt Romney nearer to the Republican nomination, we will start seeing assessments of the so-called "enthusiasm factor." President Barack Obama will have his woes in that department, but so will Romney.

George H.W. Bush. Bob Dole. George W. Bush. John McCain. And now Mitt Romney.

"Which one of those is a fiscal conservative?" Ryan asks plaintively. "None of them," he answers.

Bush I raised taxes after saying "Read my lips. No new taxes." Bush II pushed through a Medicare prescription drug plan that wasn't paid for and then got us into a war we couldn't afford. Supporters said we would be paid back with Iraqi oil. "That didn't happen," Ryan laments.

He thinks Romney is cut from the same cloth.

"You have to judge people by what they do, not what they say," he says.

When Romney debated Ted Kennedy for a U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts, Romney positioned himself to the left of Kennedy. "Any conservative who saw that debate couldn't vote for Romney," says Ryan.

Romney criticized Reagan. He financially backed liberal Paul Tsongas for president. Later, as governor of Massachusetts, he supported gun control and instituted RomneyCare.

"And that's fine," says Ryan, "but don't come back and tell me you're now a conservative. There's no way you can claim that."

Ryan says he could vote for Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum for president at this point, but "they're not my first choices." He finds Rep. Ron Paul a fair candidate, but his isolationist foreign policy views disqualify him.

Ryan admits that at this point, neither Gingrich nor Santorum will likely win the nomination because they can't match Romney's money and organization. Ryan's first choice for GOP standard-bearer would have been Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan (no relation) followed by Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels.

But why take that out on Romney, who will certainly govern more conservatively than Obama?

"How do you know Romney is more conservative than Obama?" Ryan snaps back. Romney always talks about his business experience, but he never talks about what he did in office.

"I don't want to see words. I want to see action."

So Ryan says he's contemplating a protest vote in November, and he predicts many conservatives will do the same or simply stay at home.

"The Republican Party will never change if Romney is elected. The establishment always gravitates to 'the most electable,' and that's the most liberal."

If conservative Republicans continue to do that, Ryan contends, "the country will go down the toilet."

So, Mitt Romney, allow me to introduce you to Bob Ryan and wary fiscal conservatives like him. You, sir, have your work cut out for yourself.

Sherman Frederick, former publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, writes a column for Stephens Media. Read his blog at

Share KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (183695)2/26/2012 9:06:15 AM
From: Dale Baker
of 374600
And another winger gives an apt description of the munchkin herd:

"Of the surviving Republican contenders, Ron Paul is a sound monetarist and a doughty libertarian, but he is a 76-year old kook who, like President Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright, thinks 9/11 was the chickens coming home to roost. Newt Gingrich is a completely unfeasible flake. Rick Santorum is consistent, courageous, and believably argues for fiscal encouragement of families and the creation of jobs that add value to the economy and not just more lawyers and consultants and service-industry leeches. But he has his feet stuck in cement on abortion and same-sex marriage, and early in the campaign even criticized contraception. These shouldn’t be partisan issues at all, and any candidate who gets into them has self-detonating grenades strapped to his torso, front and back. Mitt Romney is more presentable and has a successful private-sector career behind him, but is afflicted by plasticity and has faced in all four directions on most issues."

Share KeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.