Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

From the Washington Post of all places: Romney Comment -- Nobody Cares



Gallup






Make it stop! LOL.




[/FONT][/COLOR]

I don't know, JPT, "less likely" sort of imples that at one time there was a likelihood; how can you be "less likely" than zero chance. Romney losses 36% of the people that might have voted for him? We're talking the biggest landslide since Washington!

But, we'll see over the next couple days and past the weekend. I think Romney either survives this to make it a horse race going into the debates or it is all over. I think we'll know that by Monday. Then it becomes all about the fallout for the Congress.


BUT, that is only one aspect of the impact of the video. As I noted to Exile earlier, the other is to what extent this revs up the base. And that is looking not so good for Mittens -

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157547/de...gn=syndication

Democratic Enthusiasm Swells in the Swing States, Nationally
Overall, 59% of swing-state voters now highly enthusiastic, up from 46% in June
by Lydia Saad and Jeffrey M. Jones

PRINCETON, NJ -- Voters in the 12 states USA Today and Gallup consider the key swing states that could decide the 2012 presidential election are now significantly more enthusiastic about voting this fall than they were in June. Six in 10 (59%) are either "extremely" or "very" enthusiastic, up from 46%.

That kind of blows away the whole notion that the polling is mistakenly using 2008 voting patterns rather than 2010.

Putting all politics aside, there is no way I would be putting money on Romney right now, and the bettin people are obviously not when you check the pools. Romney is a long shot now.

Originally Posted by Exile 67'

Have you ever been bitten in the ass by misquitoes while you're having sex outside or got a cramp in your leg while you're having sex in a car? I have, both sucked, no thanks.

I'll take the 5th on that.

However, I will note that mistakenly wiping your rear with poison ivy beats that all! It's one of those, "please shoot me" moments that last for days!

The latest gaff, in Ohio no less -

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,6066201.story

Romney ad features miners allegedly forced to attend rally

WASHINGTON -- On Wednesday, the Mitt Romney campaign released an ad spotlighting President Obama’s putative "War On Coal," despite a controversy in Ohio about the coal miners’ rally featured in the spot. In the ad, Romney appears on a stage before rows of hard-hatted miners, their faces smudged with coal dust, as he says, “We have 250 years of coal. Why wouldn’t we use it?”

The rally was held last month in Beallsville, Ohio, thick with miners from the Century coal mine, owned by Murray Energy, a major donor to Republican causes. Within days of the rally, Murray employees contacted a nearby morning talk radio host, David Blomquist, to say they were forced to attend the Aug. 14 event at the mine.

Murray closed the mine the day of the rally, saying it was necessary for security and safety, then docked miners their pay for those hours. Asked by WWVA radio’s Blomquist about the allegations, Murray Chief Operating Officer Robert Moore said, somewhat confusingly, “Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.”

Mandatory but no one was forced??? WTF??? Now that's Top 1% moxie there, my friends!

This apparently has gone viral in Ohio big time.

Obama gets Ohio, he only needs a Virginia to win. He doesn't need Florida or Wisconsin.

Much of the Ohio TV market spills over into Indiana's Red zone where this will also not play well.

It must be because I'm a typical bleeding heart, but I'm starting to feel sorry for Mittens. However, while I can pity him, I sure don't want him to be our guy talking to Putin. I think we would be soon giving back more than just Alaska!

I still think its too early for the I-word, but by Monday….

Originally Posted by B Butler

I wouldn't mind if you tried to answer the above question. I gave you a laundry list of possible missions. What capability do we actually need?

I'd be tempted to pull out pretty much entirely from Europe and South Korea. The only reason to keep a few European bases would be to support possible actions in the Middle East and North Africa.

Can we afford to drop the capability of fighting one medium small war anywhere in the world? I'm not sure. Still, we shouldn't have a doctrine of being continuously engaged in one medium small war at all times. For quite a while any infantry unit, regular or reserve, was in one of three states: deployed, recovering from deployment, or working up towards deployment.

As to failed states, I would revert to the Powell Doctrine. If one is going to go in, bring enough force to do the job cleanly and have an exit strategy. Yet, how does one really heal a failed state?

Anyone else want to take a shot at it?

At the moment, we seem to have a Hobson's choice: continue to be the go-to country of the world, or risk instability we might be able to prevent (or might not, of course). If we decide to back away from that self-assigned role, how do we do it without leaving a huge power vacuum? Also, how much should we do in the future: nothing seems to be a non-starter.

The only thing we have that can't be duplicated quickly is our blue water Navy. If we want to have international trade, we're stuck with that job by default. I'm OK with that. On the other hand, we should define when and where we will lead or support others, when international concerns emerge. North Africa should be an African problem, with the Europeans providing the heavy lifting when needed. Libya proved that they can't do it, so this will be a tranistion issue for them. We should insist, by making it perfectly clear that we are not the guarator of a wealthy continent that seems unwilling to do for itself.

I think we can handle the Americas, with the Mexicans and Brazilians. The middle east is the worst. We should be moving away from supporting the entire region - including the intrasigent Israelis. If the region intends to return to the 12th century, we should stand by and let it happen. We know that it boomerangs when we ntervene. These are ancient societies. They can handle it. If they can't, then the regional powers, including Iran, can work through the issues. Again, we can act as a balance, not the big-stick enforcer. Africa is a mess, and we can't do much there. Asia has China, Japan, Korea, India and Russia. Can we agree to mind our own business. If the issue is balance of power, like China v. Japan, then we have little choice. When the issues are less strategic, we should act in support if at all.

So a less agressive posture measn a less agressive force. Yes, we need the drone program, but we don't need strategic bombers. We certainly don't need anywhere near as many active Army divsions, but we need the structure to build several quickly if necessary. If we keep two combat brigades from each of the the 10th Mountain and 101st Airborne Divisions, augmented by an armor regiment (pick one), the rest of the structure can be mobilized as needed. We should also start a mandatory public service programt (call it a draft, if that's better), with the miltary getting about a third and the rest providing service in cities and the like. These draftees would be the reserves in waiting, if a mobilization is required. The service can and should be compensated by a GI Bill like program. The miltary and cvilian "draftees" might have different perks, making the miltary service an option of choice.

In any case, the cost of the miltary, including weapons procurement, needs to drop by 50% to be credible to the world as a true change of focus. It will takes years to get there.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Looks to me like this thread has jumped the snark.

Whoa -

Originally Posted by Odin

You do realize that you are using a racist slur akin to the N-word, right?

It appears that some of us have just transferred a prejudice from people who are black Americans to Muslims and people from Mexico.

I'm not ready to say the election is over, and don't want to join those hyping this poll or that. I'm also about to point to a highly partisan source, Firedoglake. Still, they wrote an article refrencing several professional obituaries, fairly well known commentators thinking Romney's wheels are coming off.

The Romney Campaign Pre-Obituaries

Me? I think it too early to count chickens.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Well, we certainly can't say that about YOUR posts, can we? Here, you've managed to be snarky to Playwrite, me, the Rani, Eric, and JPT all in one short, terse paragraph. I think the alleged Snark Queen maybe should be worried about retaining her crown.

Snark? Who? Me? Don't you know that all my posts are uber serious essays on world views and values? Everybody has their own way of looking at their world, their own goals to chase, their own methods for reaching said goals? I'm a boring repetitive one theme guy... just like most everyone else.

Snark? Me? Ha!

Now how does one do that roll eyes thing?

Originally Posted by B Butler

I'm not ready to say the election is over, and don't want to join those hyping this poll or that. I'm also about to point to a highly partisan source, Firedoglake. Still, they wrote an article refrencing several professional obituaries, fairly well known commentators thinking Romney's wheels are coming off.

The Romney Campaign Pre-Obituaries

Me? I think it too early to count chickens.

The one truly germane comment had to do with perception. You don't have to actually do anything in particular; if people think your incompetent, that's enough. Candidates need massive support to look competent. Romney is losing his quickly ... thus creating a downward competence spiral.

... and no, it's not over yet.

Originally Posted by B Butler

Snark? Who? Me? Don't you know that all my posts are uber serious essays on world views and values?

I always knew, but hell I've been told that I can't even spell (one would thing that was obvious from my moniker) so what the hell do I know?

Originally Posted by B Butler

Now how does one do that roll eyes thing?

What the hell is wrong with you people!!!!! AAAGGGHHHH!!!!!

It's

What?

Its

Damit!!!

Its

Oh, whoops, ah it ":rolleyes" but add another one of these thingamaboobs to the end ":"

Oh and forget about those other thingamaboobs that look like this " " "

Oh, crap, I can't communicate or cope with this any more!!!! AAAGHHHHHH!!!!!

Crap the world wasn't this complicated before the Internet! Damn you, Al Gore, damn you to hell!

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

The one truly germane comment had to do with perception. You don't have to actually do anything in particular; if people think your incompetent, that's enough. Candidates need massive support to look competent. Romney is losing his quickly ... thus creating a downward competence spiral.

... and no, it's not over yet.

phwee! I thought you were talking about me.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Do you see any fuckin' turban on my head!?!

My all-time favorite Judd Apatow write!

Although "Knocked Up" and "Superbad" had exquisite moments, the Virgin was just non-stop side splitter the first time you see it.

You get 5 snark credits to use against me without any retailiations - you made my day posting this!

Originally Posted by B Butler

I think one should work through the exercise, though.

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

If one can't get clean answers to all of the above, one at least knows what sort of headache one is inviting.

OK -- First Gulf War.

1. The oil sheikhdoms and Saudi Arabia had shown no aggressive tendencies. Iraq suddenly did.

2. Stop at the Iraq-Kuwait border after a cease-fire that includes the destruction of WMD capacities and effective prohibition of new WMD development or procurement.

3. Letting Saddam Hussein get command of the oil of the Gulf region suggests the rise of a new and nasty superpower. Sure war now or costlier one later.

4. Every possible diplomatic approach was tried until it seemed that Saddam Hussein was only trying to delay international action. Saddam should have taken the Soviet offer -- get out of Kuwait, dismantle the WMD program, and avoid a war.

5. Get in and get out fast. Setting up a bilateral arrangement with Kuwait after liberation would serve as a deterrent.

6. Consequences of both courses of action (liberate Kuwait or allow Iraq to consolidate control of Kuwait and threaten its neighbors) were considered.

7. Disdain for the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was as strong from Democrats as from Republicans.

8. Iraq was alone. The UN uniformly opposed the invasion.

Conclusion: Prepare to do the job and do it.

"Operation Iraqi Liberation":

1. Saddam Hussein ruled a militarily-weak regime capable only of killing its own people.

2. Take over the oil fields and cut favorable deals for the sale of Iraqi oil.

3. Absolutely not.

4. Non-violent policies were not even considered.

5. Exit strategy? We want control of Iraqi oil and the consumer market once Iraq is a satellite.

6. Couldn't we have better finished the job in Afghanistan?

7. Only until the casualty lists come back from the occupation.

8. Condemnation even among some of the allies during the First Gulf War.

Conclusion: It's too bad that we didn't elect Al Gore in 2000.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

OK -- First Gulf War (snip)

Conclusion: Prepare to do the job and do it.

"Operation Iraqi Liberation" (snip)

Conclusion: It's too bad that we didn't elect Al Gore in 2000.

No real problem with either of the above...

One might draw an additional conclusion if Romney is indeed loading up his foreign policy team with former Bush 43 neocons.

Originally Posted by playwrite

I always knew, but hell I've been told that I can't even spell (one would thing that was obvious from my moniker) so what the hell do I know?

What the hell is wrong with you people!!!!! AAAGGGHHHH!!!!!

It's

What?

Its

Damit!!!

Its

Oh, whoops, ah it ":rolleyes" but add another one of these thingamaboobs to the end ":"

Oh and forget about those other thingamaboobs that look like this " " "

Oh, crap, I can't communicate or cope with this any more!!!! AAAGHHHHHH!!!!!

Crap the world wasn't this complicated before the Internet! Damn you, Al Gore, damn you to hell!

What's so hard with

Code:

:rolleyes:

?

Okay Kos is about as partisan as you can get (not that I would know about those things )

However, he may have a point about Mittens being stuck between having to throw a hall Mary and, well, being a dick.

So if money isn't doing it, and Romney's personality isn't winning him converts, what's left?

The debates. They start in early October, then it's bam, bam, bam: 10/3, 10/11 (veep), 10/16, and 10/22. They will present Romney with his last chance to gain points from Obama.

However, he can't score points by playing it safe. If he tries to be nice and gracious and not touch Obama like he touched Gov. Rick Perry in one of those early-season debates, he might earn brownie points, but Obama will remain unscathed.

So he has to attack.

But remember, people think he's a dick. So Romney has to attack in a manner that doesn't reinforce the narrative that he's a dick. And who really thinks Romney has the chops to pull that off? He can't interact with NASCAR fans or picnicking ladies or British prime ministers without coming off as a dick. He's now supposed to deftly attack—with a convincing smile—the guy who is standing between him and his birthright presidency?

Meanwhile, Obama can play it safe. He is winning. He can be gracious and accommodating, all the while rising above any nastiness with presidential bearing. He doesn't need to win these debates as much as not lose them, and that makes his job so much easier.

It seems pretty clear cut. If Romney plays it safe, he continues to lose. He has to throw that Hail Mary. But by going on the offensive, he'll remind people that they think he's a dick. Because he is.

It's going to be brilliant.

I realize that those that can't stand to even look (well, because he looks so different!) at the big O, let alone ever vote for him, will excuse Mittens for being a dick - and Fox commentators will probable get all excercised about Romney finally showing how much of a dick he can be. But the rest of the country???

But again, Romney will be pursuing his strategy of gaining 140% of the wng nut vote so he'll likely go ahead and dick away.

It's going to be brillant.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

What's so hard with

Code:

:rolleyes:

?

You, you, you ...

You bast*rd!!!


You do know I have trouble with spelling and grammer?
Now this. et tu?

Code? Code? We don't need no stinking code!

Obama made a major gaffe today...... http://freebeacon.com/obama-you-cant...om-the-inside/

Will the media obsess over this ad naseum for over 4 days??? Im not holding my breath....

Will George Step-on-all-of-us, Brian Williams and other former Democrat hacks now parading as "journalists" breathlessly announce how damaging this is? Im not holding my breath....

Will they highlight the malfeasance in the state dept, that , depite warnings, despite the fact that Sept 11th is a date that Terrorists might strike, they did nothing....in fact Hillary didnt allow Marine Guards in Egyp to even be armed.....Im not holding my breath....

Nope they'll continue to try to set the narrative that Obama has this in the bag....pathetic...

Originally Posted by Weave

Obama made a major gaffe today...... http://freebeacon.com/obama-you-cant...om-the-inside/

Will the media obsess over this ad naseum for over 4 days??? Im not holding my breath....

Will George Step-on-all-of-us, Brian Williams and other former Democrat hacks now parading as "journalists" breathlessly announce how damaging this is? Im not holding my breath....

Will they highlight the malfeasance in the state dept, that , depite warnings, despite the fact that Sept 11th is a date that Terrorists might strike, they did nothing....in fact Hillary didnt allow Marine Guards in Egyp to even be armed.....Im not holding my breath....

Nope they'll continue to try to set the narrative that Obama has this in the bag....pathetic...

Turn on Fox News, I'm sure that they will tell you all about it.

In the meantime, I will take what I know from what Obama has already said, done, etc. and try to figure out what he meant by it. Was it a true gaffe? I can assure you, I will find out on Morning Joe tomorrow at 6:00am EST.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...om-the-inside/

CORAL GABLES, Fla. — Even as he criticized the GOP for failing to work with him, President Obama said a forum aimed at Latino voters Thursday that one of his biggest failures in office was his inability “to change the tone in Washington.”


“I’ve learned some lessons,” he said at the University of Miami forum, hosted by Univision. “Most important is you can’t change Washington from inside, only from the outside. That’s how some of our biggest accomplishments like health care got done — mobilizing the American people.”


If he wins a second term, the president added, “I want to concentrate having a much more constant conversation with the American people so they can put pressure on Congress to move issues forward.”

It wasn't a "huge gaffe." He's absolutely right here. You can take that one phrase out of context, reinterpret it to mean something completely different from what the president was saying, and try to make it SOUND like a huge gaffe.

Which is exactly what some people are trying to do, of course.

But really, what he was saying is: In America, the people have the power, and reform happens when they put the pressure on. That's just the truth.

Originally Posted by The Rani

It's all over the news right now.
And yes, equal in stupidity to Romney's comment. What are these guys smoking?

Sometimes, you have to wonder. Arianna Huffington did a piece yesterday wondering if the Romney campaign might be suffering from sleep deprivation.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...om-the-inside/



It wasn't a "huge gaffe." He's absolutely right here. You can take that one phrase out of context, reinterpret it to mean something completely different from what the president was saying, and try to make it SOUND like a huge gaffe.

Which is exactly what some people are trying to do, of course.

But really, what he was saying is: In America, the people have the power, and reform happens when they put the pressure on. That's just the truth.

Sure, but he knows by now that things will be taken out of context. "You didn't build that" was only a few months ago and yes, the press beat it to death.

Originally Posted by The Rani

And Obama's must be suffering from amnesia.
"Changing Washington" was his major theme four years ago. He just admitted that he failed.

Romney doesn't care about half the voters, and Obama is punting the responsibility back to us.
Everyone vote third party!!!

I'm considering writing in Jon Huntsman or Buddy Roehmer, out of respect for the last two sane Republicans. I'll bring a quarter with me to toss when I get to the booth.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...om-the-inside/



It wasn't a "huge gaffe." He's absolutely right here. You can take that one phrase out of context, reinterpret it to mean something completely different from what the president was saying, and try to make it SOUND like a huge gaffe.

Which is exactly what some people are trying to do, of course.

But really, what he was saying is: In America, the people have the power, and reform happens when they put the pressure on. That's just the truth.

Not only was it a HUGE gaffe it was a lie as well.

First as President you have the "Bully pulpit" to move issues you favor and influence public opinion to get things accomplished. T.R. FDR, Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton were good at this. Obama's admitting he cant do this. This projects weakness on his part and another reason he should be fired.

He also lied using health care as an example. His plan never had majority support and it had toslither through in an overwhelmingly Democrat Congress by using "Cornhusker Kickbacks" and other skanky deals to get passed by a bare majority. The law has never been popular since...hardly an example of pressure from the outside.....

I find JPT's and Weave's mental gymnastics with regards to the polls hilarious.

Originally Posted by Weave

Obama made a major gaffe today...... http://freebeacon.com/obama-you-cant...om-the-inside/

Will the media obsess over this ad naseum for over 4 days??? Im not holding my breath....

Will George Step-on-all-of-us, Brian Williams and other former Democrat hacks now parading as "journalists" breathlessly announce how damaging this is? Im not holding my breath....

Will they highlight the malfeasance in the state dept, that , depite warnings, despite the fact that Sept 11th is a date that Terrorists might strike, they did nothing....in fact Hillary didnt allow Marine Guards in Egyp to even be armed.....Im not holding my breath....

Nope they'll continue to try to set the narrative that Obama has this in the bag....pathetic...

You guys are reeking of desperation.