Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
October 30, 2012
DUMB & DUMBER (who are STILL campaigning ) shown here faking their concern over storm reports.
This morning's powerful editorial in The New York Times, A Big Storm Requires Big Government, provides a brief history of FEMA and the reminder of the Republican party's history of turning disaster relief into a political football.
It’s an absurd notion, but it’s fully in line with decades of Republican resistance to federal emergency planning. FEMA, created by President Jimmy Carter, was elevated to cabinet rank in the Bill Clinton administration, but was then demoted by President George W. Bush, who neglected it, subsumed it into the Department of Homeland Security, and placed it in the control of political hacks. The disaster of Hurricane Katrina was just waiting to happen....
Over the last two years, Congressional Republicans have forced a 43 percent reduction in the primary FEMA grants that pay for disaster preparedness. Representatives Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor and other House Republicans have repeatedly tried to refuse FEMA’s budget requests when disasters are more expensive than predicted, or have demanded that other valuable programs be cut to pay for them. [...]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/a-big-storm-requires-big-government.html?_r=1&
It's all true. And even worse than the Times had room to detail. For instance, remember that Majority Leader Eric Cantor insisted last year that any increase in disaster aid funding had to come from cutting funds for equipping and training first responders by 40 percent. House Republicans nearly forced a government shutdown over disaster aid funding. They succeeded in forcing massive cuts to the program, passing a $2.65 billion bill for the disaster relief fund for the year, when the need is closer to $12 billion, annually. That's based on the average year, the average need. Hurricane Sandy is likely to blow that figure to smithereens.
Republicans have taken disaster relief hostage for the past two years, insisting like Mitt Romney that it's more appropriate for the states, already financially strapped and facing further cuts in federal aid, to take the lead in responding. Like Mitt Romney, they pretend that it's about the deficit. They preach, like Romney did in a primary debate, that it's "immoral" to spend this money now and pass the debt on to future generations. They ignore the fact that it's at least as immoral to pass on to our children a crumbling and dysfunctional infrastructure that they'll have to figure out how to rebuild.
All of this so that they can force their real goal, explained by Romney in that debate:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/30/1152506/-Republicans-history-of-playing-politics-with-disaster
HURRICANE SANDY: Romney and Republican's PLAYING POLITICS With Disaster Relief
DUMB & DUMBER (who are STILL campaigning ) shown here faking their concern over storm reports.
This morning's powerful editorial in The New York Times, A Big Storm Requires Big Government, provides a brief history of FEMA and the reminder of the Republican party's history of turning disaster relief into a political football.
It’s an absurd notion, but it’s fully in line with decades of Republican resistance to federal emergency planning. FEMA, created by President Jimmy Carter, was elevated to cabinet rank in the Bill Clinton administration, but was then demoted by President George W. Bush, who neglected it, subsumed it into the Department of Homeland Security, and placed it in the control of political hacks. The disaster of Hurricane Katrina was just waiting to happen....
Over the last two years, Congressional Republicans have forced a 43 percent reduction in the primary FEMA grants that pay for disaster preparedness. Representatives Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor and other House Republicans have repeatedly tried to refuse FEMA’s budget requests when disasters are more expensive than predicted, or have demanded that other valuable programs be cut to pay for them. [...]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/a-big-storm-requires-big-government.html?_r=1&
It's all true. And even worse than the Times had room to detail. For instance, remember that Majority Leader Eric Cantor insisted last year that any increase in disaster aid funding had to come from cutting funds for equipping and training first responders by 40 percent. House Republicans nearly forced a government shutdown over disaster aid funding. They succeeded in forcing massive cuts to the program, passing a $2.65 billion bill for the disaster relief fund for the year, when the need is closer to $12 billion, annually. That's based on the average year, the average need. Hurricane Sandy is likely to blow that figure to smithereens.
Republicans have taken disaster relief hostage for the past two years, insisting like Mitt Romney that it's more appropriate for the states, already financially strapped and facing further cuts in federal aid, to take the lead in responding. Like Mitt Romney, they pretend that it's about the deficit. They preach, like Romney did in a primary debate, that it's "immoral" to spend this money now and pass the debt on to future generations. They ignore the fact that it's at least as immoral to pass on to our children a crumbling and dysfunctional infrastructure that they'll have to figure out how to rebuild.
All of this so that they can force their real goal, explained by Romney in that debate:
"Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better." And if your campaign contributors and political cronies can make a tidy profit off of the nation's misery, you've done your job.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/30/1152506/-Republicans-history-of-playing-politics-with-disaster
October 30, 2012
On MSNBC's "Morning Joe" today, Joe Scarborough took a more direct shot, effectively calling Silver an ideologue and "a joke."
"Nate Silver says this is a 73.6 percent chance that the president is going to win? Nobody in that campaign thinks they have a 73 percent chance — they think they have a 50.1 percent chance of winning. And you talk to the Romney people, it's the same thing," Scarborough said. "Both sides understand that it is close, and it could go either way. And anybody that thinks that this race is anything but a tossup right now is such an ideologue, they should be kept away from typewriters, computers, laptops and microphones for the next 10 days, because they're jokes."
Silver's no stranger to doubt and criticism. He even doubts his own model sometimes. But he dismisses this criticism.
cont'
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/10/nate-silver-romney-clearly-could-still-win-147618.html
.
"MORNING JOKE" JOE SCAR Calls Nate Silver An " Ideologue & Joke "
This is yesterday's article but once again, On MORNING JOKE this morning, Joe Scar tries to cast doubt about Nate's 72%+ probability prediction given to Obama for winning the coming election. Joe Scar's GOP talking points are used to attack Nate's probability models......it would seem the GOP are very afraid of Nate's prediction numbers since it messes up their plans of perception or something even darker.
Politico:
- Silver cautions against confusing prediction with prophecy. "If the Giants lead the Redskins 24-21 in the fourth quarter, it's a close game that either team could win. But it's also not a "toss-up": The Giants are favored. It's the same principle here: Obama is ahead in the polling averages in states like Ohio that would suffice for him to win the Electoral College. Hence, he's the favorite," Silver said.
For all the confidence Silver puts in his predictions, he often gives the impression of hedging. Which, given all the variables involved in a presidential election, isn't surprising. For this reason and others — and this may shock the coffee-drinking NPR types of Seattle, San Francisco and Madison, Wis. — more than a few political pundits and reporters, including some of his own colleagues, believe Silver is highly overrated.
"If you tell me you think you can quantify an event that is about to happen that you don`t expect, like the 47 percent comment or a debate performance, I think you think you are a wizard. That`s not possible," Times columnist David Brooks, a moderate conservative, said on PBS earlier this month. "The pollsters tell us what`s happening now. When they start projecting, they`re getting into silly land." Brooks doubled down on this charge in a column last week: "I should treat polls as a fuzzy snapshot of a moment in time. I should not read them, and think I understand the future," he wrote. "If there’s one thing we know, it’s that even experts with fancy computer models are terrible at predicting human behavior."
On MSNBC's "Morning Joe" today, Joe Scarborough took a more direct shot, effectively calling Silver an ideologue and "a joke."
"Nate Silver says this is a 73.6 percent chance that the president is going to win? Nobody in that campaign thinks they have a 73 percent chance — they think they have a 50.1 percent chance of winning. And you talk to the Romney people, it's the same thing," Scarborough said. "Both sides understand that it is close, and it could go either way. And anybody that thinks that this race is anything but a tossup right now is such an ideologue, they should be kept away from typewriters, computers, laptops and microphones for the next 10 days, because they're jokes."
Silver's no stranger to doubt and criticism. He even doubts his own model sometimes. But he dismisses this criticism.
He acknowledges that his reputation, made as it was in the last election cycle when he correctly predicted 49 out of 50 states, could just as easily be tarnished this time.
“I'm sure that I have a lot riding on the outcome. I'm also sure I'll get too much credit if the prediction is right and too much blame if it is wrong,” he said.
“I'm sure that I have a lot riding on the outcome. I'm also sure I'll get too much credit if the prediction is right and too much blame if it is wrong,” he said.
cont'
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/10/nate-silver-romney-clearly-could-still-win-147618.html
.
October 30, 2012
Joe Biden SLAMS Romney, ‘He Will Say ANYTHING TO WIN, But He Can’t Run From The Truth.’
Look, his saying he’ll get tough on China is only outdone by his bizarre, bizarre claim about the automobile industry. A week ago, remember what he was saying with the President — is, Mr. President, I supported the rescue of the automobile industry. I did it. I said exactly what you did. I said we’ll get them through bankruptcy, et cetera. Problem is he did not say there should be a — he would not allow a penny of federal money to help them out, and there was nobody, including Bain Capital, willing to come in and help them out.
But here’s the thing. This guy pirouettes more than a ballerina. Now he says — seriously, think of what he’s saying within two weeks. I find — I’ve never seen this in public. I’ve served with eight Presidents. I have never seen this in my public life. Within two weeks, he’s running an ad in this state saying that President Obama made the companies go bankrupt; is now — gave the industry the Italians, who are selling it to the Chinese. Whoa. As we say in my faith, bless me, Father, for I have sinned. I mean, what are you talking about? I have never seen anything like that. It’s an absolutely patently false assertion. It’s such an outrageous assertion that one of the few times in my memory a major American corporation, Chrysler, has felt obliged to go public and say, there is no truth. They said, Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. Chrysler Corporation, which is highly unusual, said, a careful and unbiased reading would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.
Ladies and gentlemen, have they no shame?
Romney will say anything, absolutely anything, to win, it seems. But he can’t run from the truth. He said in an article entitled — that he wrote — “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”
But here’s the thing. This guy pirouettes more than a ballerina. Now he says — seriously, think of what he’s saying within two weeks. I find — I’ve never seen this in public. I’ve served with eight Presidents. I have never seen this in my public life. Within two weeks, he’s running an ad in this state saying that President Obama made the companies go bankrupt; is now — gave the industry the Italians, who are selling it to the Chinese. Whoa. As we say in my faith, bless me, Father, for I have sinned. I mean, what are you talking about? I have never seen anything like that. It’s an absolutely patently false assertion. It’s such an outrageous assertion that one of the few times in my memory a major American corporation, Chrysler, has felt obliged to go public and say, there is no truth. They said, Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. Chrysler Corporation, which is highly unusual, said, a careful and unbiased reading would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.
Ladies and gentlemen, have they no shame?
Romney will say anything, absolutely anything, to win, it seems. But he can’t run from the truth. He said in an article entitled — that he wrote — “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”
October 30, 2012
Then, like an hour later, Mark Halperin decided, on Twitter, that canceling campaign events to do disaster response was a bad idea, probably.
Just gotta ask!
Will President Obama lose the election if he spends too much of this week running FEMA and not being in Florida and Ohio over and over again? Shouldn’t he take off his coat and roll up his sleeves and direct storm response from … Northern Virginia, maybe? Just one thing is “clear now,” to Mark Halperin: that people who may or may not lose elections next week will think the hurricane is responsible. Fascinating, if true.
cont
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/not_even_hurricanes_can_stop_dumb_punditry/
Mark Halperin: Just Another Stale, Flip-Flopin' Republican SHILL.
HEY MARK,....
Not even hurricanes can stop dumb punditry
Mark Halperin asks the important question: What does this deadly storm mean for Obama's campaign?
Will Hurricane Sandy cause an Electoral College tie and turn Ohio into this year’s Florida 2000? PROBABLY. At least, something along those lines is what political pundits are hoping for today. The two most important events in the world right now are the presidential campaign and a major East Coast weather event, so obviously “politicos” are trying to figure out how to combine the two things into one convenient and snappy cable television hit.
Mark Halperin, MSNBC political talking guy, Time political writing guy, blogger and amateur meteorologist, has multiple competing opinions about what this storm that actually threatens to destroy much of the East Coast and kill and displace thousands of people means for the president’s reelection bid. On “The Morning Joe Show” this morning, Halperin said White House adviser David Plouffe was clever to convince the president to cancel his campaign event in Florida today and go to Washington to be the president of hurricane response.
I think the most important person in this election right now is not the candidates, for today at least, it’s David Plouffe, senior White House adviser, ran the President’s campaign last time. Brilliant at understanding the intersection between the campaign and the government. Lots of control over both, and, obviously, was central to the decision to say the President shouldn’t do this event in Florida today, should come back to Washington. And I think you will see David Plouffe doing a couple things. One, the symbolism of the office, making sure they don’t mess up.
Then, like an hour later, Mark Halperin decided, on Twitter, that canceling campaign events to do disaster response was a bad idea, probably.
W/Obama nixing events, gotta ask: what happened to constant White House claim POTUS can do job equally well from anywhere? #bothparties
— Mark Halperin (@MarkHalperin) October 29, 2012
— Mark Halperin (@MarkHalperin) October 29, 2012
Just gotta ask!
Will President Obama lose the election if he spends too much of this week running FEMA and not being in Florida and Ohio over and over again? Shouldn’t he take off his coat and roll up his sleeves and direct storm response from … Northern Virginia, maybe? Just one thing is “clear now,” to Mark Halperin: that people who may or may not lose elections next week will think the hurricane is responsible. Fascinating, if true.
cont
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/not_even_hurricanes_can_stop_dumb_punditry/
October 29, 2012
Our President!!
After the Salt Lake Tribune endorsed Obama, Romney must have been relieved when his other home state paper the Detroit News endorsed him. But today, the real blow comes from Massachusetts, where he was Governor. The Boston Globe has endorsed President Obama. The Globe writes of many reasons to reelect Obama, saying that not only would a second term be a mandate against the Republican obstructionism, but it would curb the power of special interests:
“Obama’s reelection would also curb the growing power of special interests, who so often hide their self-serving agendas behind a facade of fist-in-the-air patriotism and promises of low taxes. Anyone who lived through the crash of 2008, and now sees Republicans in Congress seeking to thwart the Dodd-Frank law’s protections, should sense the true impetus behind all the pronouncements about unleashing the job creators. The Supreme Court’s wrongheaded Citizens United decision, granting corporations unlimited power to influence campaigns, provided yet another weapon for the powerful to deploy against the general interest.”
The Globe praises Obama’s diligence and bipartisanship, and calls out the Republican meme that it’s Obama who is divisive, “He stands between the divides in American society, so some say he must therefore be the source of division. But as president, Obama has reached out repeatedly to Republicans and shied away from the I’m-the-decider pronouncements of his predecessor. He’s been diligent and responsible — to a fault.” Reminding us where we were and what we avoided under Obama’s leadership (with a few painful reminders of the “chaos” of the Bush years), they write, “As Obama was taking the oath on Jan. 20, 2009, the economy was losing a whopping 818,000 jobs in that month alone, with almost as many to follow in each of the next two months. Soon, Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package stopped the hemorrhage, and the still-bruised labor market has added jobs fitfully ever since.”
The Globe makes more of a case for Obama than a case against Romney, though they seem as confused as most as to which Romney is running for President and this is a danger for a president, “Identifying the real Romney on any major issue — social, economic, or foreign — is impossible. But a president this vulnerable within his party, needing to satisfy a conservative Congress, could never make good on his moderate commitments. Whichever Romney shows up, the Romney years would end up looking a lot like the Bush years.”
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/boston-globe-endorses-president-obama-gov-romney.html
HOW EMBARRASSING MITT: The Boston Globe ENDORSES President Obama Over THEIR Former Gov Romney
Our President!!
After the Salt Lake Tribune endorsed Obama, Romney must have been relieved when his other home state paper the Detroit News endorsed him. But today, the real blow comes from Massachusetts, where he was Governor. The Boston Globe has endorsed President Obama. The Globe writes of many reasons to reelect Obama, saying that not only would a second term be a mandate against the Republican obstructionism, but it would curb the power of special interests:
“Obama’s reelection would also curb the growing power of special interests, who so often hide their self-serving agendas behind a facade of fist-in-the-air patriotism and promises of low taxes. Anyone who lived through the crash of 2008, and now sees Republicans in Congress seeking to thwart the Dodd-Frank law’s protections, should sense the true impetus behind all the pronouncements about unleashing the job creators. The Supreme Court’s wrongheaded Citizens United decision, granting corporations unlimited power to influence campaigns, provided yet another weapon for the powerful to deploy against the general interest.”
The Globe praises Obama’s diligence and bipartisanship, and calls out the Republican meme that it’s Obama who is divisive, “He stands between the divides in American society, so some say he must therefore be the source of division. But as president, Obama has reached out repeatedly to Republicans and shied away from the I’m-the-decider pronouncements of his predecessor. He’s been diligent and responsible — to a fault.” Reminding us where we were and what we avoided under Obama’s leadership (with a few painful reminders of the “chaos” of the Bush years), they write, “As Obama was taking the oath on Jan. 20, 2009, the economy was losing a whopping 818,000 jobs in that month alone, with almost as many to follow in each of the next two months. Soon, Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package stopped the hemorrhage, and the still-bruised labor market has added jobs fitfully ever since.”
The Globe makes more of a case for Obama than a case against Romney, though they seem as confused as most as to which Romney is running for President and this is a danger for a president, “Identifying the real Romney on any major issue — social, economic, or foreign — is impossible. But a president this vulnerable within his party, needing to satisfy a conservative Congress, could never make good on his moderate commitments. Whichever Romney shows up, the Romney years would end up looking a lot like the Bush years.”
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/boston-globe-endorses-president-obama-gov-romney.html
October 29, 2012
Are these really rejected Romney/Ryan bumper stickers?....
LOL! Rejected Romney/Ryan Bumper Sticker Logos
Are these really rejected Romney/Ryan bumper stickers?....
October 28, 2012
Limp dick Mug Shot. Criminal. Misogynist. And honorary member of the Republican Congress, class of '94.
Dear God who gives women rape babies as a gift,
Please make it stop.
Please make the men stop telling us that rape is a gift, but voting means the end of the world as we know it. Please make them stop voting to take away our health care. And please, pretty please, make impotent gasbag and coiner of the word "feminazi" Rush Limbaugh shut the fuck up:
That's right. In mansplaining to women what is insulting to women, he referred to the women's movement as "feminazi-ism." Because that is totally not offensive at all. And this is the guy who was once made an honorary member of the congressional class of '94 by, that's right, the Republican Party.
That really sums it up, doesn't it?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/26/1150806/-Limp-dick-Rush-Limbaugh-mansplains-to-feminazi-sluts-what-is-insulting-to-women
Limp Dick Rush Limbaugh Mansplains To Feminazi Sluts What is 'Insulting To Women'
Limp dick Mug Shot. Criminal. Misogynist. And honorary member of the Republican Congress, class of '94.
Dear God who gives women rape babies as a gift,
Please make it stop.
Please make the men stop telling us that rape is a gift, but voting means the end of the world as we know it. Please make them stop voting to take away our health care. And please, pretty please, make impotent gasbag and coiner of the word "feminazi" Rush Limbaugh shut the fuck up:
I mean, [the Lena Dunham ad is] insulting to women. It again looks at women as monolithic sex machines who want to make sure they've got unending birth control pills and then a free trip to Planned Parenthood the next day, all paid for by Obama. If I were a woman today, I would feel insulted each and every day, the way they look at women, all thinking the same way, all wanting the same things. I think that ad -- some people look at it, they'll think it's cool, that it's hip and it's representative of the current modern day pop culture. But I think it's an insult to women everywhere.
I mean, where the hell is Gloria Steinem? Gloria, is this what you all have been fighting for all your lives, an ad like this, an appeal to women as sex machines? Is that what feminazi-ism was all about? Is that what all the equal pay stuff was all about? Is that why you wanted to storm your way into every all-male club and all-male institution and everything that you felt you were being discriminated against, was this what you were hoping would be the fruition, the result of all of your hard work?
I mean, where the hell is Gloria Steinem? Gloria, is this what you all have been fighting for all your lives, an ad like this, an appeal to women as sex machines? Is that what feminazi-ism was all about? Is that what all the equal pay stuff was all about? Is that why you wanted to storm your way into every all-male club and all-male institution and everything that you felt you were being discriminated against, was this what you were hoping would be the fruition, the result of all of your hard work?
That's right. In mansplaining to women what is insulting to women, he referred to the women's movement as "feminazi-ism." Because that is totally not offensive at all. And this is the guy who was once made an honorary member of the congressional class of '94 by, that's right, the Republican Party.
That really sums it up, doesn't it?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/26/1150806/-Limp-dick-Rush-Limbaugh-mansplains-to-feminazi-sluts-what-is-insulting-to-women
October 27, 2012
Friday night, former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and Congressman Tim Ryan appeared on MSNBC to address Romney’s cruel lies. In Defiance, Ohio Mitt Romney fear mongered Ohioans with the lie that Chrysler is moving Jeep operations to China.
Strickland said it “showed a lack of judgment and a lack of truthfulness.” Ryan said that Romney didn’t consider the impact of his comments on Ohio’s working families, and “This is the same kind of business that these Republicans do. They troll around on the internet. They find one story that’s made up and they use it.”
TRANSCRIPT
SCHULTZ: Governor, you first. I mean I can only think that this is only a complete disservice to the people of Ohio to go out in front of a crowd and erroneously put out information that cuts right to the fabric of what this election is all about and that’s jobs. What’s your reaction to this Governor?
STRICKLAND: My reaction is that Mitt Romney is a desperate man. He knows he’s losing Ohio. If he loses Ohio he’s losing the election. But for him to do what he did is despicable. Think of the angst that those workers felt when they heard him say that. And obviously, it showed a lack of judgment and a lack of truthfulness. This man is not ready to be the President of the United States of America. As Jon Huntsman said during the primary season, he is like a well- oiled weathervane, you never know where Mitt Romney’s going to be on any issue on any day. And this is just the latest example of his desperation in trying to reach the Ohio voter, but Ohioans have figured this guy out, they know who’s on their side and it’s Barack Obama and Joe Biden. And that’s why I am convinced to my depths that Ohio is going to do the right thing and the President is going to be reelected with Ohio’s support.
SCHULTZ: Congressman Ryan, you know accuracy is important in your business. To be a public servant and to stand up in front of people and say something that’s flat out false, doesn’t this speak to the character of Mitt Romney to play with people’s emotions like this?
RYAN: I don’t think, Ed, there’s any doubt about it. It does show the kind of coldness that we saw with him at Bain Capital. The kind of detachment when he talks about these issues. That he did not even consider, as Governor Strickland just said, the families that would have been affected in Northwest Ohio by his comments. They have had enough problems dealing with the Romney policies, the Bush economic policies, the way they have handled things. But he’s not happy with that. He comes in and continues to try to scare people. This is a consistent pattern, though, Ed. This is the same kind of business that these Republicans do. They troll around on the internet. They find one story that’s made up and they use it. Whether it’s Todd Akin using it, like his science that he has for legitimate rape or the goofy stuff that these guys come up with climate change. Now he finds an article saying something about China. God knows where it’s come from. He peddles it as the truth in Ohio. But the reality on the ground is so much different. People are working now because of Obama so this nonsense doesn’t work.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/romney-fear-mongering-jeep.html
Ohio Rep. ACCUSES Romney of TROLLING the Internet for JEEP LIES
Friday night, former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and Congressman Tim Ryan appeared on MSNBC to address Romney’s cruel lies. In Defiance, Ohio Mitt Romney fear mongered Ohioans with the lie that Chrysler is moving Jeep operations to China.
Strickland said it “showed a lack of judgment and a lack of truthfulness.” Ryan said that Romney didn’t consider the impact of his comments on Ohio’s working families, and “This is the same kind of business that these Republicans do. They troll around on the internet. They find one story that’s made up and they use it.”
TRANSCRIPT
SCHULTZ: Governor, you first. I mean I can only think that this is only a complete disservice to the people of Ohio to go out in front of a crowd and erroneously put out information that cuts right to the fabric of what this election is all about and that’s jobs. What’s your reaction to this Governor?
STRICKLAND: My reaction is that Mitt Romney is a desperate man. He knows he’s losing Ohio. If he loses Ohio he’s losing the election. But for him to do what he did is despicable. Think of the angst that those workers felt when they heard him say that. And obviously, it showed a lack of judgment and a lack of truthfulness. This man is not ready to be the President of the United States of America. As Jon Huntsman said during the primary season, he is like a well- oiled weathervane, you never know where Mitt Romney’s going to be on any issue on any day. And this is just the latest example of his desperation in trying to reach the Ohio voter, but Ohioans have figured this guy out, they know who’s on their side and it’s Barack Obama and Joe Biden. And that’s why I am convinced to my depths that Ohio is going to do the right thing and the President is going to be reelected with Ohio’s support.
SCHULTZ: Congressman Ryan, you know accuracy is important in your business. To be a public servant and to stand up in front of people and say something that’s flat out false, doesn’t this speak to the character of Mitt Romney to play with people’s emotions like this?
RYAN: I don’t think, Ed, there’s any doubt about it. It does show the kind of coldness that we saw with him at Bain Capital. The kind of detachment when he talks about these issues. That he did not even consider, as Governor Strickland just said, the families that would have been affected in Northwest Ohio by his comments. They have had enough problems dealing with the Romney policies, the Bush economic policies, the way they have handled things. But he’s not happy with that. He comes in and continues to try to scare people. This is a consistent pattern, though, Ed. This is the same kind of business that these Republicans do. They troll around on the internet. They find one story that’s made up and they use it. Whether it’s Todd Akin using it, like his science that he has for legitimate rape or the goofy stuff that these guys come up with climate change. Now he finds an article saying something about China. God knows where it’s come from. He peddles it as the truth in Ohio. But the reality on the ground is so much different. People are working now because of Obama so this nonsense doesn’t work.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/romney-fear-mongering-jeep.html
October 27, 2012
WASHINGTON -- In late September 2011, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's office notified Rep. Paul Ryan's office with some good news. The U.S. Department of Veteran's Affairs had awarded a grant to a Wisconsin veteran's home to help renovate its water distribution system. Walker's office just needed Ryan's people to sign off on the press release. But what started out as a routine matter quickly turned into a minor panic among aides to the two Republicans. Wendy Riemann, Walker's director of federal relations, sent an email to Ryan's communications director, Kevin Seifert, asking for a quote from the congressman. "Not sure if you're doing your own release, etc.," Riemann emailed on Sept. 26. "Let me know -- we'll wait to hear from you either way before putting it out."
Seifert replied with a simple message: Stop the presses. He had one concern. Could the grant be tied to federal stimulus funds? "Not to create more work for you all but -- do you have any idea where the money for this grant came from? Was it from the stimulus/the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act?" Seifert wrote. "Our concern is that if it's stimulus funds, we won't want to highlight (and would think you guys wouldn't either)." Seifert did not want Ryan appearing to support President Barack Obama. "The Administration is encouraging lots of agencies to spend un-spent stimulus funds and we generally won't do press on things we actively oppose," the congressman's communications director concluded.
THE EMAILS:
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/stim.pdf
The emails were obtained by The Huffington Post through a public records request with Walker's office. The email exchange underscored a routine problem facing Republicans in the House of Representatives at the time. Having opposed the president's stimulus bill publicly, many (including some of the foremost conservatives) privately concluded that the legislation did some good in their districts. But rather than back off their opposition, or risk charges of hypocrisy -- even for something as mundane and worthy as a veteran's home water system upgrade -- they did what they could to secure money without public notice. Seifert's worry in September 2011 was prescient.
During the recent vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden chided Ryan for asking for stimulus funds. Ryan had sought stimulus funds for four projects, including two involving Environmental Protection Agency funds. The congressman routinely sought grant money for projects in Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District, which encompasses his hometown of Janesville. He sought EPA grant money for environmental studies of potentially hazardous industrial lands, and for clean diesel fuel assistance for a school association.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/27/paul-ryan-emails-stimulus_n_2027975.html
NEWLY UNCOVERED Paul Ryan Staff EMAILS Show Sensitivity To Stimulus HYPOCRISY
WASHINGTON -- In late September 2011, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's office notified Rep. Paul Ryan's office with some good news. The U.S. Department of Veteran's Affairs had awarded a grant to a Wisconsin veteran's home to help renovate its water distribution system. Walker's office just needed Ryan's people to sign off on the press release. But what started out as a routine matter quickly turned into a minor panic among aides to the two Republicans. Wendy Riemann, Walker's director of federal relations, sent an email to Ryan's communications director, Kevin Seifert, asking for a quote from the congressman. "Not sure if you're doing your own release, etc.," Riemann emailed on Sept. 26. "Let me know -- we'll wait to hear from you either way before putting it out."
Seifert replied with a simple message: Stop the presses. He had one concern. Could the grant be tied to federal stimulus funds? "Not to create more work for you all but -- do you have any idea where the money for this grant came from? Was it from the stimulus/the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act?" Seifert wrote. "Our concern is that if it's stimulus funds, we won't want to highlight (and would think you guys wouldn't either)." Seifert did not want Ryan appearing to support President Barack Obama. "The Administration is encouraging lots of agencies to spend un-spent stimulus funds and we generally won't do press on things we actively oppose," the congressman's communications director concluded.
THE EMAILS:
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/stim.pdf
The emails were obtained by The Huffington Post through a public records request with Walker's office. The email exchange underscored a routine problem facing Republicans in the House of Representatives at the time. Having opposed the president's stimulus bill publicly, many (including some of the foremost conservatives) privately concluded that the legislation did some good in their districts. But rather than back off their opposition, or risk charges of hypocrisy -- even for something as mundane and worthy as a veteran's home water system upgrade -- they did what they could to secure money without public notice. Seifert's worry in September 2011 was prescient.
During the recent vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden chided Ryan for asking for stimulus funds. Ryan had sought stimulus funds for four projects, including two involving Environmental Protection Agency funds. The congressman routinely sought grant money for projects in Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District, which encompasses his hometown of Janesville. He sought EPA grant money for environmental studies of potentially hazardous industrial lands, and for clean diesel fuel assistance for a school association.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/27/paul-ryan-emails-stimulus_n_2027975.html
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
