The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

A little disturbing that Twitter is a twitter with threats to Romney and Ryan's lives if they win.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7276/8161101301_34dddd0e06_c.jpg)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8486/8161133734_5a607ff8b4_c.jpg)

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and we won't have to deal with any rioting or looting.

Quote from: Gaspar on November 06, 2012, 08:29:45 AM
A little disturbing that Twitter is a twitter with threats to Romney and Ryan's lives if they win.

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and we won't have to deal with any rioting or looting.

Well it sure is.  Just like all the threats 4 years ago.

Give it a rest.

I heard as much from two, ahem, "gentlemen" in the bank lobby yesterday as they spoke in near unintelligible lingo.  Pretty amazing how much non-sense gets spread about what will and will not happen if a certain candidate wins.  These two were apparently worried their gravy train would come to an end if Romney is elected.  Apparently, they think they been gettin' their Obama money.

Quote from: Gaspar on November 06, 2012, 08:29:45 AM
A little disturbing that Twitter is a twitter with threats to Romney and Ryan's lives if they win.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7276/8161101301_34dddd0e06_c.jpg)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8486/8161133734_5a607ff8b4_c.jpg)

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and we won't have to deal with any rioting or looting.

Considering our incumbent has had to deal with more death threats than any other sitting President, I wonder where your outrage over THAT is?

Wait, nevermind....

Quote from: Conan71 on November 06, 2012, 08:36:25 AM
Pretty amazing how much non-sense gets spread about what will and will not happen if a certain candidate wins. 

Yes, you didn't ask them if they were concerned about getting their guns taken away?

That Christianity would be outlawed?

That Sharia Law would take over?

Quote from: Townsend on November 06, 2012, 08:42:43 AM
Yes, you didn't ask them if they were concerned about getting their guns taken away?

That Christianity would be outlawed?

That Sharia Law would take over?

Us 'telligent folk already know that will happen with Obama's increased flexibility these next four years.  I suspect he will take the oath of office on a Quran wearing full Islamic garb if he's re-elected.  Then he will turn around and urinate on the Constitution.

All those threats. And they call Terry Bradshaw a racist?
I think I'll have a bucket of chicken at lunch.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 06, 2012, 09:02:02 AM
Us 'telligent folk already know that will happen with Obama's increased flexibility these next four years.  I suspect he will take the oath of office on a Quran wearing full Islamic garb if he's re-elected.  Then he will turn around and urinate on the Constitution.

I think so too.... :)

I also think that there will be "whites only" bathrooms mandated and women will be forced to attend tea with retired Michele Bachman.

RMoney returns to Wall Street.... there will be fewer horses and bayonets!

Surely there are no obama threats on twitter...

Death threats in public to a candidate or official should not be tolerated.

Quote from: cannon_fodder on November 07, 2012, 08:26:54 AM
Surely there are no obama threats on twitter...

Death threats in public to a candidate or official should not be tolerated.

I have seen several of my 'friends' on FB with threats of moving out of the country.

Pretty childish.  Even when Bush won back in 2004 I didn't think we were going to hell, like some on the right have seemed to prophesize.

Seems like as good a place to re-post my FB status update this morning:


For those unhappy with the election results last night, I highly recommend you buy a bicycle and ride the crap out of it! Here's why:

1) Burns fat, not $5 a gallon gas
2) Proactive healthcare so you don't have to rely on Obamacare and a daily handful of pills
3) Great form of stress relief to help you endure the stupidity coming out of Washington and state houses all over the country

I think the good news we can take out of these election results is that this is probably one or two coffin nails from the end of the Republican party.  Hopefully within the next 4 years we can cultivate the birth of a real Libertarian movement to serve as an alternative for people like myself who believe social policy is separate from political and economic policy.  Republicans lost this election.

The Kremlin Celebrates

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/kremlin-cheers-obama-election-121603792--abc-news-topstories.html
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7038/6821642120_af91c66389.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7231/6983363454_6706d1a73c.jpg)

Tea Party Slams Mitt Romney as 'Weak Moderate Candidate' Hand-Picked by 'Mushy-Middle' GOP

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/11/07/tea-party-slams-mitt-romney-as-weak-moderate-candidate-hand-picked-by-mushy-middle-gop (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/11/07/tea-party-slams-mitt-romney-as-weak-moderate-candidate-hand-picked-by-mushy-middle-gop)

QuoteThe Tea Party Patriots, one of the most prominent organizations within the fiscally conservative tea party movement, says Mitt Romney lost the election because he was a "weak moderate" candidate that was "hand-picked" by the establishment GOP.

"For those of us who believe that America, as founded, is the greatest country in the history of the world – a 'Shining city upon a hill' – we wanted someone who would fight for us," Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin wrote in an e-mail, quoting 40th president and conservative hero Ronald Reagan. "We wanted a fighter like Ronald Reagan who boldly championed America's founding principles... What we got was a weak moderate candidate, hand-picked by the Beltway elites and country-club establishment."

Romney made efforts in the campaign to reach out to the tea party—especially in his choice of right-wing ideologue Paul Ryan as running mate. But as the election drew closer, the GOP nominee tacked closer to the center, and in the final debate he made few contrasts between himself and President Obama.


The Tea Party Patriots said it had to work harder going forward to stop the "mushy-middle" members of the GOP from "getting rolled" by the left.

The group also told followers that they were "not going away," despite losses Tuesday night by tea party congressmen Allen West in Florida and Joe Walsh in Illinois, as well as a near-loss by Rep. Michele Bachmann in Minnesota.

Martin said the group would now turn its attention back to Congress, where it has been more successful in pushing its message of fiscal conservatism, where it would battle over the budget, the debt and against Obamacare.

Quote from: Townsend on November 07, 2012, 10:54:40 AM
Tea Party Slams Mitt Romney as 'Weak Moderate Candidate' Hand-Picked by 'Mushy-Middle' GOP

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/11/07/tea-party-slams-mitt-romney-as-weak-moderate-candidate-hand-picked-by-mushy-middle-gop (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/11/07/tea-party-slams-mitt-romney-as-weak-moderate-candidate-hand-picked-by-mushy-middle-gop)

The Tea Party needs to realize that there are far more people in the middle than them.  They are just as fringe as the ultra-libs on the left.  There's about 60% of the electorate who is really weary of hard-line partisanship.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 07, 2012, 11:45:58 AM
The Tea Party needs to realize that there are far more people in the middle than them.  They are just as fringe as the ultra-libs on the left.  There's about 60% of the electorate who is really weary of hard-line partisanship.

And so, the infighting begins....

a shallow civil war

Rove's on-air Fox Meltdown

Every election night has at least one standout television moment,  and  -- with all due respect to John King and magical fingertips -- the clear winner Tuesday was Republican strategist Karl Rove, who staged a civil war on the air after Fox News called Ohio -- and therefore the entire election -- for President Obama.

Technically speaking, it was Chris Wallace who fired the first shot. Shortly after Fox projected Obama as the winner, Wallace explained that he had received an email from the Romney campaign contesting the network's decision. 
Rove wasn't willing to concede, either, saying it was premature to call the race, even though most of the remaining votes were from Ohio's Democratic-leaning Cuyahoga County. After several minutes of protest, he warned,  "I'd be very cautious about intruding into the process."

Intruding in the process?  Like when they called the last Oklahoma governor's race for the "R" candidate with ONE PERCENT of the precincts reporting?

How Did Science, Medicine, and the Environment Do in the Elections?

Your House of Representatives now has twice as many physicists.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/11/science_environment_medical_election_2012_what_the_votes_mean_for_the_future.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/11/science_environment_medical_election_2012_what_the_votes_mean_for_the_future.html)

QuoteOverall, it was a pretty good night for science. Voters may have had other issues in mind, but when they re-elected President Obama, they endorsed one of the most scientifically accomplished administrations in U.S. history. Obama has been a great supporter of science education and research; he has appointed science-friendly people to science posts (which shouldn't be a big accomplishment but is); and although it wasn't the first act of his presidency (there's no shame in losing out to Lily Ledbetter), he did give a great shout-out to science just a few weeks after taking office:

Science and the scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration on a wide range of issues, including improvement of public health, protection of the environment, increased efficiency in the use of energy and other resources, mitigation of the threat of climate change, and protection of national security.


A win for Obama was a win for science, the environment, and health care.

The election was also an affirmation of the magical powers of math, statistics, and social science research. Well-conducted polls gave Bayesian statistics god Nate Silver the raw data to predict electoral outcomes with satisfying accuracy. Numbers work!

At the state level, California's genetically-modified food labeling initiative failed. Providing information on food labels may sound innocuous, but fear of GMOs is misguided and irrational; on this particular issue, some liberals compete with right-wingers in their rejection of research. Another win for science.

Massachusetts voters weren't quite as wise. The Death With Dignity Act appears to be heading toward a loss. Washington and Oregon passed similar physician-assisted laws and have had no abuse of the system. The main opposition to the law was inspired by religious beliefs.

Voters in Michigan had a chance to put renewable energy in their constitution; Proposal 3 would have required 25 percent of the state's electricity to come from renewable sources by 2025. It failed.

Locally, San Francisco voters—who are normally famously pro-environment—rejected a proposal to study alternative sources of water for the city. The eventual goal of the effort was to restore the once spectacular but now submerged Hetchy Hetchy Valley. California's water wars tend to bring out the worst in everybody.

The number of physicists in Congress doubled last night. Bill Foster, a particle physicist from Illinois, will join Rush Holt, a plasma physicist from New Jersey. They're both Democrats.

Congress lost a physiologist, though: Roscoe Bartlett, a member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, was a member of the Tea Party Caucus but a booster of scientific research.

Rep. Henry Waxman, a force for science and the environment as the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, was re-elected to a redrawn district in a squeaker.

There's a lot of competition in the Senate and House (especially the House) for the most scientifically-illiterate member. But this year Todd Akin really distinguished himself, and his loss was a victory not just for women and rationality and good judgment, but also for basic biology.

The impact of the election on science and the environment will play out over many years, of course, but to take the big-picture view: It looks like we're going to an asteroid.

Quote from: Gaspar on November 07, 2012, 10:39:45 AM
I think the good news we can take out of these election results is that this is probably one or two coffin nails from the end of the Republican party.  Hopefully within the next 4 years we can cultivate the birth of a real Libertarian movement to serve as an alternative for people like myself who believe social policy is separate from political and economic policy.  Republicans lost this election.

Heh, I've had a hard time convincing left-minded folks that when the Republican party implodes, they're just going to move farther to the right as if their electoral failures are because they aren't sufficiently right wing.

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2012, 12:55:15 PM
Heh, I've had a hard time convincing left-minded folks that when the Republican party implodes, they're just going to move farther to the right as if their electoral failures are because they aren't sufficiently right wing.

I agree, and I'm actually shocked it hasn't happened before now. I thought the Tea Party was going to split it. They may still.

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2012, 12:55:15 PM
Heh, I've had a hard time convincing left-minded folks that when the Republican party implodes, they're just going to move farther to the right as if their electoral failures are because they aren't sufficiently right wing.

I was wondering if the crazy was going to scooch to the crazier after this. 

As long as they think conservative entertainers are worth listening to, there will be some sort of justification of the crazy.

Glad to see the market is reacting so positively, best day after election market  results since Dewey defeated Truman in 1948.

Quote from: dbacks fan on November 07, 2012, 01:37:09 PM
Glad to see the market is reacting so positively, best day after election market  results since Dewey defeated Truman in 1948.

;D

Quote from: dbacks fan on November 07, 2012, 01:37:09 PM
Glad to see the market is reacting so positively, best day after election market  results since Dewey defeated Truman in 1948.

The 2% drop?  That's the Koch brothers beating their people with money belts.

Quote from: Townsend on November 07, 2012, 01:53:45 PM
The 2% drop?  That's the Koch brothers beating their people with money belts.

Selling to pay off the massive loans they took out to finance the election, I'm sure. ;)

Damn Koch heads.

Glad to see that some got the sarcasm. I tend to agree with some of the articles on CNBC that I have been reading that whats happening is a sell off of high paying dividend stocks, the two best being AT&T and Verizon, so as to avoid the potential dividend tax. The example was that if you bought 1000 shares of AT&T you would invest ~ $34,000.00, the dividend is ~$1.76/share so you would get $1760.00, but at a tax of 43% you would only get a return of ~$800.00.

Washington Approves Gay Marriage In Referendum 74 Vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html)

QuoteUPDATE: Officials from Washington United for Marriage (WUM) declared a 52 to 48 percent win for Referendum 74 on Nov. 7.

"This is an historic day for Washington, an historic day for our country and, most of all, for families across the state who have dreamed of this day and the wedding celebrations to come," WUM campaign manager Zach Silk said in a statement on the group's website.

Washington looks poised to join Maine and Maryland in allowing same-sex couples to wed via public vote.

Given the state's mail-in voting system, Washington's final tally won't be official for the next few days. But the Seattle Post-Intelligencer found that support for Referendum 74 was leading 51.8 percent to 48.2 percent in the final hours of Nov. 6.

Among those to praise the preliminary results was Rick Jacobs, founder and chair of the Courage Campaign. "More and more voters are coming to know that gay people are our neighbors, our co-workers, our fellow parishioners, our family and our friends," Jacobs said in an email statement. "It won't be long at all before all loving committed couples have the freedom to marry."

Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire signed the voter-approved marriage equality legislation into law in February. Opponents of the law, which would have taken effect in June, filed more than 200,000 signatures seeking a Nov. 6 public vote on the issue.

A number of high-profile, Washington state-based corporations -- including Amazon, Nordstrom and Starbucks -- publicly backed Referendum 74, despite ample criticism from some conservative outlets and right-wing pundits.

In other big wins for marriage equality, Maine and Maryland legalized gay marriage. In Minnesota, voters shot down a constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as a union only between a man and a woman

Quote from: Townsend on November 07, 2012, 02:35:17 PM
Washington Approves Gay Marriage In Referendum 74 Vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html)

QuoteIn Minnesota, voters shot down a constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as a union only between a man and a woman

Wouldn't that already invalidate the Bachmann's marriage?

:o

Quote from: Townsend on November 07, 2012, 02:35:17 PM
Washington Approves Gay Marriage In Referendum 74 Vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/washington-referendum-74-gay-marriage_n_2050539.html)

A friend of mine was celebrating the fact that in Maryland he can now legally play blackjack while seated next to a legally married gay couple.

I think passing the bong around at a gay wedding reception in Washington would trump going to a casino.  ;D

Quote from: dbacks fan on November 07, 2012, 02:33:09 PM
Glad to see that some got the sarcasm. I tend to agree with some of the articles on CNBC that I have been reading that whats happening is a sell off of high paying dividend stocks, the two best being AT&T and Verizon, so as to avoid the potential dividend tax. The example was that if you bought 1000 shares of AT&T you would invest ~ $34,000.00, the dividend is ~$1.76/share so you would get $1760.00, but at a tax of 43% you would only get a return of ~$800.00.

Dividend tax, as in paying income tax like the rest of us schlubs.

Well now someone's lying to herself a little.

Top Democrat says 'rape' comments didn't determine Senate outcome

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/07/top-democrat-says-rape-comments-didnt-determine-senate-outcome/ (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/07/top-democrat-says-rape-comments-didnt-determine-senate-outcome/)

Quote(CNN) - Widely condemned comments about rape from two Republican candidates weren't the determining factor in Democrats retaining the upper chamber of Congress, a top Senate Democrat said Wednesday.

Sen. Patty Murray, the chairwoman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said the two seats her party picked up were instead the prize for hard work ahead of an election that once seemed an uphill climb for Democrats, who were defending 23 of the 33 seats being contested in Tuesday's vote.

We always said we were going to put ourselves in a position to seize upon Republican missteps and we did," Murray said on a conference call. "But offensive comments from Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock did not decide this election. It was a result of hard work and critical strategic decisions over many months."

Those two Republicans received massive blowback this summer and fall for comments on rape and abortion – Akin for claiming that pregnancy was rare after "legitimate rape," and Mourdock for saying God intends for pregnancies occurring from rape.

Both Akin and Mourdock lost their bids for U.S. Senate in elections where Democrats previously appeared vulnerable.

Murray also touted a persistent spending deficit for Democrats, saying the fact her team was outspent in close races was proof the politicians running under the Democratic banner were "the best class of candidates I've ever seen."

"We proved to Karl Rove, the U.S. Chamber [of Commerce], and a bunch of right wing billionaires, they can spend all the money they want, but they can't buy themselves the U.S. Senate," Murray said on the call. "If I'm Sheldon Adelson, Charles Koch or a big oil executive, I would be picking up the phone today and asking the Chamber, asking Karl Rove 'What the heck did you do?'"

The disparity among the Democratic candidates who won – including those in the progressive wing like Massachusetts' Elizabeth Warren, and more moderate senators-to-be like Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota and Tim Kaine in Virginia – didn't worry Murray, who said she was "confident we'll be able to work with these people to move in the right direction."

She added she had "sympathy and understanding" for Sen. John Cornyn, her counterpart at the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

"I don't see this as a John Cornyn problem, I see this as a Republican Party problem, and they'll have to figure out how to deal with that," Murray said.

On that point, she and Cornyn seem to agree. The Texas Republican released a statement Tuesday night urging some introspection for the GOP.

"It's clear that with our losses in the Presidential race, and a number of key Senate races, we have a period of reflection and recalibration ahead for the Republican Party," Cornyn wrote. "While some will want to blame one wing of the party over the other, the reality is candidates from all corners of our GOP lost tonight. Clearly we have work to do in the weeks and months ahead."

Republicans could easily capture the hispanic vote if they would just change their message on Imigration.

It turns out that the term "self-deport" just isn't that popular.

If money is going to continue to be no object then I think the Republican party will be bought and there will be no chance of moderate politics within the party.

Quote from: Townsend on November 07, 2012, 03:41:18 PM
If money is going to continue to be no object then I think the Republican party will be bought and there will be no chance of moderate politics within the party.

As long as they continue to cede everyone center-right or left of that point, they will indeed continue to be a (very loud) bucket of fail.

"Dogs and cats... living together... MASS HYSTERIA"

The Republican party needs to sit down and stop this hard right turn or as a party they will soon slide towards irrelevancy and I don't think they can do it. The Tea Party will not let them. This is the first election since Roosevelt where an incumbent held office with unemployment above 8%, think on that. The Republicans still couldn't win. It's not going to get better either.

Over the last six presidential elections dating back to 1992 Republicans have only won the popular vote once, in 2004. The average percentage of the vote for Democrats over that time is 48.7% compared to 45.1%. And the demographics of republican voters would predict a negative trend line. Republican voters are older, and nearly all white. 89% of the votes for Romney were from white voters as compared to 59% for Obama. But each presidential election the percentage of white voters drops 2%, in 2008 white voters made of 74% of the electorate, this year it was 72%, next time it's likely to be 70%.

Those voters are being replaced by Hispanics mostly in the south and southwest. In 2004 Bush got 44% of the Hispanic vote but McCain's percentage dropped to 31% as the Tea Party types started pushing new immigration laws. Having to run far to the right in the primaries Romney number fell all the way to 26%. Now with the Tea Party radicals firmly in charge of the house the Republican party stance is likely to become more anti-immigration, not less. Four years from now Florida and Nevada may not even be in play for Republicans. And Texas and Arizona may well be the new battleground states. If not in 2016, they will be by 2020. No Republican is going to be able to win if the Democrats can reliable hold California, Florida, New York and Illinois and force Republicans to fight for Texas.

A Tea Party dominated Republican party can win localized elections in red states and Republican gerrymandered districts but the Senate is also likely out of reach. Democrats will control 53 seats in the next Senate, 55 with the Independents. In the next two Senate elections republicans will have to defend 35 seats compared to 29 seats for Democrats. That disadvantage with the ongoing demographic shift nationally means that Republicans are going to be more worried about keeping the Democrats from getting to 60 than they are about getting to 51.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 07, 2012, 01:50:30 PM
;D

Oh, but the past 4 years when the market was up over %50 was not Obama's doing?

Conan, time to quit f#$king with the facts.  :o

Quote from: Teatownclown on November 07, 2012, 04:16:46 PM
Oh, but the past 4 years when the market was up over %50 was not Obama's doing?

Conan, time to quit f#$king with the facts.  :o

Relax.  Go smoke another bowl.

New fear ad:

Ah, yes, I see that the money machine hasn't let up a bit. Do you think Republicans would give so much if they knew that the folks that send them the mailers and call them on the phone keep 80 cents on the dollar?

On the bright side, Trump's army has failed to turn up yet...

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2012, 05:02:43 PM
Ah, yes, I see that the money machine hasn't let up a bit. Do you think Republicans would give so much if they knew that the folks that send them the mailers and call them on the phone keep 80 cents on the dollar?

On the bright side, Trump's army has failed to turn up yet...

Ah yes, but what you don't realize is that Trump's army has turned up...it is stationed in his hair for full stealth capabilities...

One more bit of bad news/gloating that should be taken care of today: Across all the House races, Democrats won the popular vote by about half a million. Thanks to the 2.5% (ish) Republican gerrymandering advantage, the Republicans still have a decent sized majority. God help the Republicans if the playing field is ever leveled.

Quote from: swake on November 07, 2012, 03:58:25 PM
Four years from now Florida and Nevada may not even be in play for Republicans. And Texas and Arizona may well be the new battleground states. If not in 2016, they will be by 2020. No Republican is going to be able to win if the Democrats can reliable hold California, Florida, New York and Illinois and force Republicans to fight for Texas.

See what happens when you re-elect a pro-immigration globalist California governor who sold arms to Iran to pay ransoms because under his watch hostages were taken at many of our foreign embassies... whoever did that must really hate America.... oh wait, that was Ronald Reagan.  Nevermind. 

(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/579133_498597560158830_1438653675_n.jpg)

Quote from: TulsaRufnex on November 07, 2012, 05:27:36 PM
See what happens when you re-elect a pro-immigration globalist California governor who sold arms to Iran to pay ransoms because under his watch hostages were taken at many of our foreign embassies... whoever did that must really hate America.... oh wait, that was Ronald Reagan.  Nevermind. 

It's called entrepreneurial spirit. Not that you'd know anything about that.  :-*

;)

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2012, 05:43:07 PM
It's called entrepreneurial spirit. Not that you'd know anything about that.  :-*

;)

Yep.

(http://www.democraticstuff.com/common/images/products/large/BT23882-2.jpg)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-dNGrqXJdAb8/T7-lgpkhYlI/AAAAAAAAAFg/lj5B25D3kEQ/beware_artists.jpg)

First, some semi-compulsory snark:

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3215/2943837100_12212916b5.jpg)

Now that it's out of the way, let's move on to more serious stuff.

The republic survived through eight years of the Bush administration.  It will survive through President Obama's tenure, just as it survived Nixon, Reagan, and far more venal rogues.  Take a deep breath and think about this question.  How much impact does the office of the president have on your day-to-day life?  For most of us, whoever occupies the oval office is largely irrelevant, so why get overly emotional about a presidential election?

Here's one personal observation that you may agree with or not.  The Tea Party is a political dead end, one that the Republican party can safely discard.  I know.  It's heresy in Oklahoma particularly in light of the election of two TP stalwarts on Tuesday.  I'm saying that the mainstream Republicans can jettison both the Tea Party and the social conservatives.  There simply are no more votes to be had out there on the fringe, so why worry about them?  It's not as if they'll turn to the Democrats.  No, the country club Republicans will have to throw a few sops their way, but there's no need to pander to the far right fringe any longer.

It will come as no surprise to discover that Fox News now has the credibility of the defunct Weekly World News without the insouciant charm of Bat Boy.  I suspect that many former WWN staffers are now with Fox.  Earlier today, Speaker of the House John Boehner said that in order to avoid the looming fiscal cliff, the Republican majority in the House would give consideration to raising additional revenue, provided some caveats were met.  The talking heads on Fox were appalled that he'd say such a thing. News is supposed to be based on reality, yet it's painfully obvious that Fox prefers ideology.  So I can only conclude that Fox is more like performance art or the Weekly World News.

The Tulsa World revealed its loyalty to Oklahoma readers and advertisers while turning a blind eye to the strengths of the President's achievements.  There's a name for the "everyone believes" fallacy, but it escapes me just now.  Oh, I understand their reasons for echoing the views of the majority here in Oklahoma.  Newsprint is an endangered species, after all, so why hasten its demise?  Their tepid endorsement of Governor Romney was self-serving, practical, and utterly spineless.

Tulsa county voters stuck to their anti-tax guns by voting down both Vision2 proposals, largely giving credence to the "too soon, too vague, too hurried" argument.  Yet they also voted for state-wide questions that serve to cap property taxes and reduce corporate taxes.  Similar proposals in other states have served to reduce the amount of money for schools.  Since the effects are known, what can explain the voters endorsement of these proposals?  I'm sure the legislature will step up and see that the funds are available.  Sure they will.

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2012, 05:16:01 PM
One more bit of bad news/gloating that should be taken care of today: Across all the House races, Democrats won the popular vote by about half a million. Thanks to the 2.5% (ish) Republican gerrymandering advantage, the Republicans still have a decent sized majority. God help the Republicans if the playing field is ever leveled.

Funny, libs I know say the GOP has the gerrymandering advantage, cons I know say it's the other way.  I think all of you are lying.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 07, 2012, 09:26:24 PM
Funny, libs I know say the GOP has the gerrymandering advantage, cons I know say it's the other way.  I think all of you are lying.

Outsider. :P

Quote from: Conan71 on November 07, 2012, 09:26:24 PM
Funny, libs I know say the GOP has the gerrymandering advantage, cons I know say it's the other way.  I think all of you are lying.

Statistics. Suck 'em.  ;D

As I've said before, I'd rather draw districts by algorithm and completely without regard to partisan advantage, race, income, or anything else other than state boundaries. Let the chips fall where they may. Demographic shifts eventually change the makeup of the districts if we don't actively work against them.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 07, 2012, 09:26:24 PM
Funny, libs I know say the GOP has the gerrymandering advantage, cons I know say it's the other way.  I think all of you are lying.

The Tea Party wave two years ago set the advantage in State Houses and Governorships so that Republicans were able to redraw house lines after the census and will they have a Gerrymandered advantage for the next decade.

Something else that happened:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/puerto-ricans-favor-statehood-for-first-time/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/puerto-ricans-favor-statehood-for-first-time/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29)

Puerto Ricans favor statehood for first time

QuoteCNN) – In an overshadowed Election Day contest, Puerto Ricans voted in favor of statehood in a nonbinding referendum, marking the first time such an initiative garnered a majority.

Puerto Ricans were asked about their desires in two parts. First, by a 54% to 46% margin, voters rejected their current status as a U.S. commonwealth. In a separate question, 61% chose statehood as the alternative, compared with 33% for the semi-autonomous "sovereign free association" and 6% for outright independence.

Screen shots of short lived victorious Romney website:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/07/romneys_transition_site.html (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/07/romneys_transition_site.html)

(http://politicalwire.com/assets_c/2012/11/Screen%20Shot%202012-11-07%20at%208.16.28%20PM-thumb-550x335-403.png)

(http://politicalwire.com/assets_c/2012/11/Mitt%20Romney%20the%20President%20Elect%20Join%20The%20Administration-thumb-550x631-412.png)

(http://politicalwire.com/assets_c/2012/11/Mitt%20Romney%20the%20President%20Elect%20The%20Inauguration-thumb-550x619-414.png)

(http://politicalwire.com/assets_c/2012/11/Screen%20Shot%202012-11-07%20at%208.40.24%20PM-thumb-550x371-409-thumb-550x371-410.png)

The Obama website was a bit mor blunt.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7250/8167138241_7f5fe56391_z.jpg)

Quote from: swake on November 08, 2012, 08:31:26 AM
The Tea Party wave two years ago set the advantage in State Houses and Governorships so that Republicans were able to redraw house lines after the census and will they have a Gerrymandered advantage for the next decade.

Only thing I can find claims a 1.2% advantage as of the recent round of redistricting.  There are several Republican Congressmen/women who blamed gerrymandering in blue states on their losses Tuesday.

QuoteSummary: My analysis indicates that redistricting has given Republicans an advantage of about 1.2% in national popular vote margin compared with pre-2010. In a close national Congressional race, which we have this year, this translates to an advantage of 13 seats. The effect is more than I was expecting. http://election.princeton.edu/2012/10/04/quantifying-the-effect-of-redistricting/

In spite of this supposed advantage, Democrats gained House seats.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 08, 2012, 10:59:45 AM

In spite of this supposed advantage, Democrats gained House seats.

And Senate seats.

Of course they did.  The republican party was a ship wreck.

Only 73 more days to inauguration day.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 08, 2012, 10:59:45 AM
In spite of this supposed advantage, Democrats gained House seats.

Not very many, despite winning the national popular vote.

It begins.
http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/vegas-employer-obama-won-so-i-fired-22-employees/

Quote from: Gaspar on November 08, 2012, 01:42:54 PM
It begins.
http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/vegas-employer-obama-won-so-i-fired-22-employees/

"David" is a 27 year old creeper living in his mother's basement wanting to hear himself on the radio.

The crazy is strong:

http://electionresultbutthurt.tumblr.com/

Turns out Iran fired on a US drone aircraft over the gulf days before the election and the story was successfully squashed.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/first-on-cnn-iranian-jets-fire-on-u-s-drone/?hpt=hp_t3

Quote from: Gaspar on November 08, 2012, 01:55:31 PM
Turns out Iran fired on a US drone aircraft over the gulf days before the election and the story was successfully squashed.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/first-on-cnn-iranian-jets-fire-on-u-s-drone/?hpt=hp_t3

It's been all over twitter.  They missed a drone.

Quote from: Townsend on November 08, 2012, 01:57:43 PM
It's been all over twitter.  They missed a drone.

remember who you're talking to.  I can hear the collective hand-wringing already.

Quote from: Hoss on November 08, 2012, 02:43:43 PM
remember who you're talking to.  I can hear the collective hand-wringing already.

Rocking back and forth. "ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah"

Quote from: Townsend on November 08, 2012, 02:45:57 PM
Rocking back and forth. "ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah, ohmagah"

Still working alongside Hoss?

Quote from: guido911 on November 08, 2012, 02:54:22 PM
Still working alongside Hoss?

Aww.  He still cares....   :D

Quote from: guido911 on November 08, 2012, 02:54:22 PM
Still working alongside Hoss?

It's more of a banter.

Gotta try to keep the crazy tucked back behind the door.

Quote from: Gaspar on November 08, 2012, 01:55:31 PM
Turns out Iran fired on a US drone aircraft over the gulf days before the election and the story was successfully squashed.

Fired on and apparently deliberately missed? Getting worked up over sabre rattling is what got us into two land wars in Asia. Maybe take an Ativan.

Republicans: Don't Trust Fox News!

How the news network failed the GOP.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/11/how_fox_news_failed_the_republican_party_in_the_2012_election.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/11/how_fox_news_failed_the_republican_party_in_the_2012_election.html)

QuoteFor liberals like me, Fox News was the channel to watch last night. As it became clear early on that Obama was going to take this thing, my household quickly switched the channel from CNN to Fox, eager to see the network's massive breakdown play out in real time. After all, if the job of Fox News these past four years was to make Obama a one-term president, a goal the network not-incidentally shared with the Republican Party, Fox News super-duper seriously failed.

(My house did that.)

QuoteIn 2009, White House communications director Anita Dunn called Fox News "either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party." I don't know about the "or" part. With massive funds and infinite air time, Roger Ailes' little network that could spent the past four years demonizing president Obama (after a year of demonizing candidate Obama), and obsessively churning up non-news to scare the smile out of white guys and feed into the GOP bloodstream: from the Black Panthers' remarkable rise to political power to that thing about the guns and Mexico named after an awesome Vin Diesel movie to the multifront war on Christmas/Christians/Christ to The Great Benghazi Conspiracy of 2012.

And what do they have to show for it? Not a Republican president. Not a Republican Senate. Not a repealed health care law. Adding insult to Tuesday's injury, Eric Holder is still a free man.

Yes, ratings. Yes, money. I hear you. But if Fox News has any actual interest in helping the Republican Party or the conservative cause—and you can want to do this and make money, just like the GOP!—the network really flubbed it. So what happened, other than the mainstream media oppressors shutting down the truth once again and polling places letting Hispanics in?
In 2009, Gawker published a post titled "What's Bad for the GOP is Good for Fox News," arguing that Republicans' worst nightmare—the election of a black, Democratic president who listens to the rap music and gives young, female, and non-white Americans hope—was actually a dream come true for Rupert Murdoch's money-minting, 24-hour news network. Pointing to this illustrative graph, Gawker's John Cook (who, full disclosure, is my husband) wrote that "the more viewers Fox attracts, the more voters the GOP repels."
But in 2010, the GOP/Fox News Industrial Complex proved Gawker —and many Democrats who assumed Fox had taken things too far—wrong. With the aid of the Fox-bolstered Tea Party revolution, the Fox-created Socialist-in-Chief, the Fox-aired town hall debacles, and the Fox-supported conspiracy theories of Glenn Beck, Republicans won the House and the narrative. We all gave in and started calling it Obamacare. 2012 looked to be a lost cause.
But Fox overreached. The midterm results told Sean Hannity and Gretchen Carlson and Megyn Kelly that they were doing something right, and so they kept at it. Donald Trump phoned in from Trump HQ daily to inform Greta Van Susteren's viewers about his heroic quest for the missing birth certificate. Glenn Beck presented his irrefutable evidence that everything is connected and all roads lead to the Jews/Kenya/Cass Sunstein. Beck finally got canned in 2011, but Hannity picked up some of his nut-job slack. The liberals on Hannity's panel got paler and sicklier by design (my theory, at least), and the true-believer conservatives became more insufferably confident and dismissive of any potential Obama revival.

So what does all this delusional thinking have to do with actual voters and their actual votes? As Conor Friedersdorf writes in his very smart Atlantic piece about the failure of the conservative media, it's "easy to close oneself off inside a conservative echo chamber." As he points out, Fox News and other conservative media are "far more intellectually closed" than, say, NPR. Fox News feeds its viewers a line of bull about the way the world is. Viewers buy this line of bull. Misinformed viewers become misinformed voters. And then misinformed voters are shocked when Obama wins. Hey, I thought everyone hated this guy? (The preceding is a very good reason why liberals should limit their MSNBC viewing, by the way.)

Friedersdorf argues that Fox not only deludes its viewers, but that it is part of a self-deluded system, in which right-wing talk radio and TV pundits like Dennis Prager and Hugh Hewitt actually also take the bait. They all reinforce each other's divorce from reality, Friedersdorf  suggests, until the whole thing blows up—as it did last night in that crazy MegynCam moment, as the anchor, faced with a raving Karl Rove, walked from the studio to one of the back offices to confront the network's decision desk over its Ohio call. It was, of course, terrific TV. In our house it played as comedy, but I'm sure Fox's loyal viewers, still holding out hope of a Romney turnaround, loved the drama of Kelly stalking the hallways, one of the network's conservative crusaders on the hunt for nebbish number crunchers.

So is the talent at Fox News made up of true believers or cynical hacks? Most likely, the network—just like the pundit roundtable on air last night—contains some of each. For the ratings whores, it's likely true that four more years of Obama is exactly what the network needs—but it's clearly not what's best for, say, Chris Christie. Fueled by intensity and hatred, Fox thrives as the opposition. The trouble is that for the GOP to survive, Republican candidates eventually have to get votes. When they fail, Fox gets to keep on printing money.

After Karl Rove's on-air freakout and the aforementioned MegynCam challenge, Fox was forced to acknowledge that Obama had won the damn election. And now what are they left with? A whole lot of viewers who are quite surprised to find that they are once again outnumbered by Americans who actually like better access to health care and don't all keep Carrie Mathison-style timelines of the Benghazi cables on their living room walls. Now these disappointed souls wonder: Why isn't the world the way we thought it was Tuesday morning? Just guess where they will turn for the answer.

I have found it very surprising how many people are willing to call Obama a n****r in public. I have also found it very surprising that religious people who prayed for the election to turn out well for them are absolutely convinced that the heathens thwarted God's will when it's equally possible that their prayers were indeed answered. And that many Christians also don't know that Allah is the same as Yahweh is the same as God.

I know intellectually that people are just this stupid all the time, but rarely is it so flagrantly on display as the last couple of days.

Quote from: nathanm on November 08, 2012, 05:24:15 PM
I have found it very surprising how many people are willing to call Obama a n****r in public. I have also found it very surprising that religious people who prayed for the election to turn out well for them are absolutely convinced that the heathens thwarted God's will when it's equally possible that their prayers were indeed answered. And that many Christians also don't know that Allah is the same as Yahweh is the same as God.

I know intellectually that people are just this stupid all the time, but rarely is it so flagrantly on display as the last couple of days.

The Devil moves in mysterious ways.  ;)

Some people say they want to leave the country now.

Don't let the snow plow hit you in the a$$:

http://www.fox23.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=3822861

Quote from: patric on November 09, 2012, 03:15:25 PM
Some people say they want to leave the country now.

A lot of them won't actually leave.  They'll just send their money to the Caymans or a numbered Swiss account. 

That sounds familiar somehow.

Quote from: Ed W on November 09, 2012, 05:32:43 PM
A lot of them won't actually leave.  They'll just send their money to the Caymans or a numbered Swiss account. 

That sounds familiar somehow.

Ding Ding Ding. I like how you used the word "their" in reference to whose money it is. That's the truth.

Just read about these layoffs...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/after-obama-re-election-ceo-reads-prayer-to-staff-announces-layoffs/2012/11/09/e9bca204-2a63-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_story.html


http://www.ksl.com/?sid=22890041&nid=148&title=utah-company-blames-president-obama-for-102-workers-laid-off&s_cid=featured-4

Not quite sure the folks being let go care too much whose fault the employers believe it is.

edited.

Consider this.  We had a full moon last week, but in the intervening days, President Obama won re-election.  Now, the moon is waning.  Could there be a connection?

Quote from: Ed W on November 09, 2012, 06:22:46 PM
Consider this.  We had a full moon last week, but in the intervening days, President Obama won re-election.  Now, the moon is waning.  Could there be a connection?

So it's the moon's fault. I knew it!!! I guess that's better than blaming boooosshhh.

Quote from: Ed W on November 09, 2012, 06:22:46 PM
Consider this.  We had a full moon last week, but in the intervening days, President Obama won re-election.  Now, the moon is waning.  Could there be a connection?

Werewolf?

It's sad someone would throw their business failings onto an election and that a member of the media would print the story.

Quote from: Townsend on November 09, 2012, 10:34:09 PM
It's sad someone would throw their business failings onto an election former President Bush and that a member of the mainstream media would print the story for four years and counting.

That's acceptable, correct? Kinda lobbed that one it there....

Quote from: Townsend on November 09, 2012, 10:34:09 PM
It's sad someone would throw their business failings onto an election and that a member of the media would print the story.

There is a certain set that assumes that any successes are solely due to their own hard work, while any failures are someone else's fault, usually the government's. If only that pesky government hadn't intervened, I would have made a mint with my underwater basketweaving classes!  ::)

On rare occasion, it is actually true. I saw it once. A client of mine made pretty good money selling stuff to the government. Then the government stopped buying so much stuff. Sad days. Of course, one could argue that perhaps they should have diversified their customer base. (To be fair, that's exactly what they were doing, just too late)

So is anyone ready to start calling the people still butthurt over this thing and lashing out sore losers?

Quote from: guido911 on November 10, 2012, 02:02:27 AM
Kinda lobbed that one it there....

A lob?  You changed the statement.  How is that a lob?

Guido smells of elderberries.  Kinda lobbed that one in there...

Quote from: Townsend on November 10, 2012, 08:12:58 AM
A lob?  You changed the statement.  How is that a lob?

Guido smells of elderberries.  Kinda lobbed that one in there...

Quote from: nathanm on November 10, 2012, 08:03:17 AM
There is a certain set that assumes that any successes are solely due to their own hard work, while any failures are someone else's fault, usually the government's.

And there are other sets that believe that success is solely the result of good luck and government assistance.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 10, 2012, 11:28:46 AM
And there are other sets that believe that success is solely the result of good luck and government assistance.

Really? Can you link to someone saying that? I don't think anyone except your straw man believes that hard work, ingenuity, and common sense aren't part of what makes people successful.

Quote from: nathanm on November 10, 2012, 12:27:33 PM
Really? Can you link to someone saying that? I don't think anyone except your straw man believes that hard work, ingenuity, and common sense aren't part of what makes people successful.

Waiting for that straw man link to the 'You didn't built that' comment....

Quote from: Hoss on November 10, 2012, 12:45:09 PM
Waiting for that straw man link to the 'You didn't built that' comment....

Don't hold your breath waiting.

Quote from: nathanm on November 10, 2012, 12:27:33 PM
Really? Can you link to someone saying that? I don't think anyone except your straw man believes that hard work, ingenuity, and common sense aren't part of what makes people successful.

I build things of wood. Straw is too combustible.  Can't quite get to brick.

I'll huff and I'll puff

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 10, 2012, 04:07:11 PM
I'll huff and I'll puff

Very good.  With modern adhesives, you will have to huff and puff pretty strong.

;D

Quote from: Townsend on November 10, 2012, 08:12:58 AM
A lob?  You changed the statement.  How is that a lob?

Guido smells of elderberries.  Kinda lobbed that one in there...

What is it with you and Hoss? Really. The guy is nothing but a post troll and hasn't had an original thought since he farted last.

I recommend this as his avatar:

(http://www.gucomics.com/comics/2010/gu_20100326.jpg)


edited. Oh you a "my bad" on the above if you post back. I just noticed that Hoss was trolling you then Clavin this time.  Just bringing his brainless echo chamber bullcrap to stir up smile. 

Quote from: Townsend on November 10, 2012, 08:12:58 AM
A lob?  You changed the statement.  How is that a lob?

And you cannot be serious. We've listened to a guy blame his economic policy failures on Bush, and now you find that excuse-making objectionable?

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 10, 2012, 04:07:11 PM
I'll huff and I'll puff

We know RM...

(http://halfpastawesome.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Huffer.jpg)

Quote from: guido911 on November 10, 2012, 11:17:14 PM
What is it with you and Hoss? Really. The guy is nothing but a post troll and hasn't had an original thought since he farted last.

I recommend this as his avatar:

(http://www.gucomics.com/comics/2010/gu_20100326.jpg)


edited. Oh you a "my bad" on the above if you post back. I just noticed that Hoss was trolling you then Clavin this time.  Just bringing his brainless echo chamber bullcrap to stir up smile.  

You're calling ME a forum troll.  That's truly priceless, coming from the king of the audio visual aid...and the drive-by ad-hominem.

Especially considering that most of your posts are drive-bys at 3am.  You have someone restricting you from computer use?  Your mommy maybe?

???

Since guido is so good with A/V aids...

I imagine this must have been you..or hell, it might be you now:

(http://miltownkid.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/internettoughguy.jpg)

Quote from: Hoss on November 11, 2012, 12:20:15 AM
You're calling ME a forum troll.  That's truly priceless, coming from the king of the audio visual aid...and the drive-by ad-hominem.

Especially considering that most of your posts are drive-bys at 3am.  You have someone restricting you from computer use?  Your mommy maybe?

???

Someone's panties got wadded up a bit--I guess I got a little too close to the truth. I am actually embarrassed for that guy.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 12:36:19 AM
Someone's panties got wadded up a bit--I guess I got a little too close to the truth. I am actually embarrassed for that guy.

Nope, just pointing out the irony of your post.  I fart in your general direction

:D

Quote from: guido911 on November 10, 2012, 02:02:27 AM
That's acceptable, correct? Kinda lobbed that one it there....

You sweet little lobber you....

Kind of like the rabid frothing at the mouth those guys did about Clinton and Whitewater, et al, for 8 years - but at least THEY had absolutely NO reason, unlike the ones going on about Bush who actually had good reasons that remains to affect us adversely today.

Actually 16 years, 'cause they did it all through Clinton's term, and then continued all through Baby Bush's term.

Quote from: Hoss on November 11, 2012, 12:38:00 AM
Nope, just pointing out the irony of your post.  I fart in your general direction

:D

Don't be crude - don't 'fart'...just pass copious quantities of odious bodily excretion related vapors in his general direction....

As a side note regarding panties in a bunch:

President Obama won in Florida after the votes were finalized on Saturday.  His electoral vote count is now 332 to Governor Romney's 206.  The president won 365 electoral votes in 2008, leading some on the right to insist that this election was not an overwhelming victory.  Still, it seems that 332 is greater than 206 to my way of thinking, but those who find basic arithmetic a challenge are free to disagree.

This election was clearly a mandate. Obama won high numbers of independents and in virtually every demographic except white males. Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes for president. America is choosing the democrat message and it clearly shows.

Oklahoma doesn't agree, and it will keep our state behind the rest of the country in my opinion.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 12:44:51 PM
Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes for president. America is choosing the democrat message and it clearly shows.

Proof that our public school system is failing.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 01:36:31 PM
Proof that our public school system is failing.

Or, more to the point, that educated voters just vote differently:

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/184qlyxk0x1x6jpg/xlarge.jpg)

I wonder why educated America votes for democrats? Is it because education teaches you to be open to new ideas? My dictionary defines liberal as broad-minded and not bound by authoritarianism.

No wonder Mary Fallin and Janet Barressi want to destroy public education in Oklahoma. It is a strategy to get re-elected.

Quote from: patric on November 11, 2012, 01:54:32 PM
Or, more to the point, that educated voters just vote differently:

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/184qlyxk0x1x6jpg/xlarge.jpg)

Even more to the point that we are giving diplomas to people who don't deserve them.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:20:12 PM
I wonder why educated America votes for democrats? Is it because education teaches you to be open to new ideas?

Indoctrination, especially at the college level.  If you don't write your essays in line with the liberal doctrine, you get poor grades.  Many otherwise intelligent students never recover.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 12:44:51 PM
Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes for president.

Democrats have only won more than 50% of the popular vote in the last two.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:20:12 PM
My dictionary defines liberal as broad-minded and not bound by authoritarianism.

The definition of liberal in my dictionary is also appealing.  Too bad it doesn't transfer to the real world of politics.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 02:25:30 PM
Indoctrination, especially at the college level.  If you don't write your essays in line with the liberal doctrine, you get poor grades.  Many otherwise intelligent students never recover.

Please step away from the Flavor Aid.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 02:31:23 PM
Democrats have only won more than 50% of the popular vote in the last two.

Is this your lame attempt to make the republicans look like winners?

Look at the scoreboard. Your party is losing.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:52:33 PM
Is this your lame attempt to make the republicans look like winners?

Look at the scoreboard. Your party is losing.

Holy crap. Just two years ago the dems took a historic beating. And as for scoreboards, I'd say Oklahoma is doing just fine. That's where you live by the way. And, that's where I think most that post here live.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 02:25:30 PM
Indoctrination, especially at the college level.  If you don't write your essays in line with the liberal doctrine, you get poor grades.  Many otherwise intelligent students never recover.

No.  Maybe one or two isolated incidents - much like with any Gaussian distribution, but I have written essays from TCC to OSU to TU from the mid 70's to the late, late 80's, with a definitely not so liberal bent and never had an issue.  Think gun control and lifetime NRA membership, and balanced budget amendment.

Have had some serious follow on discussions about them, too.  Always got A's.  Have since moderated my views on balanced budget amendment somewhat.  Not the Second Amendment.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:20:12 PM
I wonder why educated America votes for democrats? Is it because education teaches you to be open to new ideas?

I am no fan of public education either. And I dare say I am better educated that you. I am better educated than many regulars in here. So by your thinking I am always right. Oh, and my better half is more educated than I am. So she is super right.

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 02:47:56 PM
Please step away from the Flavor Aid.

Tell us again about your college experience since you apparently know so much about it.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 02:55:41 PM
Holy crap. Just two years ago the dems took a historic beating. And as for scoreboards, I'd say Oklahoma is doing just fine. That's where you live by the way. BY the way, that's where I think most that post here live.

Not me...I live part time in Tralfamadore where I can exist freely outside of Dumbf@$kistan. The other half I live in denial.

Quote from: Teatownclown on November 11, 2012, 03:05:07 PM
Not me...I live part time in Tralfamadore where I can exist freely outside of Dumbf@$kistan. The other half I live in denial.

Good thing I couldn't give less of a damn about you or where you live.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 02:25:30 PM

Many otherwise intelligent students never recover.

If a bad grade on an essay is all it takes for someone never to recover, then they actually were NOT otherwise intelligent students.  Come on, Red, you have done better than that - you have done in the past!!

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:20:12 PM
I wonder why educated America votes for democrats?

Listen to these geniuses. They vote like you do.





And before you think about linking to a right wing loon to do the ol' straw man dance, remember, you are the one pushing how intelligent dem voters are.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:01:31 PM

I am no fan of public education either. And I dare say I am better educated that you. I am better educated than many regulars in here.

Boom!!  Bam!!  Pow!!   Take that, public school graduates!!

Starting to sound like a Batman comic book around here.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:08:41 PM
Listen to these geniuses. They vote like you do.

And before you think about linking to a right wing loon to do the ol' straw man dance, remember, you are the one pushing how intelligent dem voters are.

Have you listened to the Mississippi right wing...nuts?  Or Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman?

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 11, 2012, 03:11:30 PM

Have you listened to the Mississippi right wing...nuts?  Or Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman?

Nothing in particular. Besides, what do they have to do with how better educated dem voters are? And as far as Bachmann goes, she has a JD and LL.M in tax. How does her education square up with yours? And I guess you just ignored the admonishing about straw man.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 11, 2012, 03:09:02 PM

Boom!!  Bam!!  Pow!!   Take that, public school graduates!!

Starting to sound like a Batman comic book around here.

Translation: I got nothing.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 11, 2012, 03:09:02 PM



Starting to sound like a Batman comic book around here.

Now now, let's not drag in your reading level into this.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:06:05 PM
Good thing I couldn't give less of a damn about you or where you live.

Mean spirited.  Over your head.... Which drug are you on?

Quote from: Teatownclown on November 11, 2012, 03:05:07 PM
Not me...I live part time in Tralfamadore where I can exist freely outside of Dumbf@$kistan. The other half I live in denial.

Tralfamadore, Dumbf@$kistan and Denial.  I believe they are towns in SW Oklahoma next to Technicolor and Panavision where all the movies are filmed.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 02:52:33 PM
Is this your lame attempt to make the republicans look like winners?
Look at the scoreboard. Your party is losing.

Republicans lost this round for the office of POTUS.  My only point is that when looking at the popular vote, Democrats are not running away with the whole kit and kaboodle.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:03:32 PM
Tell us again about your college experience since you apparently know so much about it.

I'm not the one making an assertion, so why don't you stick a sock in it?

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 06:24:30 PM
I'm not the one making an assertion, so why don't you stick a sock in it?

QuotePlease step away from the Flavor Aid.

Is an assertion.

From my dictionary:
"a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason."

I expect you don't see it that way but you need to accept (even if you don't understand) that others do see it that way.

I guess it implies that there is Flavor Aid somewhere near your person.

That's clearly not what I was referring to, though. I was referring to your assertion that higher education indoctrinates politically liberal beliefs. Pretty funny given that the source of the present conservative movement is a "liberal" Ivy League school and their economic doctrine is straight out of another university. Am I just missing a joke?

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 08:26:22 PM
I guess it implies that there is Flavor Aid somewhere near your person.

Evidently in your opinion, not mine.  I will at least give you the honor of drinking the brand name Kool-Aid in your thoughts.

QuoteThat's clearly not what I was referring to, though.

Maybe in your mind.

QuoteI was referring to your assertion that higher education indoctrinates politically liberal beliefs.

Depends on your frame of reference.  

Edit: spelling correction

Even though the definition may be technically incorrect, it may be time to renew the term "an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals" as it applies to liberals as intended by Spiro Agnew.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 08:35:00 PM
I will at least give you the honor of drinking the brand name Kool-Aid in your thoughts.

Thanks, but I referenced Flavor Aid for a reason.

Quote
Depends on your frame of reference.  

It's got nothing to do with a frame of reference and everything to do with the fact that education, generally, doesn't indoctrinate a particular political view on the left-right spectrum. I provided examples that illustrate why I believe that to be the case. I do think that our education system generally does indoctrinate the normative neoliberal capitalist world view, but that's a product of that being the prevailing consensus and has absolutely nothing to do with educating people to be Republicans or Democrats.

It's a completely ridiculous assertion that flies in the face of some 51% of college graduates who voted voting for Romney, according to exit polling. If anything, the exit polling data shows exactly the opposite, at least below the postgraduate level. Romney got 33% of the vote among those who did not graduate high school, 48% of those who did graduate high school, 49% of those with an associate's degree, 51% among those who have a bachelor's degree, and 42% of those with a postgraduate degree.

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 09:27:18 PM
Thanks, but I referenced Flavor Aid for a reason.

The cult mass suicide?

QuoteIt's got nothing to do with a frame of reference and everything to do with the fact that education, generally, doesn't indoctrinate a particular political view on the left-right spectrum. I provided examples that illustrate why I believe that to be the case. I do think that our education system generally does indoctrinate the normative neoliberal capitalist world view, but that's a product of that being the prevailing consensus and has absolutely nothing to do with educating people to be Republicans or Democrats.

I'm sure you believe that.  I have seen enough of your examples to be skeptical. I don't think that the intention is Republican vs. Democrat so much as what the professors believe what is "correct".  Differing opinions are not allowed.

QuoteIt's a completely ridiculous assertion that flies in the face of some 51% of college graduates who voted voting for Romney, according to exit polling. If anything, the exit polling data shows exactly the opposite, at least below the postgraduate level. Romney got 33% of the vote among those who did not graduate high school, 48% of those who did graduate high school, 49% of those with an associate's degree, 51% among those who have a bachelor's degree, and 42% of those with a postgraduate degree.

So the problem is after the bachelor's degree where there is a closer relationship with the professors.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 11, 2012, 09:48:41 PM
The cult mass suicide?

Sparked by a misguided sense of persecution.

Quote
I'm sure you believe that.  I have seen enough of your examples to be skeptical. I don't think that the intention is Republican vs. Democrat so much as what the professors believe what is "correct".  Differing opinions are not allowed.

So the problem is after the bachelor's degree where there is a closer relationship with the professors.

Show some evidence that there's a lack of conservative-leaning college graduates and I'll be more inclined to take your claim more seriously.

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:20:36 PM
Nothing in particular. Besides, what do they have to do with how better educated dem voters are? And as far as Bachmann goes, she has a JD and LL.M in tax. How does her education square up with yours? And I guess you just ignored the admonishing about straw man.

Well, apparently is not only squares up, but exceeds mightily.  Since I, in fact am able to read.  And have read the US Constitution...a simple feat that, by so many of her public pronouncements, eludes her.

Straw men...wonderful creations.  Useful on so many levels, and use in practical application by the expression "grasping at straws..."

Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2012, 03:23:36 PM
Now now, let's not drag in your reading level into this.

Kapow!!

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 11:04:35 PM
Show some evidence that there's a lack of conservative-leaning college graduates and I'll be more inclined to take your claim more seriously.

I'm going to have to spin this one back at you.  Show me some evidence that there is a significant proportion of conservative leaning college graduates compared to liberals.  That's outside of Oklahoma and the other severely Red states.  Include places like the Northeast, Northwest, California....

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 12, 2012, 08:11:11 AM
I'm going to have to spin this one back at you.  Show me some evidence that there is a significant proportion of conservative leaning college graduates compared to liberals.  That's outside of Oklahoma and the other severely Red states.  Include places like the Northeast, Northwest, California....

You made the assertion that colleges indoctrinate people into politically liberal thought, not me. The burden is on you. I already provided data that backs up my claim that you had no evidence. Feel free to refute it. Unfortunately, there was limited exit polling this cycle, so you'll have to look at pre-election telephone polls or find some other source of data on the subject if you want to know specifically about California or other typically "liberal" states.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 11, 2012, 12:44:51 PM
This election was clearly a mandate. Obama won high numbers of independents and in virtually every demographic except white males. Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes for president. America is choosing the democrat message and it clearly shows.

Oklahoma doesn't agree, and it will keep our state behind the rest of the country in my opinion.

When nearly half the nation voted against Obama and he received about 7 million fewer votes than in 2008, that's not a mandate.  From what I've read about 11 million voters stayed home this time, rather than trying to make less of a poor choice.  His margin of victory dropped from 7.2% in 2008 to 2.9% this year.  Clearly, he's lost some support and the enthusiasm for him has waned.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 10:43:13 AM
When nearly half the nation voted against Obama and he received about 7 million fewer votes than in 2008, that's not a mandate.  From what I've read about 11 million voters stayed home this time, rather than trying to make less of a poor choice.  His margin of victory dropped from 7.2% in 2008 to 2.9% this year.  Clearly, he's lost some support and the enthusiasm for him has waned.

But yet the Republican pundits saying that 320 in the EC for Romney (when they were predicting that) would be called a mandate.

I understand where you are coming from, but the right wingers calling 320 a mandate when they thought their guy had it, as opposed to the 322 when the evil overlord got it is...well, it's predictable if nothing else.

:D

Quote from: Hoss on November 12, 2012, 10:48:20 AM
But yet the Republican pundits saying that 320 in the EC for Romney (when they were predicting that) would be called a mandate.

I understand where you are coming from, but the right wingers calling 320 a mandate when they thought their guy had it, as opposed to the 322 when the evil overlord got it is...well, it's predictable if nothing else.

:D

I don't give a smile what right leaning or left leaning pundits were or are saying.  Basic math tells you this was no "resounding" victory as I've heard it called on various media outlets. 

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 10:56:18 AM
I don't give a smile what right leaning or left leaning pundits were or are saying.  Basic math tells you this was no "resounding" victory as I've heard it called on various media outlets. 

I don't disagree in the abstract, but by the standard commonly applied by Republicans, it was indeed a resounding victory with a clear mandate. They did, after all, claim a mandate when they lost the popular vote and when they won in 2004 by about the same margin Obama has this year. Both Bush wins also netted him less EVs than either Obama win. You've gotta admit there's something mildly satisfying about stuffing pundits' words back down their smarmy throats and making them choke on them.

Guy With Mitt Face Tattoo 'Disappointed'

(http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/cheats/2012/11/12/guy-with-mitt-face-tattoo-disappointed/jcr:content/image.img.204.136.jpg/1352741050811.cached.jpg)

QuoteBig surprise: A man who got a giant tattoo of Mitt Romney's campaign logo on his face is "totally disappointed" with the election results. "I'm the guy who has egg all over his face," Eric Hartsburg tell Politico. "But instead of egg, it's a big Romney/Ryan tattoo. It's there for life." Hartsburg raised $5,000 on eBay for the 5-by-2 inch tat. Now, he claims he has no regrets. "I'm hoping this opens some other doors in the entertainment business," he says.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/11/12/guy-with-mitt-face-tattoo-disappointed.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/11/12/guy-with-mitt-face-tattoo-disappointed.html)

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 11:15:48 AM
I don't disagree in the abstract, but by the standard commonly applied by Republicans, it was indeed a resounding victory with a clear mandate. They did, after all, claim a mandate when they lost the popular vote and when they won in 2004 by about the same margin Obama has this year. Both Bush wins also netted him less EVs than either Obama win. You've gotta admit there's something mildly satisfying about stuffing pundits' words back down their smarmy throats and making them choke on them.

I don't recall anyone calling either Bush victory a "mandate".  I do recall the '06 mid-terms and '10 mid-terms "mandates".

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 12:13:03 PM
I don't recall anyone calling either Bush victory a "mandate".  I do recall the '06 mid-terms and '10 mid-terms "mandates".

No.  In fact I think they called it fraud.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 12:13:03 PM
I don't recall anyone calling either Bush victory a "mandate".  I do recall the '06 mid-terms and '10 mid-terms "mandates".

Maybe smoke less dope? ;)

In any event, this search (https://www.google.com/search?q=bush+mandate&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&sa=X&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A11%2F01%2F2000%2Ccd_max%3A02%2F01%2F2005&tbm=nws) should refresh your memory. I also seem to recall a statement from Bush himself that the '04 election had given him political capital that he intended to spend.

Edited to add: Gassy, 2000 was fraud. 2004 was swift boating and the advantage of incumbency. :D

Interesting pic I saw on FB:

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/408153_558376907521158_717345978_n.jpg)

QuoteThe map we're used to seeing exaggerates the size of the Republican vote, since there are a lot of red states that are large in area but small in population. In this cartogram, where 1 square = 1 electoral vote

Holy crap.  They signed a no-tax pledge for THIS tool?

Wow.  "Poopy-head".  Seriously, Grover?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134980n

(http://www.filibustercartoons.com/comics/20121109.gif)

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 10:43:13 AM
When nearly half the nation voted against Obama and he received about 7 million fewer votes than in 2008, that's not a mandate.  From what I've read about 11 million voters stayed home this time, rather than trying to make less of a poor choice.  His margin of victory dropped from 7.2% in 2008 to 2.9% this year.  Clearly, he's lost some support and the enthusiasm for him has waned.

Yeah, and Romney got 2 million fewer votes than McCain.  It's all playing with numbers, and as long as we are at 50/50, they just don't mean all that much in the overall scheme of things...

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 12:19:30 PM
Maybe smoke less dope? ;)

Edited to add: Gassy, 2000 was fraud. 2004 was swift boating and the advantage of incumbency. :D

Swift boating...which means fraud.  Lies about anything and everything related to Kerry's military service.  While glorifying Baby Bush's country club cruise of the same era.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 10:43:13 AM
When nearly half the nation voted against Obama and he received about 7 million fewer votes than in 2008, that's not a mandate.  From what I've read about 11 million voters stayed home this time, rather than trying to make less of a poor choice.  His margin of victory dropped from 7.2% in 2008 to 2.9% this year.  Clearly, he's lost some support and the enthusiasm for him has waned.

That is the only answer? Maybe Romney was a better choice than McCain for independents. Maybe Romney's spending hundreds of millions more than McCain could be an answer. Not having Sarah Palin on the ticket could have had a factor.

Of course, only you would find a way to bash Obama on the election after he won again.

Quote from: Hoss on November 12, 2012, 12:36:07 PM
Holy crap.  They signed a no-tax pledge for THIS tool?

Wow.  "Poopy-head".  Seriously, Grover?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134980n

Today in the news, Elmo is a child molester and Grover calls people poopy-head.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/be/Grover.JPG/220px-Grover.JPG)

Outstanding!

I can't wait for the slap-fight on the floor of the Senate next week!

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 12:19:30 PM
Maybe smoke less dope? ;)

In any event, this search (https://www.google.com/search?q=bush+mandate&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&sa=X&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A11%2F01%2F2000%2Ccd_max%3A02%2F01%2F2005&tbm=nws) should refresh your memory. I also seem to recall a statement from Bush himself that the '04 election had given him political capital that he intended to spend.

Edited to add: Gassy, 2000 was fraud. 2004 was swift boating and the advantage of incumbency. :D

QuoteBroadcast media also took up the "mandate" theme. MSNBC host Chris Matthews announced at the top of his November 3 broadcast, "President Bush wins the majority of the vote and a mandate for his second term." CNN 's Wolf Blitzer (11/3/04) offered his assessment that Bush is "going to say he's got a mandate from the American people, and by all accounts he does." NPR 's Renee Montague (11/3/04) also relayed the White House's spin, before quickly agreeing with it: "The president's people are calling this a mandate. By any definition I think you could call this a mandate." http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2001

Damn, even Chris Matthews said that?  I guess if you consider Bush enjoyed a majority of careless enablers in both houses for the next two years, that would be a mandate of sorts.  I don't consider 51% of the popular vote a mandate by any means.

Democrats pick up another seat in the House

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/12/democrats-pick-up-another-seat-in-the-house/?cid=sf_twitter (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/12/democrats-pick-up-another-seat-in-the-house/?cid=sf_twitter)

Quote(CNN) - Democrat Kyrsten Sinema has defeated Republican Vernon Parker in the race for Arizona's 9th Congressional District, CNN projected Monday.

Sinema's win in the newly-created district adds one more seat to the list of pick-ups for Democrats in the House, putting the breakdown at 234 Republicans, 196 Democrats and two independents.

Including Sinema's win in Arizona, Democrats have gained a net of three seats in the House this cycle.

Sinema, a former state senator, had 48.1% of the vote compared to Parker, the former mayor of Paradise Valley, at 45.3%, according to the office of Arizona's Secretary of State on Monday.

Both parties had invested heavily in the race, though a Democratic super PAC had tipped the TV ad war balance of power slightly in the Democrat's favor.

Five races remain too close to call from last week's elections, including contests in Arizona, Florida, North Carolina and two races in California.

While Democrats have an edge in all five, a sixth unresolved House race will be settled in a December 8 run-off between two Republican incumbents, guaranteeing a GOP seat.

Quote from: Hoss on November 12, 2012, 12:36:07 PM
Holy crap.  They signed a no-tax pledge for THIS tool?

Wow.  "Poopy-head".  Seriously, Grover?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134980n

You got that wrong.

"Poopyhead" is never hyphenated  8)

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 12, 2012, 12:56:40 PM

Yeah, and Romney got 2 million fewer votes than McCain.  It's all playing with numbers, and as long as we are at 50/50, they just don't mean all that much in the overall scheme of things...

About 1.1 million fewer in an election with 11 million less voter participation.  Romney enjoyed a 2% gain in the popular vote over McCain.

Comparing voter turnout between Romney & McCain vs. voter turnout for Obama in 2008 & 2012, Obama lost far more support than the GOP candidate did this election.

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 11:15:48 AM
I don't disagree in the abstract, but by the standard commonly applied by Republicans, it was indeed a resounding victory with a clear mandate. They did, after all, claim a mandate when they lost the popular vote and when they won in 2004 by about the same margin Obama has this year. Both Bush wins also netted him less EVs than either Obama win. You've gotta admit there's something mildly satisfying about stuffing pundits' words back down their smarmy throats and making them choke on them.

In fact President Bush made this statement (which I translate to "in your face BXXXCHES!")

"This week the voters of America set the direction of our nation for the next four years," I earned capital in the political campaign and I intend to spend it."

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 12, 2012, 03:06:28 PM
That is the only answer? Maybe Romney was a better choice than McCain for independents. Maybe Romney's spending hundreds of millions more than McCain could be an answer. Not having Sarah Palin on the ticket could have had a factor.

Of course, only you would find a way to bash Obama on the election after he won again.

I'm not the only one who would do that.  Guido and Gassy are quite capable as well.

I wasn't trying to bash him though, it's simple math.  It's indisputable that fewer people voted this time around even though there's little doubt that the ranks of eligible voters hasn't shrunk since 2008.  I simply don't see a 2 or 3% margin of victory as a mandate, I don't care who the victor is.

Bashing would be me giving the president's campaign its props in this fashion:  He managed to win without having to run on his record.  He didn't have a great record to run on so he made Romney look like someone to run from.  There, now I've bashed.

Fla. GOP House Incumbent Allen West Refuses to Concede Defeat

(http://timeswampland.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sl_west_111212.jpg?w=360&h=240&crop=1)

http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/12/fla-gop-house-incumbent-allen-west-refuses-to-concede-defeat/ (http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/12/fla-gop-house-incumbent-allen-west-refuses-to-concede-defeat/)

QuoteWEST PALM BEACH, Fla.) — Firebrand Republican Rep. Allen West was defeated by Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy, according to the state's vote count Saturday, but the incumbent won't concede.

The state issued complete but unofficial results showing Murphy with a lead of 2,442 votes, or 50.4 percent. That's beyond the half-percent margin needed to trigger an automatic recount. A handful of overseas and military ballots remain outstanding, but under state law the decision for a recount is based on Saturday's count.

Murphy declared victory early Wednesday morning and has held his lead ever since, even as thousands of absentee and provisional ballots were processed. He issued a statement Saturday saying it was time to put the campaign behind. He called his win a signal that voters were tired of the extremism West represented.

West's campaign insists there are many unanswered questions in the race, mostly centered in St. Lucie County, the only one of three counties in the district that Murphy won. They are concerned that votes were counted twice and have asked to review sign-in books from the polls to ensure the number of voters matched the ballot count. "We're simply not going to just walk away from the race until we see that the numbers add up," West campaign manager Tim Edson said.

West's only path forward appears to be through the courts. Under state law, he still could contest the election if misconduct or fraud might have changed its result. "If I come out on the short end of the stick, guess what?" West told WPEC-TV on Friday. "I salute the flag, I wish you good luck and I continue on, and hopefully my replacement will be able to go up and contend with these monumental issues."

The race was the country's most expensive House race and one of the most closely watched. The two sides had raised nearly $21 million as of Oct. 17, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, and Super PACs poured in about $6.6 million.

West is a former Army lieutenant colonel who was elected in 2010 on a wave of tea party support. He is one of only two black Republicans in the House. He had a constant string of headline-grabbing statements, from calling a majority of congressional Democrats communists to saying President Barack Obama, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and others should "get the hell out of the United States."

Murphy, 29, was a political newcomer who portrayed West as an extremist who has done little else in Washington than stoke partisan fires.



Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/12/fla-gop-house-incumbent-allen-west-refuses-to-concede-defeat/#ixzz2C30EUVYO

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 03:43:26 PM
I wasn't trying to bash him though, it's simple math.  It's indisputable that fewer people voted this time around even though there's little doubt that the ranks of eligible voters hasn't shrunk since 2008.

How about we wait for all the ballots to be counted before declaring this election a turnout fail, eh? You might be interested to know that turnout is actually up in most of the swing states.

I think Congress got more dims to vote for them than GOP/Teabaggers.

What's that translate into?

And as far as Obama's mandate....too bad sucka. He wields a lot of stroke and power.

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 03:56:40 PM
How about we wait for all the ballots to be counted before declaring this election a turnout fail, eh? You might be interested to know that turnout is actually up in most of the swing states.

From this point forward, I don't think you'd see even a million more which are not currently tabulated.

I didn't say it was a turnout fail, I'm just saying the numbers suggest enthusiasm for Obama wasn't near the magnitude it was in '08.

I think quite a few of his former supporters realized Hope & Change was nothing more than Hype & Chump Change  ;)

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 04:34:51 PM
From this point forward, I don't think you'd see even a million more which are not currently tabulated.

You would be wrong. California alone has a couple of million mail-ins still to be counted. I'm not sure what Arizona is down to. Oregon and Washington are also waiting on mail-ins. Then there's the provisional ballots which many states have yet to even begin to examine. Is all this going to result in taking turnout up to what it was in '08? Probably not, it had particularly high turnout. We don't really know at this point, though.

Turnout was down in most red states, too, by the way...

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 04:34:51 PM
From this point forward, I don't think you'd see even a million more which are not currently tabulated.

I didn't say it was a turnout fail, I'm just saying the numbers suggest enthusiasm for Obama wasn't near the magnitude it was in '08.

I think quite a few of his former supporters realized Hope & Change was nothing more than Hype & Chump Change  ;)

I guess many of them figured it was better than Etch-A-Sketch.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 04:34:51 PM
From this point forward, I don't think you'd see even a million more which are not currently tabulated.

I didn't say it was a turnout fail, I'm just saying the numbers suggest enthusiasm for Obama wasn't near the magnitude it was in '08.

I think quite a few of his former supporters realized Hope & Change was nothing more than Hype & Chump Change  ;)

Sneer..... cynical....dislike..... negativity... I see a pattern here.

Quote from: Conan71 on November 12, 2012, 04:34:51 PM
I didn't say it was a turnout fail, I'm just saying the numbers suggest enthusiasm for Obama wasn't near the magnitude it was in '08.

Team A wins over Team B by a touchdown. They play again and this time Team A beats team B by a field goal.

According to Conan, Team A sucks.

Oh, regarding Papa John's....

(http://i.qkme.me/3rq9xw.jpg)

Quote from: nathanm on November 12, 2012, 10:23:04 AM
You made the assertion that colleges indoctrinate people into politically liberal thought, not me. The burden is on you. I already provided data that backs up my claim that you had no evidence. Feel free to refute it. Unfortunately, there was limited exit polling this cycle, so you'll have to look at pre-election telephone polls or find some other source of data on the subject if you want to know specifically about California or other typically "liberal" states.

You provided some interesting but inconclusive voting "data", followed by the disclaimer about exit polling.  I am not going to take on the fool's task of trying to prove that something doesn't exist.

QuoteShow some evidence that there's a lack of conservative-leaning college graduates and I'll be more inclined to take your claim more seriously.

I sincerely doubt you would take my claim seriously regardless of any data I could find.  I went to college (undergraduate) "back East" a long time ago.  Most of the non-engineering students I knew were not conservative.  My sister went through a liberal arts program at OU in the late 70s.  When she came home for a weekend, she and dad usually ended up arguing, my sister presenting a liberal view that she learned at OU.  She ended up turning to the Dark Side, becoming the only registered Democrat in our family including Aunts, Uncles, and cousins that we regularly visited.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 12, 2012, 04:50:52 PM
Team A wins over Team B by a touchdown. They play again and this time Team A beats team B by a field goal.

According to Conan, Team A sucks.

Someone must be filtering my TNF.  I only see Conan's posts regarding the recent voter turnout as Team A isn't as good as it used to be.

Quote from: nathanm on November 11, 2012, 09:27:18 PM
those who did not graduate high school,

I know it's common usage around Oklahoma but what the heck:

QuoteI don't know why so many people have taken to dropping the "from" and are going around saying they graduated college, but it really is wrong. Do your alma mater a favor and make your English instructors proud. Tell people you graduated from college or high school.

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/graduated-from.aspx

Here's some aftermath! http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-considers-john-kerry-for-job-of-defense-secretary/2012/11/12/8a0e973a-2d02-11e2-a99d-5c4203af7b7a_story.html?hpid=z1

Kerry and Rice...nice. Just wondering what the real end game is here since Rice must be a red herring.

The aftermath for this couple wasn't pretty.  Wow.

http://gawker.com/5959933/woman-blames-husband-for-obamas-reelection-runs-him-over-with-her-jeep

Her mug shot says it all.

Gingrich 'dumbfounded' by Obama win

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gingrich-dumbfounded-obama-win-163256034--election.html (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gingrich-dumbfounded-obama-win-163256034--election.html)

Quote
Add Newt Gingrich to the list of Republicans coming to terms with the loss of the presidential election.

On Monday, the former speaker of the House sounded reflective on the "Today" show, saying, "We need to stop, take a deep breath and learn." He added, "The president won an extraordinary victory. And the fact is, we owe him the respect of trying to understand what they did and how they did it."

Gingrich said, "But if you had said to me three weeks ago Mitt Romney would get fewer votes than John McCain and it looks like he'll be 2 million fewer, I would have been dumbfounded."

The former GOP candidate had previously predicted that Romney would enjoy an easy victory. He said on Fox News, "My personal guess is you'll see a Romney landslide, 53 percent-plus ... in the popular vote, 300 electoral votes-plus."

But Gingrich sounded a different tone postelection, writing for Politico, "For the conservative movement and the Republican Party to succeed in the future (and while they are not identical the two are inextricably bound together) we will have to learn the lessons of 2012. An intellectually honest and courageous Republican Party has nothing to fear from the current situation."

Asked about the editorial on "Today," Gingrich admitted, "I was wrong last week, as was virtually every major Republican analyst. And so, you have to stop and say to yourself, 'If I was that far off, what do I need to learn to better understand America.'"
.

"An intellectually honest and courageous Republican Party" - We can hope.

Lawmaker asks to be paid in gold

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83767.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83767.html)

QuoteA Montana state lawmaker is asking that he be paid in gold coins because of his lack of faith in the U.S. dollar amid a rising deficit.
Jerry O'Neil, a Republican just reelected in his northern Montana district, says his constituents told him he was not honoring his duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution, which O'Neil and Gold Standard supporters say requires the government to print money backed by gold.

"I believe that if you take a look at the Constitution, that's what it says," he told POLITICO. "I think we've gotten a tremendously long way from it."
So he wrote a letter to the state Legislature asking to be paid his public salary in gold and stating: "It is very likely the bottom will fall out from under the U.S. dollar. Only so many dollars can be printed before they have no value."

A former supporter for Rep. Ron Paul's (R-Texas) failed bid for president, O'Neil said he hasn't heard back from the Montana Legislature about his request.
"I believe that if you take a look at the Constitution, that's what it says. Actually, I think we've gotten a tremendously long way from it," O'Neil said. "If we don't start paying that debt down, we're going to lose the country."

O'Neil said that he collects about $7,000 annually from the Montana Legislature. Currently, the U.S. Mint is selling the 2012 American Eagle One Ounce Gold Proof Coin (at face value worth $50) for $1,985.00.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 12, 2012, 04:50:52 PM
Team A wins over Team B by a touchdown. They play again and this time Team A beats team B by a field goal.

According to Conan, Team A sucks.

Is it OU, or OSU??  If OU, then yeah, it sucks... oh...OU sucks no matter what, so scores are irrelevant...


Geez, guys...I'm kidding!  But OSU RULZ!!!

Quote from: Townsend on November 13, 2012, 12:00:38 PM
Lawmaker asks to be paid in gold

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83767.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83767.html)

Another classic case of either can't read....or chooses NOT to actually read the document that forms the basis of what he allegedly is representing in Congress.  And oh, by the way, is also sworn to protect.  Well, I guess that would just be coincidental in this case.

Quote from: Townsend on November 13, 2012, 11:53:38 AM
Gingrich 'dumbfounded' by Obama win

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gingrich-dumbfounded-obama-win-163256034--election.html (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gingrich-dumbfounded-obama-win-163256034--election.html)

"An intellectually honest and courageous Republican Party" - We can hope.

Of course, this is the same guy who thought he had a legit shot at the GOP nomination.  Shows his prognostication skills leave a little to be desired.

Jindal to GOP: 'Stop being the stupid party'

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/13/jindal-to-gop-stop-being-the-stupid-party/ (http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/13/jindal-to-gop-stop-being-the-stupid-party/)

QuoteLouisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has a message for his fellow Republicans: Stop being so "stupid."

In his first interview since Mitt Romney's defeat and Republicans failure to capture the Senate majority, the lawmaker went on the attack, saying his party needs to appeal to more voters and stay away from offensive comments that tarnish the party.

Jindal told Politico, "It is no secret we had a number of Republicans damage our brand this year with offensive, bizarre comments—enough of that "It's not going to be the last time anyone says something stupid within our party, but it can't be tolerated within our party."

Indiana's Richard Mourdock and Missouri's Todd Akin, who made offensive statements about rape and pregnancy during their Senate races and subsequently lost, of course, come to mind.
Jindal also said his party has a habit of speaking down to its electorate.

"We've also had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being simplistic, we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters," Jindal said, adding Republicans need to "stop being the stupid party."

Jindal's name is already being floated as a potential 2016 presidential candidate. He's been selected to chair the Republican Governors Association next year.

So on that note:

Gov. O'Malley to GOP: Remove Tea Party 'Stench'

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/13/gov-omalley-to-gop-remove-tea-party-stench/ (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/13/gov-omalley-to-gop-remove-tea-party-stench/)

QuoteBALTIMORE—Jumping off the fiscal cliff may make Republicans more willing to compromise next year on raising taxes for the rich, said a prominent Democratic governor.

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley added that he believed Republicans should compromise earlier to remove what he called their "Tea Party obstructionist stench."

Tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush expire at the end of the year. Republicans want to extend all the cuts, while Democrats say they should be ended for high-income taxpayers. The deadline is a central part of the fiscal cliff—the fear that, if Congress fails to act by the end of the year, the U.S. will fall back into recession owing to higher tax rates and spending cuts scheduled to take effect.

Democrats have differed in tone over the fiscal cliff, with some saying it must be avoided at all costs and others willing to entertain the idea of jumping over it as a bargaining tool to use with Republicans.

Mr. O'Malley seemed closer to the latter camp in a brief interview after a speech here. The governor said Republicans "may have painted themselves into such a corner that they are not able to support anything on the revenue part of this equation, even for wealthier Americans, until they are faced with the new terrain and the new reality that all of the Bush tax cuts have expired."

The top Republican in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, criticized such statements in a Senate speech Tuesday. "Some on the other side have said we should just go off the cliff, and just hope for the best," he said. "I don't think that's what the American people had in mind when they went to the polls this week."

Mr. O'Malley is chairman of the Democratic Governors Association but isn't directly involved in the fiscal talks.

He said President Barack Obama's re-election was a "pretty strong signal" to Republicans that voters want them to drop what he described as "obstructionist" positions on issues such as immigration.

On the fiscal cliff, he said, "I am hopeful that [Republicans] see that writing on the wall and will want to do [a deal] sooner rather than later in order to shed their sort of Tea Party obstructionist stench."

However, if the Bush tax cuts expire, he said he was "very confident" that "we will get to a reasonable and substantive and meaningful compromise."

Mr. McConnell said Republicans were making a "good-faith effort" for a deal and were "open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt."

So it seems, the folks that frighten me more then the rest may be getting kicked in the chest from both sides.

This Is the Real Political Map of America (Hint: We Are Not That Divided)

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/1857r5yihj9c7jpg/original.jpg)

QuoteThis is the real political map of the United States of America after the Presidential Election. A fascinating view, much different from the maps that you saw that night, which showed an artificial, binary divide. But these maps demonstrate that there is not such a huge divide between rural and urban America

On the top of the column you can see the usual representation by state: who won where. One or the other. It shows a big area of red (republican) and some blue (democrat). If you see the results by county (second in the column), the divide is even more overwhelming. Visually, it appears as if a few are imposing their will on a huge majority. We know that's not the case, but that's what the maps conveys.

That's why those maps are not really good for understanding what really happened. They convey the wrong idea.

The third map of the column is much more accurate. Created by Mark Newman (Department of Physics and Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan, it mixes blue and red based on popular vote percentage instead of showing a binary representation.

There's no huge area of red. There is a gradient. A lot of purple. That's the accurate map that reflects the actual result of the election. It also shows that the divide between the cities and the countryside is not that huge. There are differences of opinions everywhere.

The large map is even better. It factors in the population density, showing the importance of every county based on the population. The lighter the color is, the less populated, the less weight in the election. The more saturated it is, the more populated and more weight.

The Republican Party should look at this map and think again for 2016.

Some Early Returns From First Post-Citizens United Election

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/13/165027641/some-early-returns-from-first-post-citizens-united-election?ft=1&f=1014&sc=tw (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/13/165027641/some-early-returns-from-first-post-citizens-united-election?ft=1&f=1014&sc=tw)

QuotePolitical observers are still working through the rubble of the unprecedented $6 billion presidential campaign, but we're getting a steady stream of reaction and analysis.

The liberal advocacy groups U.S. PIRG and Demos have one of the most striking numerical comparisons: 1.4 million to 61.

That is, it took more than 1.4 million donors for President Obama and Mitt Romney to raise $285.2 million through one traditional fundraising avenue — the campaign's small, unitemized contributions of $200 or less.

It took 61 wealthy donors to give the same amount of money through a new player — the unregulated superPAC.

Specifically, the $285.2 million came from a minimum of 1,425,500 donors, most of them giving to the Obama campaign. But it would be matched by merely 61 of the 132 donors who gave at least $1 million to superPACs involved in the presidential race, like the pro-Romney Restore Our Future and the pro-Obama Priorities USA Action.

The U.S. PIRG-Demos report says those 132 largest donors gave an average $4.7 million each to superPACs.

On Friday, George Washington University Law School assembles some of the mavens of the political money world for a post-election assessment of the hot-button issues of political money and voting rights.

And a few groups already are using the numbers from the just ended election to launch efforts to change campaign finance law: The watchdog group Common Cause wants a constitutional amendment to undo Citizens United, the 2010 Supreme Court ruling that, more than anything else, uncorked the big money; and the liberal United Republic, which says it is "dedicated to ending the corrupting influence of money in politics," unveiled a proposal on Tuesday seeking online "citizen co-sponsors" of a plan to overhaul political finance and lobbying laws.

Quote from: Townsend on November 13, 2012, 03:59:23 PM
Mr. McConnell said Republicans were making a "good-faith effort" for a deal and were "open to new revenue in exchange for meaningful reforms to the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt."

You had me all optimistic, but then I saw that McConnell still isn't acknowledging reality. The dedicated taxes for our "entitlement" programs have been funding much of our deficit spending since 1986 or so. Maybe the clue by four needs to come back out for a few more whacks upside the head.

Senate GOP Largely Retains Leadership Team

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/14/senate-gop-largely-retains-leadership-team/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/14/senate-gop-largely-retains-leadership-team/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

QuoteWASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) will become the second-ranking Republican in the Senate as the GOP decided to largely keep their leadership team intact despite a failure to gain a majority in the chamber in last week's elections.

Senate Republicans meeting Wednesday chose Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.)to remain as the Senate's minority leader, while Mr. Cornyn will take over as minority whip, a senior Senate GOP aide said, succeeding Sen. Jon Kyl, who is retiring. Sens. John Thune (R., S.D.) and John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) will remain GOP conference and policy committee chairs, respectively, and Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt will again serve as conference vice chair.

Good advice:

Earth to GOP: Get a Grip

By BRET STEPHENS

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324894104578114791679213644.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324894104578114791679213644.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet)

QuoteIn January I was rebuked by some readers for predicting that the GOP would lose, and for saying it deserved to lose, too.

"It doesn't matter that Americans are generally eager to send Mr. Obama packing," I wrote. "All they need is to be reasonably sure that the alternative won't be another fiasco. But they can't be reasonably sure, so it's going to be four more years of the disappointment you already know."

I quote these lines less to boast about my prescience than to establish some credibility for what I'm about to say.

Fellow conservatives, please stop obsessing about what other adults might be doing in their bedrooms, so long as it's lawful and consensual and doesn't impinge in some obvious way on you. This obsession is socially uncouth, politically counterproductive and, too often, unwittingly revealing.

Also, if gay people wish to lead conventionally bourgeois lives by getting married, that may be lunacy on their part but it's a credit to our values. Channeling passions that cannot be repressed toward socially productive ends is the genius of the American way. The alternative is the tapped foot and the wide stance.

Also, please tone down the abortion extremism. Supporting so-called partial-birth abortions, as too many liberals do, is abortion extremism. But so is opposing abortion in cases of rape and incest, to say nothing of the life of the mother. Democrats did better with a president who wanted abortion to be "safe, legal and rare"; Republicans would have done better by adopting outgoing Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels's call for a "truce" on social issues.

By the way, what's so awful about Spanish? It's a fine European language with an outstanding literary tradition—Cervantes, Borges, Paz, Vargas Llosa—and it would do you no harm to learn it. Bilingualism is an intellectual virtue, not a deviant sexual practice.

Which reminds me: Can we, as the GOP base, demand an IQ exam as well as a test of basic knowledge from our congressional and presidential candidates? This is not a flippant suggestion: There were at least five Senate seats in this election cycle that might have been occupied by a Republican come January had not the invincible stupidity of the candidate stood in the way.

On the subject of idiocy, can someone explain where's the political gold in demonizing Latin American immigrants? California's Prop 187, passed in 1994, helped destroy the GOP in a once-reliable state. Yet Republicans have been trying to replicate that fiasco on a national scale ever since.

If the argument is that illegal immigrants are overtaxing the welfare state, then that's an argument for paring back the welfare state, not deporting 12 million people. If the argument is that these immigrants "steal" jobs, then that's an argument by someone who either doesn't understand the free market or aspires for his children to become busboys and chambermaids.

And if the argument is that these immigrants don't share our values, then religiosity, hard work, personal stoicism and the sense of family obligation expressed through billions of dollars in remittances aren't American values.

Here's another suggestion: Running for president should be undertaken only by those with a reasonable chance of winning a general election. It should not be seen as an opportunity to redeem a political reputation or audition for a gig on Fox News. Mitt Romney won the nomination for the simple reason that every other contender was utterly beyond the pale of national acceptability, except Michele Bachmann.

Just kidding.

Though conservatives put themselves through the paces of trying to like Mr. Romney, he was never a natural standard bearer for the GOP. He was, instead, a consensus politician in the mold of Jerry Ford and George H.W. Bush; a technocrat who loved to "wallow in data"; a plutocrat with a fatal touch of class guilt. His campaign was a study in missed opportunities, punctuated by 90 brilliant minutes in Denver. Like a certain Massachusetts governor who preceded him, he staked his presidential claims on "competence." But Americans want inspiration from their presidents.

Mr. Romney was never likely to deliver on that score. And though I have my anxieties about the president's next term, I also have a hunch the GOP dodged a bullet with Mr. Romney's loss.

It dodged a bullet because a Romney victory would have obscured deeper trends in American politics the GOP must take into account. A Romney administration would also have been politically cautious and ideologically defensive in a way that rarely serves the party well.

Finally, the GOP dodged ownership of the second great recession, which will inevitably hit when the Federal Reserve can no longer float the economy in pools of free money. When that happens, Barack Obama won't have George W. Bush to kick around.

So get a grip, Republicans: Our republican experiment in self-government didn't die last week. But a useful message has been sent to a party that spent too much of the past four years listening intently to echoes of itself. Change the channel for a little while.

If Obama is such a fantastic President. Why then are there so many States up in arms about wanting to secede from the U.S.?
And also. What other President was so despised that would make a human being want to kill himself?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232845/Man-killed-saying-wouldnt-Obama-elected.html

Quote from: DolfanBob on November 14, 2012, 12:47:24 PM
If Obama is such a fantastic President. Why then are there so many States up in arms about wanting to secede from the U.S.?
And also. What other President was so despised that would make a human being want to kill himself?

Lack of intellect and mental illness.

Quote from: DolfanBob on November 14, 2012, 12:47:24 PM
If Obama is such a fantastic President. Why then are there so many States uninformed citizens up in arms about wanting to secede from the U.S.?
And also. What other President was so despised that would make a depressed human being want to kill himself?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232845/Man-killed-saying-wouldnt-Obama-elected.html

FIFY.

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 10:47:12 AM
Senate GOP Largely Retains Leadership Team

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/14/senate-gop-largely-retains-leadership-team/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/11/14/senate-gop-largely-retains-leadership-team/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

Wow, that's a lot of John's.  I wonder if they also engage in the services of those who work in the oldest profession.

(http://cdn.washingtonexaminer.biz/cache/r620-d2c397cea9d996f6e7acf0a3e6fd5e85.jpg)

                 Nov 5th                                                                Nov 14th


"I'm gonna wash that gray right outta my hair"

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 11:58:26 AM
Good advice:

Earth to GOP: Get a Grip

By BRET STEPHENS

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324894104578114791679213644.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324894104578114791679213644.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet)

Wow Townsend. Thanks a lot. We all know you have the best interest of the republican party in mind. Especially because you were telling the right to get a grip just 2 years ago when the left got throttled.

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 03:22:27 PM
(http://cdn.washingtonexaminer.biz/cache/r620-d2c397cea9d996f6e7acf0a3e6fd5e85.jpg)

                 Nov 5th                                                                Nov 14th


"I'm gonna wash that gray right outta my hair"

(http://images.businessweek.com/cms/2012-11-06/1106_ObamaCover_inline4051.jpg)

2016

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 03:31:11 PM
Wow Townsend. Thanks a lot. We all know you have the best interest of the republican party in mind. Especially because you were telling the right to get a grip just 2 years ago when the left got throttled.

You're very welcome Guido.  I hope the article helps you realize how lost the party has become and allows you to do your part to make it better.

I think he would look better bald. That would speak volumes to his demographic.

Quote from: DolfanBob on November 14, 2012, 03:53:00 PM
That would speak volumes to his demographic.

Please elaborate.

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
Please elaborate.

Obama girl, Obama phone, Hollywood, and all the voting districts in Philadelphia etc. etc....

Quote from: DolfanBob on November 14, 2012, 04:23:23 PM
Obama girl, Obama phone, Hollywood, and all the voting districts in Philadelphia etc. etc....

Is that the GOP view of his base?  That would explain mass quantities.

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 03:42:11 PM
You're very welcome Guido.  I hope the article helps you realize how lost the party has become and allows you to do your part to make it better.

Is the party lost in Oklahoma? You know, where you live and are governed by directly? Last I heard the repubs did just fine if not better this election in this state. If you are talking nationally, I see no change since 2008, except they won North Carolina IIRC this go around. So I guess the republicans have been lost for the past four years--except for 2 years ago. 

I am 100% comfortable with my party's pro-life/anti-abortion message. I am also okay with lower taxes and stronger national defense. If that means I'm lost, oh well. 

In the opposite, if being "found" means supporting basically unfettered abortion rights, higher taxes, and weaker national defense, then, well, that's you and not where I want to be. Sorry.

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 04:36:33 PM
Is the party lost in Oklahoma? You know, where you live and are governed by directly? Last I heard the repubs did just fine if not better this election in this state. If you are talking nationally, I see no change since 2008, except they won North Carolina IIRC this go around. So I guess the republicans have been lost for the past four years--except for 2 years ago. 

I am 100% comfortable with my party's pro-life/anti-abortion message. I am also okay with lower taxes and stronger national defense. If that means I'm lost, oh well. 

In the opposite, if being "found" means supporting basically unfettered abortion rights, higher taxes, and weaker national defense, then, well, that's you and not where I want to be. Sorry.

And in spite of Oklahoma's position in so many areas relative to the rest of the nation - you seem to be proud that we are near the bottom of those rankings/topics...


And the "jump to the extreme end" point of view - well, what can one say... yep, you will experience higher taxes - we all will - regardless of who is President.  Weaker national defense...?  Another one of those Murdochian "the orange sky is falling, chicken little nonsense rhymes they make up all the time.

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 04:36:33 PM
If that means I'm lost, oh well. 

Shame.  I was hopeful for you.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 14, 2012, 04:42:39 PM

And in spite of Oklahoma's position in so many areas relative to the rest of the nation - you seem to be proud that we are near the bottom of those rankings/topics...


And the "jump to the extreme end" point of view - well, what can one say... yep, you will experience higher taxes - we all will - regardless of who is President.  Weaker national defense...?  Another one of those Murdochian "the orange sky is falling, chicken little nonsense rhymes they make up all the time.

Do you think using the word "Murdochian" improves your argument or makes you appear smarter? You sound like @ssclown. And since when is being pro-life, wanting lower taxes and a strong national defense the "extreme" end of anything. That's not extreme at all. Are you ashamed that your party is pro-abortion rights? Be proud of that position your party supports, don't run from it. Indeed, that was almost the democrat's central theme this election: The republican's "war on women", or have you forgotten.

Higher taxes for "all", you may be right. If the 47% that pay no federal taxes now wind up paying $.01 this go around, that's more.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 14, 2012, 04:42:39 PM

And in spite of Oklahoma's position in so many areas relative to the rest of the nation - you seem to be proud that we are near the bottom of those rankings/topics...

I do not care what Mass., Calif., Ill. or the like is doing right now or where they are "ranked". Why would I? If you like what's happening there, go. Personally, I do not look to those states as the pinnacle of anything I want to be associated with. Oklahoma has it right with tort reform, life (except the death penalty IMO), and tax policy is improving.

As a whole, like it or not, this Oklahoma. The democrats controlled the state senate since Oklahoma became a state, until 2008. What happened? Did Oklahoma suddenly become a state of geniuses in 2007 to idiots in 2008? Most likely idiots to geniuses between 2007 and 2008.  ;). Taking a queue from T, the dem party is lost in this state.

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 04:36:33 PM
stronger national defense.

Stronger how? And how do you square that with lowering taxes further when we already have a gigantic budget deficit that you harp on pretty regularly?

Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2012, 03:22:27 PM
"I'm gonna wash that gray right outta my hair"

It's amazing what winning a big election can do for you.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 14, 2012, 06:33:48 PM
It's amazing what winning a big election can do for to you.

FIFY...

Quote from: Hoss on November 14, 2012, 07:25:19 PM
FIFY...

QuoteIt's amazing what winning a big election can do for to you.

Fixed what?  Maybe you don't have any grey hair yet.  You can't appreciate the idea that winning a big election can return your younger appearance?  We all know that isn't the real reason.

It's your turn to be without humor.  

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 04:36:33 PM
Is the party lost in Oklahoma?

Sadly, I think you mean this.  Of course it is.  The party is horribly lost here in Oklahoma.  So misled and struggling in its own misunderstanding of what would be best for the population of Oklahoma.


Education is a big one for me.  I know you've said everyone should pay their own way but I truly believe there are good reasons to provide education to those who can't afford it.

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 05:03:03 PM
Do you think using the word "Murdochian" improves your argument or makes you appear smarter? You sound like @ssclown. And since when is being pro-life, wanting lower taxes and a strong national defense the "extreme" end of anything. That's not extreme at all. Are you ashamed that your party is pro-abortion rights? Be proud of that position your party supports, don't run from it. Indeed, that was almost the democrat's central theme this election: The republican's "war on women", or have you forgotten.

Higher taxes for "all", you may be right. If the 47% that pay no federal taxes now wind up paying $.01 this go around, that's more.

I use the word as a convenient descriptive term to sum up and cover all the ignorant, deceptive lies and in particular, their source - Rupert Murdoch just happening to be the most visible of the Decepticons, thereby lending his name to the cause - and the whole gamut of extremist right carp.  BUt you know that....and yet, attempt to deflect....

As for pro-life, I never mentioned that at all - another of your attempts at deflection and misdirection.  Lower taxes - same a pro-life.  What I mentioned was that hack traveling around in Murdochianville circles about somehow our national defense is being or gonna be hurt.  In spite of the facts.  The only times we have actually had a true reduction in our national defense capabilities was immediately after WWII, and for a very short window after VietNam.  Both of which were more of the nature of "taking a deep breath" after those efforts while planning the next move.  Neither constituted any kind of serious reduction in capability relative to the time frames of any possible threats and did not endanger us in any way.  It is a tired old hack that the Murdochians trot out every time they can't think of anything REAL to talk about - let's spew about "strong national defense"...  gag,...puke.  This is the mentality that talks about how we have so many fewer ships than when we went into WWI - as if one of our nuke subs doesn't replace about 150 of the 1918 ships!  No sense of history or reality in those quarters.  Or like Predator drone doesn't effectively replace at least one B-17 bomber and eliminate the risk to 10 men.

Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2012, 05:20:22 PM
I do not care what Mass., Calif., Ill. or the like is doing right now or where they are "ranked". Why would I? If you like what's happening there, go. Personally, I do not look to those states as the pinnacle of anything I want to be associated with. Oklahoma has it right with tort reform, life (except the death penalty IMO), and tax policy is improving.

As a whole, like it or not, this Oklahoma. The democrats controlled the state senate since Oklahoma became a state, until 2008. What happened? Did Oklahoma suddenly become a state of geniuses in 2007 to idiots in 2008? Most likely idiots to geniuses between 2007 and 2008.  ;). Taking a queue from T, the dem party is lost in this state.

Don't want to be associated with those states as pinnacles of anything like education, health, standard of living (as relates to lower income).  Easy to see how all these things would satisfy some of the richer ones - their relative position of influence, etc is higher.  Medium fish/little pond....

Another example of "low <insert item here> being the problem, versus "low <insert item here> being the solution".
Wages, education, availability of health care, even road maintenance..., and yes, your precious "tort" reform - where now, no matter the egregious nature of action, the limit of damages is now what....$350,000?  Carte Blanche!!

Barbour: GOP needs a 'proctology exam'

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/14/barbour-gop-needs-a-proctology-exam/?hpt=hp_t3 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/14/barbour-gop-needs-a-proctology-exam/?hpt=hp_t3)

Quote(CNN) – While Republicans continue to soul search after their party's loss in the presidential election, former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour injected a new term Wednesday to describe the GOP's introspection.

"The ground game is really important, and we have to be, I mean we've got to give our political organizational activity a very serious..." he said, taking a pause and looking for the right word. "Proctology exam. We need to look everywhere."

peaking at a conference for the Republican Governors Association in Las Vegas, Barbour said his party needs to not only adapt to demographic changes but also reform its messaging.

"We can catch up in four years doing this," he said. "This isn't rocket science, but it is hard work that we can't wait and start in 2016."

The party needs a "brutally honest assessment of everything we did," he added. "We need to take everything apart and look at all of it."

Like other Republicans in recent days, Barbour stressed the importance of being more inclusive to Latinos, African-Americans and other minorities. Barbour in particular chided the party for its tone on illegal immigration, saying many illegal workers contribute to the economy and comprise an important part of society.

"What are we going to do? Send them home? Send five million people home and then try to figure out how to replace them? We need those people to do those jobs," he said, adding the issue can be resolved "if we'll just follow good economic policy."

"But," he continued, "then we have to follow up with Latinos and show them that we want their vote - not only that we're for good policy, we want their vote. We need to do the same thing with African-Americans."

President Barack Obama overwhelmingly won the Latino vote over Mitt Romney, taking 71% of the group. Among African-Americans, the president won 93%, according to CNN exit polls.

Furthermore, the Republican National Committee has stated it will undergo a major review of the party's performance in 2012.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 15, 2012, 01:41:10 PM

and yes, your precious "tort" reform - where now, no matter the egregious nature of action, the limit of damages is now what....$350,000?  Carte Blanche!!

Nope. Try again.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 14, 2012, 07:48:08 PM
Fixed what?  Maybe you don't have any grey hair yet.  You can't appreciate the idea that winning a big election can return your younger appearance?  We all know that isn't the real reason.

It's your turn to be without humor.  

I see you forgot who you responded to. Ten demerits for you.

Quote from: guido911 on November 15, 2012, 06:03:47 PM
I see you forgot who you responded to. Ten demerits for you.

Whew!  I thought I might get 15.

Allen West conceded.

Quote from: Townsend on November 20, 2012, 08:33:06 AM
Allen West conceded.

Wow, that only took two weeks...

Quote from: Hoss on November 20, 2012, 08:40:31 AM
Wow, that only took two weeks...

That's 2 hours in screaming desperation time.

Quote from: Townsend on November 20, 2012, 08:33:06 AM
Allen West conceded.

Wonder how many people thought they were voting for "Adam" West?

(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060929205013/familyguy/images/c/cf/Adam_We.JPG)

Republican challenger calls for recount in unresolved House race

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/20/republican-challenger-calls-for-recount-in-unresolved-house-race/?cid=sf_twitter (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/20/republican-challenger-calls-for-recount-in-unresolved-house-race/?cid=sf_twitter)

I guess these guys just can't believe Rove wasn't able to do what they paid him for.

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — A police officer who said he would volunteer to assassinate President Barack Obama has quit.

57-year-old Sam Koivisto retired earlier this month while facing an internal investigation into his comments to other officers after the election.

He told them that if an order came to kill Obama, he "wouldn't mind being the guy."

When questioned by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office integrity unit, he said he also didn't care if a nuclear explosion killed everyone in the Northeastern U.S because they supported Obama.

Stay classy Jacksonville....!!!!!

Quote from: patric on November 22, 2012, 10:42:17 AM
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — A police officer who said he would volunteer to assassinate President Barack Obama has quit.

57-year-old Sam Koivisto retired earlier this month while facing an internal investigation into his comments to other officers after the election.

He told them that if an order came to kill Obama, he "wouldn't mind being the guy."

When questioned by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office integrity unit, he said he also didn't care if a nuclear explosion killed everyone in the Northeastern U.S because they supported Obama.

I wonder what the response would have been to a Romney victory.  I watched "The Men Who Built America" edition of the fall of Standard Oil.... and the rise of Teddy Roosevelt after McKinley was shot.  I can see a lot of similarities between the perception of McKinley and Romney.  Who among you would have been willing to pull the trigger?

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 24, 2012, 09:56:51 PM
I wonder what the response would have been to a Romney victory.  I watched "The Men Who Built America" edition of the fall of Standard Oil.... and the rise of Teddy Roosevelt after McKinley was shot.  I can see a lot of similarities between the perception of McKinley and Romney.  Who among you would have been willing to pull the trigger?

Thankfully...we'll never know.

As a side note:  it never ceases to amaze me.  No matter who the President is, it should NEVER be within reason to talk about assassination of one.

Quote from: Hoss on November 24, 2012, 10:25:22 PM
As a side note:  it never ceases to amaze me.  No matter who the President is, it should NEVER be within reason to talk about assassination of one.

Actually you are right on this subject.  After all the hate spewed toward Romney during the campaign and seeing the correlation to McKinley it slipped out.

The real hate toward Romney came from Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and even locals like Michael Bates.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 25, 2012, 10:43:28 AM
The real hate toward Romney came from Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and even locals like Michael Bates.

I would say the hate toward Romney from the left was genuine and plentiful.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 25, 2012, 11:04:25 AM
I would say the hate toward Romney from the left was genuine and plentiful.

That turnabout - it's a grumble.

Quote from: Hoss on November 25, 2012, 11:21:32 AM
That turnabout - it's a grumble.

Call it a turnabout if you wish but I believe it was real.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 25, 2012, 11:42:51 AM
Call it a turnabout if you wish but I believe it was real.

Don't pretend it wasn't real from the Republican side. But I guess you probably will.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 25, 2012, 10:11:12 AM
After all the hate spewed toward Romney during the campaign

Vehement disagreement and hate are two different things.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 25, 2012, 11:04:25 AM
I would say the hate toward Romney from the left was genuine and plentiful.

Red, can you provide some examples of hate speech directed at Mr. Romney?  I'm not being snarky in asking this.  I truly cannot think of any examples.

Quote from: Hoss on November 25, 2012, 12:58:43 PM
Don't pretend it wasn't real from the Republican side. But I guess you probably will.

During the primaries, yes there was.  Just the same as there was in the Democratic party 4 years ago.  How much really goes away after the conventions?  I don't know.

Edit:

I almost forgot.  You are about as good as analyzing me as some of you claim Gaspar is in prognostication.

Quote from: nathanm on November 25, 2012, 03:30:48 PM
Vehement disagreement and hate are two different things.

Got it. Against Republicans and conservatives in general: vehement disagreement.  Against Democrats and liberals in general: hate.

Also, there can be no disagreement with a minority.  It is by definition, hate.

Quote from: Ed W on November 25, 2012, 05:24:47 PM
Red, can you provide some examples of hate speech directed at Mr. Romney?  I'm not being snarky in asking this.  I truly cannot think of any examples.

I didn't say hate speech.  I believe there was an attitude of hate by liberals toward Romney.  I disagree with Nathan's analysis of the objection to Romney  being merely "Vehement disagreement".  Many of the posts here during the campaign were not hate speech but it was obviously more than vehement disagreement in my opinion.  Feel free to look through all the posts of the last year.  There may have been some infrequent bursts of hate speech by idiots on both sides of politics.

I am not going to spend the time looking for the equivalent of some idiots calling the President the "n" word. 

I am not being snarky either.

Quote from: Red Arrow on November 25, 2012, 06:55:54 PM
I didn't say hate speech.  I believe there was an attitude of hate by liberals toward Romney.  I disagree with Nathan's analysis of the objection to Romney  being merely "Vehement disagreement".  Many of the posts here during the campaign were not hate speech but it was obviously more than vehement disagreement in my opinion.  Feel free to look through all the posts of the last year.  There may have been some infrequent bursts of hate speech by idiots on both sides of politics.

I am not going to spend the time looking for the equivalent of some idiots calling the President the "n" word. 

I am not being snarky either.

I stand corrected. And I have to tell you that I'm not good at discerning the attitude behind someone's words, unless they're remarkably blunt about it.  Subtlety is not one of my strong points.

I didn't hate Romney. I just posted about what a bully he was in high school, how he laughed about what I considered animal abuse, how he hid his money in the Cayman Islands, how his equity firm destroyed jobs for profit, and refused to show his income taxes for the years he wasn't running for president.

There was no hate by me, just a certainty that these actions were going to cost him the election.

Hate is the 30 minute movie shown by Newt Gingrich during the primary. Hate is what Rick Perry and Rick Santorum said about him.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 25, 2012, 08:07:38 PM
I didn't hate Romney. I just posted about what a bully he was in high school, how he laughed about what I considered animal abuse, how he hid his money in the Cayman Islands, how his equity firm destroyed jobs for profit, and refused to show his income taxes for the years he wasn't running for president.
There was no hate by me,

You obviously fooled me.

Yes, there is a big difference in not supporting a candidate and hating them. There are very few people in politics I hate. I thought Romney was a good father and very generous with his money. I admire those qualities.

One last Flip Flop:

Man to Remove Romney Face Tattoo

(http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/.4gBJi6VsW_m7t_U7M4DoQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MzYwO2NyPTE7Y3c9NjQwO2R4PTA7ZHk9MDtmaT11bGNyb3A7aD0zNTU7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/us.news.abcnews.otus/ht_eric_hartsburg_2_jef_121026_wmain.jpg)

http://news.yahoo.com/wrestler-romney-face-tattoo-removed-175257435--abc-news-politics.html (http://news.yahoo.com/wrestler-romney-face-tattoo-removed-175257435--abc-news-politics.html)

QuoteTwo weeks after telling ABC News he did not " regret the tattoo at all" the man who got the Romney 'R' logo tattooed on his face for an eBay bid of $15,000 has changed his mind.

"I had a little change of heart," Eric Hartsburg confessed, saying he will now have the tattoo removed.

Hartsburg said he could live with touting the logo of a losing candidate, but what pushed him over the edge were Romney's comments that President Obama won the election by giving "gifts" to certain constituencies.

"I could deal with being a part of a losing campaign, but to still stand behind Gov. Romney with the positions he's taken post-election with the blame game instead," Hartsburg said. "To be such a sore loser about it, to me I can't walk around representing that."

The tattoo was meant to make politics more fun, Hartsburg said, but since Romney made those remarks strangers have been shouting lewd comments and hissing at Hartsburg on the street.

He said he could defend Romney's policies - not his post-election behavior.

The tattoo removal process could take up to 15 sessions over a period of six months to a year, longer than usual because of the blue ink in the logo.

Hartsburg has agreed to take up Will Kirby of Dr. TATTOFF on his offer to remove the ink for free. The Dr. TATTOFF website lists most removals as costing $98 per treatment.

Hartsburg said he found the removal process "a little terrifying," but he's more scared about the flight to Los Angeles, where he will have his first consultation with Dr. Kirby.

Hartsburg will be able to have subsequent sessions at offices around the country, so it won't slow down a professional wrestling career that he is hoping to transition into a role in the entertainment industry.

After all is said and done, Hartsburg hopes ditching the tattoo won't hamper his rise to fame, instead allowing him to "be more than just the tattoo face guy."

Ann Romney Might Be Taking This Loss Harder Than Mitt

http://news.yahoo.com/ann-romney-might-taking-loss-harder-mitt-231529114.html (http://news.yahoo.com/ann-romney-might-taking-loss-harder-mitt-231529114.html)

QuoteIf you're wondering how the Romney family is holding up post-election loss, the answer is: not well. Mitt has resorted to retail therapy, and Ann might be the most disappointed Romney of all. 

The Washington Post's Phillip Rucker has a furiously reported update on what, exactly, Mitt is doing with all of his free time now that he isn't running a campaign. The answer? Not much. The Atlantic's Molly Ball probably put it best on Twitter: "Mitt Romney is bored." 

Rucker's report is filled with heartbreaking line after heartbreaking line chronicling what Romney is doing with himself, culled straight from the CEOs closest to him. That is, what Mitt's doing when he's not having lunch with the President. To help himself deal with the loss, Mitt apparently bought himself (or has been seen driving, at least), "a new black Audi Q7, a luxury SUV manufactured in Slovakia." Retail therapy is an effective and frequently used coping mechanism, at least for this writer. He apparently hasn't decided what he'll do next, but one thing is for sure: "In private, Romney has told friends he has little interest in helping the Republican Party rebuild and rebrand itself," Rucker reports. 

But the owner of the most tragic anecdote in the whole story is Mitt's wife, Ann, who really isn't taking things well: 

     By all accounts, the past month has been most difficult on Romney's wife, Ann, who friends said believed up until the end that ascending to the White House was their destiny. They said she has been crying in private    and trying to get back to riding her horses.

It's not too much of a surprise, really. She had enough trouble dealing with the campaign. Still, we feel for her, and wish her and her horses the best. It gets better. 

I really dislike these stories. Leave Ann Romney alone.

It is none of our business how she is dealing with the election.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 03, 2012, 02:57:41 PM
I really dislike these stories. Leave Ann Romney alone.

It is none of our business how she is dealing with the election.

Of course it is.  I'm interested to learn about the folks who came 2nd closest to being the president and the 1st lady.  

We can learn from these things and perhaps make wiser choices in the future.

Too bad they don't drink.

Quote from: Townsend on December 03, 2012, 03:01:04 PM
 I'm interested...

I am interested in many things that are really none of my business.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 03, 2012, 04:49:23 PM
I am interested in many things that are really none of my business.

Can you learn from them?  In this case, we can see what the parties are throwing up on the wall to see what will stick.

Quote from: Townsend on December 04, 2012, 11:23:09 AM
Can you learn from them?  In this case, we can see what the parties are throwing up on the wall to see what will stick.

The only thing specific I have seen from the President is to raise taxes.

Quote from: Townsend on December 04, 2012, 11:23:09 AM
Can you learn from them?  In this case, we can see what the parties are throwing up on the wall to see what will stick.

The posted story wasn't about what the parties are doing. It was a story about a candidate's wife crying. I think coverage of that is tacky and unnecessary.

Yes, Ann Romney is a public person and thus loses the right to privacy in today's world. If she does something shocking I would expect coverage. This is a personal issue and I wish her to be able to heal in private if possible.

Quote from: RecycleMichael on December 04, 2012, 11:58:44 AM
The posted story wasn't about what the parties are doing. It was a story about a candidate's wife crying. I think coverage of that is tacky and unnecessary.

Yes, Ann Romney is a public person and thus loses the right to privacy in today's world. If she does something shocking I would expect coverage. This is a personal issue and I wish her to be able to heal in private if possible.

She would've been the 1st lady.  Remember what power that holds.  She would've represented the US as the 1st lady.  She is part of the package.

Don't worry.  She's not concerned that you and I are reading about her crying.

Quote from: Red Arrow on December 04, 2012, 11:57:54 AM
The only thing specific I have seen from the President is to raise taxes.

Ok, Rumplestiltskin, you should have wakened 4 years ago and you could have seen first hand how far we have come....a shame you missed all the improvement.  It can always be better, but it wasn't bad at all.

QuoteFOX and Roger Ailes Outed by Petraeus Tape
MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT   
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17674-fox-and-roger-ailes-outed-by-petraeus-tape

As revealed by Bob Woodward in The Washington Post and discussed by Rachel Maddow on December 4, FOX is now on record as having become directly involved in trying to recruit a Republican candidate for president.

As Woodward reported:

So in spring 2011, Ailes asked a Fox News analyst headed to Afghanistan to pass on his thoughts to Petraeus, who was then the commander of U.S. and coalition forces there. Petraeus, Ailes advised, should turn down an expected offer from President Obama to become CIA director and accept nothing less than the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top military post. If Obama did not offer the Joint Chiefs post, Petraeus should resign from the military and run for president, Ailes suggested.

The Fox News chairman's message was delivered to Petraeus by Kathleen T. McFarland, a Fox News national security analyst and former national security and Pentagon aide in three Republican administrations. She did so at the end of a 90-minute, unfiltered conversation with Petraeus that touched on the general's future, his relationship with the media and his political aspirations — or lack thereof. The Washington Post has obtained a digital recording from the meeting, which took place in Petraeus's office in Kabul.

McFarland also said that Ailes — who had a decades-long career as a Republican political consultant, advising Richard M. Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush — might resign as head of Fox to run a Petraeus presidential campaign. At one point, McFarland and Petraeus spoke about the possibility that Rupert Murdoch, the head of News Corp., which owns Fox News, would "bankroll" the campaign.

"Rupert's after me as well," Petraeus told McFarland.

Not long after the conversation between the FOX news emissary/analyst, Petraeus accepted the position of director of the CIA because he apparently thought that the role had become as important as being named head of the Joints Chiefs of Staff.

If you listen to the audio of the conversation between FOX's McFarland and Petraeus (or read the transcript here), it becomes clear that not only does Petraeus (now the ex-CIA director due to a sex scandal) express his admiration for Roger Ailes ("I love Roger," he says), but that he is very chummy with the Darth Vader of right wing news -- and owner of FOX -- Rupert Murdoch. The now disgraced general jokes that Ailes or Murdoch could bankroll a run for the presidency – if he were interested, but he was not inclined at the time that the conversation took place to run for higher office.  Petraeus also implies that he understood FOX attacking Obama politically, but complained that they were now being critical of Petraeus's war in Afghanistan – and the general didn't like that much.

As Maddow notes -- among other insights that this recorded conversation provides us -- FOX has now lost its thin fig leaf of legitimacy as anything other than a bullhorn for the Republican Party.  However, its fig leaf of not being mainlined into the GOP has always been a transparent one in any case. Ailes, who launched his career as a Republican propaganda maven after he met Richard Nixon when Nixon was a guest on the "Mike Douglas Show" in the '60s (which Ailes produced), has never really stopped being a political media and image strategist despite his disclaimers.  He is selling a product, and the product is not soap suds; it is the Republican brand and programming that aids it in achieving its corporate governance policies by propaganda manipulation of the electorate.

Ailes admitted to Woodward that the conversation occurred – given that it was curiously on tape Ailes had no choice -- but tried to belittle it:

In a telephone interview Monday, the wily and sharp-tongued Ailes said he did indeed ask McFarland to make the pitch to Petraeus. "It was more of a joke, a wiseass way I have," he said. "I thought the Republican field [in the primaries] needed to be shaken up and Petraeus might be a good candidate."

A FOX national security analyst has a cozy conversation with Petraeus in which she also emphasizes how much Ailes and Murdoch want to personally talk to him about his running for president, but it was just a "wiseass" joke?

Ailes loves to play the self-deprecating naive political bumbler, while he oversees the Republican flagship media outlet – and intervenes in GOP politics.

Now we know that the tentacles of FOX reach further than putting potential GOP presidential candidates on the network's payroll, they reach right to the top in terms of kingmaking for the Republican Party.

While Ailes and Murdoch have made FOX into the farm team for the GOP, unfortunately Petraeus was playing another sort of game under his desk with Paula Broadwell.

Why hold a Republican Convention?  You can just have Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly crown a GOP president nominee on FOX.

Well, looks like the CIA did covertly oust Betrayus knowing what a liability he was to Obama. Classic.

Quote from: Teatownclown on December 05, 2012, 04:22:11 PM
Well, looks like the CIA did covertly oust Betrayus knowing what a liability he was to Obama. Classic.

That's really what you have taken from all this? I'm impressed.......... ..... ... . !

Gimme Gimme Gimme....

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/detroit-councilwomans-actual-rant-we-voted-for-you-obama-now-give-us-some-of-that-govt-bacon/

And heiron, this is where we have come in four years...Just so YOU know. Remember this from four years ago?



Sounds the damned same to me. Some improvement.

Quote from: guido911 on December 05, 2012, 08:03:27 PM
Gimme Gimme Gimme....

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/detroit-councilwomans-actual-rant-we-voted-for-you-obama-now-give-us-some-of-that-govt-bacon/

And heiron, this is where we have come in four years...Just so YOU know. Remember this from four years ago?

Sounds the damned same to me. Some improvement.

I remember quite a few things from four years ago.... your despicable stereotypes about people you know diddly-squat about... and...

Ohio idiots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utXFkXwaG7A

Republican Right Wing Retards Repeating Ridiculous Rhetoric
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PNP_X2zp7c

Quote from: guido911 on December 05, 2012, 08:03:27 PM
Gimme Gimme Gimme....


And heiron, this is where we have come in four years...Just so YOU know. Remember this from four years ago?

Sounds the damned same to me. Some improvement.

No.  I DO know.  And I do remember.

I was actually taking a much broader view of our situation and the improvements that have occurred since Bush and Buddies sent us over a real cliff - not this contrived Fox Fiscal Cliff we are hearing about 24/7 these days.  1/2% hit on GDP...compared to what...15% from Baby Bush efforts??  

As always in FoxFantasyWorld, it's the "bad" 1 to the "not too bad, in fact it might even be good" 1000.

Just like the 4 killed in Benghazi we keep getting blasted with...compared to over 4,000 from a contrived Iraq war...  

Republicans not handling election results well
December 04, 2012

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

QuotePPP's first post election national poll finds that Republicans are taking the results pretty hard...and also declining in numbers.

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.


Some GOP voters are so unhappy with the outcome that they no longer care to be a part of the United States. 25% of Republicans say they would like their state to secede from the union compared to 56% who want to stay and 19% who aren't sure.

One reason that such a high percentage of Republicans are holding what could be seen as extreme views is that their numbers are declining. Our final poll before the election, which hit the final outcome almost on the head, found 39% of voters identifying themselves as Democrats and 37% as Republicans. Since the election we've seen a 5 point increase in Democratic identification to 44%, and a 5 point decrease in Republican identification to 32%.

So wait.  If PPP has a "liberal bias," does that mean more than 49% of GOP voters believe ACORN stole the election?    :D

In the Womans own words "Thats why WE voted for him" Who is the "WE" she is referring to?
Now who's stereotyping? but thats ok because it's them. Couldn't help myself.  ;D

In the character from Happy Gilmore voice. "Jackass!"

Well, if they are that distraught and want to go...then go!  Nobody stopping them.  And if they can't handle the little bit of carp that is coming down the line from having to pay an extra $1500 for every $50,000 of income over $250,000, well then, that's just toooooo bad.  Since I have had to pay on those Bush Abominations - unfunded war and bank/insurance bailouts as well as deal with the extreme adverse consequences of the Bush Tax Cuts for WAY too long.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 06, 2012, 03:48:02 PM
Well, if they are that distraught and want to go...then go!  Nobody stopping them.  And if they can't handle the little bit of carp that is coming down the line from having to pay an extra $1500 for every $50,000 of income over $250,000, well then, that's just toooooo bad.  Since I have had to pay on those Bush Abominations - unfunded war and bank/insurance bailouts as well as deal with the extreme adverse consequences of the Bush Tax Cuts for WAY too long.

How about that little (okay a lot) that they already pay PLUS the new stuff. Or does that not count. And everyone--not just you--paid for those unfunded wars and bailouts. blah blah blah. Here's a thought, have you ever written the IRS a check for over six figures before. If you haven't paid one year's worth of taxes that an evil 1-2% pays every year--just once, how's about shutting that noise hole under your nose.  :P Maybe say "thanks" to those that have done more financially to support this country than you. Or not. Watch those evil richers stop making charitable donations, or investing income, or working less (no sense in making more money if its being confiscated), or not hiring anyone...

I would guess there are many in this forum who would be PISSED if they paid over 10K. There are probably others that over a period of years wouldn't pay that to the feds. How come those are the folks screaming the loudest for others to pay more?

Quote from: TulsaRufnex on December 05, 2012, 08:38:45 PM
I remember quite a few things from four years ago.... your despicable stereotypes about people you know diddly-squat about... and...

Looks like your peeps in that video got to ya.

Quote from: guido911 on December 07, 2012, 03:03:44 AM
How about that little (okay a lot) that they already pay PLUS the new stuff. Or does that not count. And everyone--not just you--paid for those unfunded wars and bailouts. blah blah blah. Here's a thought, have you ever written the IRS a check for over six figures before. If you haven't paid one year's worth of taxes that an evil 1-2% pays every year--just once, how's about shutting that noise hole under your nose.  :P Maybe say "thanks" to those that have done more financially to support this country than you. Or not. Watch those evil richers stop making charitable donations, or investing income, or working less (no sense in making more money if its being confiscated), or not hiring anyone...

I would guess there are many in this forum who would be PISSED if they paid over 10K. There are probably others that over a period of years wouldn't pay that to the feds. How come those are the folks screaming the loudest for others to pay more?

Many of us pay more than that.  Most of us have the couth not to bring things like that up in a boastful way.  Sometimes your posts can be off putting.

QuoteMaybe say "thanks" to those that have done more financially to support this country than you.

That's a pretty A-hole comment.

Quote from: guido911 on December 07, 2012, 03:03:44 AM
How about that little (okay a lot) that they already pay PLUS the new stuff. Or does that not count. And everyone--not just you--paid for those unfunded wars and bailouts. blah blah blah. Here's a thought, have you ever written the IRS a check for over six figures before. If you haven't paid one year's worth of taxes that an evil 1-2% pays every year--just once, how's about shutting that noise hole under your nose.  :P Maybe say "thanks" to those that have done more financially to support this country than you. Or not. Watch those evil richers stop making charitable donations, or investing income, or working less (no sense in making more money if its being confiscated), or not hiring anyone...

I would guess there are many in this forum who would be PISSED if they paid over 10K. There are probably others that over a period of years wouldn't pay that to the feds. How come those are the folks screaming the loudest for others to pay more?

It is definitely not a lot extra.  For you, the extra $750,000 over the first $250,000 is gonna cost you about $1500 per 50k.  Or $22,500 more on the total $1 million.  You have had an aberration for over 10 years of getting to keep that - based on the pre-Baby Bush rates, so you have had the benefit of not just an extra $225,000, but the added investment income from that tax honey-hole you have been enjoying for so long.   Oh, and by the way - Sweet!! that you make so much - I am envious and hope to join you soon in that rarified atmosphere you inhale every day!!!

For me, it's gonna be about an extra $1.50, so proportionately, I am getting hit just as bad as you.

While your kids/grandkids lives are being massively affected - adversely - way into the future by all the debt that has racked up.

Oh, please...being confiscated??  Geez...you are as melodramatic as as little girl sometimes!  It's going back to what it was before Baby Bush's BS (BBBS).  And that was still lower than ALL the history of the nonsense we call income tax....

or not hiring anyone....you mean like they haven't been doing so for what, about the last 4+ years.  That is so far beyond lame as well as just a flat out lie - I can't believe even you keep trotting that one out.  What's next - all those "small businesses" are just gonna fold up and die?  I know for a fact that won't stop you.  It won't stop me.  It won't stop ANY of the couple dozen acquaintances I have who also own/operate small businesses.  And you also won't stop investing, either, so don't even try to convince anyone of that nonsense.

As for being pissed, yeah, I was pissed the first year I had to pay more than $10 - and that was a LONG time ago.  And yes, I am pissed that I have to pay way beyond $10k now.  I feel the personal income tax is an abomination.  It is unconstitutional.  It is also a reality in our world, so I just deal with it.  And rant every chance I get to get rid of it and go to  a system where all tax 'collections' are handled through companies - they have the infrastructure in place (either internal or external), they pass it through anyway, and it reduces a massive, ridiculous, obscene government bureaucracy (IRS) by a dramatic amount.  Only have to interface with a few million entities instead of hundreds of millions, so it don't need to be near as big.

Quote from: Townsend on December 07, 2012, 09:30:31 AM
Many of us pay more than that.  Most of us have the couth not to bring things like that up in a boastful way.  Sometimes your posts can be off putting.
  That's a pretty A-hole comment.

I like it when he does that...it's such an easy target.


As for his comment about "screaming the loudest" - well, I guess Buffet and Bogle and Gates are just chopped liver...?  They have all called for higher taxes, since they recognize the inequity and also wish to have it eliminated.

Quote from: Townsend on December 07, 2012, 09:30:31 AM
Many of us pay more than that.  Most of us have the couth not to bring things like that up in a boastful way.  Sometimes your posts can be off putting.
  That's a pretty A-hole comment.

I have had it with the damned class warfare around here T. People with little or no skin in the game need to STHU instead of complaining about others that do foot the bill. I worked damned hard and sacrificed plenty to get where I am. My wife even more so. And several folks in here have done the same thing. I see those that demand even more from those that give much already, and receive little or nothing in return, as simple jealousy. 

As for being boastful, I DO NOT see how not wanting to give more money to the government, instead of me using what is mine, to be boastful. To me, your point rings more of envy (not you necessarily being envious). It sickens me to see people just willy nilly exclaim that "too bad" if some of those richers have to kick in another $1500 per $50K. Easy for heiron to say since its not his money he's talking about taking away and then telling those you are paying to suck it up. That's the a-hole comment.

And you should know better than to come after me on this. I've done my damnest to help out those in need in this town--where I am not even originally from--with ZERO expectation of anything in return. Just don't tell me that its no BFD for me to cough up more to the govt. simply because I supposedly can.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 07, 2012, 02:29:49 PM

I like it when he does that...it's such an easy target.


As for his comment about "screaming the loudest" - well, I guess Buffet and Bogle and Gates are just chopped liver...?  They have all called for higher taxes, since they recognize the inequity and also wish to have it eliminated.

I do not give a damn what those three people call for when it comes to tax policy. However, I more inclined to at least listen to them since they got skin in the game. And, who knows how they would feel if they weren't already freakin billionaires and looking at tax policy through those eyes. They may have thought differently if they were like me or any other regular person.

Quote from: guido911 on December 07, 2012, 03:50:20 PM

As for being boastful, I DO NOT see how not wanting to give more money to the government, instead of me using what is mine, to be boastful. To me, your point rings more of envy (not you necessarily being envious). It sickens me to see people just willy nilly exclaim that "too bad" if some of those richers have to kick in another $1500 per $50K. Easy for heiron to say since its not his money he's talking about taking away and then telling those you are paying to suck it up. That's the a-hole comment.

Yeah, it IS my money I'm talking about, too.  Not the million dollar version, but certainly much more than I want to pay, and more than enough to feel it sting.  And yeah, you do have to just suck it up.  It's what HAS to happen or this whole economic environment is gonna collapse like the house of cards it is.  I would much rather it not happen just yet....

And if the version Obama is talking about does NOT happen, then the "cliff" version will, which will mean even MORE that you get to pay, because then the Republicontins would have made it so the rates on the amount LESS than $250k would also go back, so there is that extra bit you get to add on....insult to injury as far as I am concerned...probably what...??  Another $6,000 or 7,000 on top of the extra above 250.  Ask your accountant to get the exact numbers.

Either way, taxes have to go up because of the drunken unfunded spending and tax cut orgy we have been on for 12 years.  It was stupid to start with in 2001 and it becomes even worse with every day that passes.  So, get your "big girl" panties on, cause ain't no one in office today gonna do the right thing anytime soon...certainly not in my lifetime, and probably not in yours, either!

Maureen's boss!

QuoteA Lost Civilization

By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: December 8, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/dowd-a-lost-civilization.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121209

MY college roommates and I used to grocery shop and cook together. The only food we seemed to agree on was corn, so we ate a lot of corn.

My mom would periodically call to warn me in a dire tone, "Do you know why the Incas are extinct?"

Her maize hazing left me with a deeply ingrained fear of being part of a civilization that was obliviously engaging in behavior that would lead to its extinction.

Too bad the Republican Party didn't have my mom to keep it on its toes. Then it might not have gone all Apocalypto on us — becoming the first civilization in modern history to spiral the way of the Incas, Aztecs and Mayans.

The Mayans were right, as it turns out, when they predicted the world would end in 2012. It was just a select world: the G.O.P. universe of arrogant, uptight, entitled, bossy, retrogressive white guys.

Just another vanishing tribe that fought the cultural and demographic tides of history.

Someday, it will be the subject of a National Geographic special, or a Mel Gibson movie, where archaeologists piece together who the lost tribe was, where it came from, and what happened to it. The experts will sift through the ruins of the Reagan Presidential Library, Dick Cheney's shotgun casings, Orca poll monitoring hieroglyphics, remnants of triumphal rants by Dick Morris on Fox News, faded photos of Clint Eastwood and an empty chair, and scraps of ancient tape in which a tall, stiff man, his name long forgotten, gnashes his teeth about the 47 percent of moochers and the "gifts" they got.

Instead of smallpox, plagues, drought and Conquistadors, the Republican decline will be traced to a stubborn refusal to adapt to a world where poor people and sick people and black people and brown people and female people and gay people count.

As the historian Will Durant observed, "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."

President Obama's victory margin is expanding, as more votes are counted. He didn't just beat Romney; he's still beating him. But another sign of the old guard's denial came on Friday, a month after the election, when the Romney campaign ebulliently announced that it raised $85.9 million in the final weeks of the campaign, making its fund-raising effort "the most successful in Republican Party history."

Why is the Romney campaign still boasting? You can't celebrate at a funeral. Go away and learn how to crunch data on the Internet.

Outside the Republican walled kingdom of denial and delusion, everyone else could see that the once clever and ruthless party was behaving in an obtuse and outmoded way that spelled doom.

The G.O.P. put up a candidate that no one liked or understood and ran a campaign that no one liked or understood — a campaign animated by the idea that indolent, grasping serfs must be kept down, even if it meant creating barriers to letting them vote.

Although Stuart Stevens, the Romney strategist, now claims that Mitt "captured the imagination of millions" and ran "with a natural grace," there was very little chance that the awkward gazillionaire was ever going to be president. Yet strangely, Republicans are still gobsmacked by their loss, grasping at straws like Sandy as an excuse.

Some G.O.P. House members continue to try to wrestle the president over the fiscal cliff. Romney wanders in a daze, his hair not perfectly gelled. And his campaign advisers continue to express astonishment that a disastrous campaign, convention and candidate, as well as a lack of familiarity with what Stevens dismissively calls "whiz-bang turnout technologies," could possibly lead to defeat.

Who would ever have thought blacks would get out and support the first black president? Who would ever have thought women would shy away from the party of transvaginal probes? Who would ever have thought gays would work against a party that treated them as immoral and subhuman? Who would have ever thought young people would desert a party that ignored science and hectored on social issues? Who would ever have thought Latinos would scorn a party that expected them to finish up their chores and self-deport?

Republicans know they're in trouble when W. emerges as the moral voice of the party. The former president lectured the G.O.P. on Tuesday about being more "benevolent" toward immigrants.

As Eva Longoria supersedes Karl Rove as a power player, Republicans act as shellshocked as the Southern gentry overrun by Yankee carpetbaggers in "Gone with the Wind." As the movie eulogized: "Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave. Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind."

Gun sales have burgeoned since the president's re-election, with Black Friday weapons purchases setting records as the dead-enders rush to arm themselves.

But history will no doubt record that withering Republicans were finally wiped from the earth in 2016 when the relentless (and rested) Conquistadora Hillary marched in, General Bill on a horse behind her, and finished them off.

"it's all over now, but I used to love her....."

Quote from: guido911 on December 07, 2012, 04:01:51 PM
I do not give a damn what those three people call for when it comes to tax policy. However, I more inclined to at least listen to them since they got skin in the game. And, who knows how they would feel if they weren't already freakin billionaires and looking at tax policy through those eyes. They may have thought differently if they were like me or any other regular person.

But the only "regular" person on tax policy in your mind is you.  Which is way off the curve of "regular"...regular is making, as an annual income, a whole lot less than you pay in taxes...by half or more.  In fact, half of the people (47%) in the country have income below what you have said private school costs you every year....just for some perspective.

So, since Buffet is out.  The lower 98% is out since they don't pay anywhere near as much as you.  And you are out because you are way out of the mainstream.  That leaves no one to make tax policy, so I guess reverting back to pre-Baby Bush BS is the only way to go. 

And in spite of your continued dependency on proven false FoxFaxts, everybody in this country has some "skin in the game".  While there are tiny little adjustments due to child and earned income credits, there is NO refund to the 47% who pay taxes - income taxes - passed through corporations - on all the goods and services they buy/consume every year - if they are so unlucky as to have purchased those goods and services from a corporation that actually pays income tax....

As for "feelings" - well, I have stated many times that I would hate it to happen, but if the pre-Bush rates go up, then so be it.  Even though we have been subsidizing the richest since Bush, it is much more important to get some fiscal order in our economy.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 09, 2012, 06:02:11 PM


Even though we have been subsidizing the richest since Bush, it is much more important to get some fiscal order in our economy.

I will never understand how people who pay thousands or millions less in taxes than those "rich" have the gall to say since those rich people paid a little less for some time they were being subsidized. It takes a special breed of "have not" to conjure up that kind of thought.

Quote from: guido911 on December 12, 2012, 02:42:33 AM
I will never understand how people who pay thousands or millions less in taxes than those "rich" have the gall to say since those rich people paid a little less for some time they were being subsidized. It takes a special breed of "have not" to conjure up that kind of thought.

Or the understanding of math and how small to medium numbers add up to the bonus' and benefits and tax breaks the remaining 1% have gotten voted for themselves...it's the class warfare the top 1% have been waging on the rest of the population since 2001.  It is the "corporate welfare" mentality that they really shouldn't have to pay proportionate taxes, since they are so special.  It is the redistribution of wealth that has occurred for a long, long time and now even many of the direct beneficiaries have become so embarrassed by the inequity that they are starting to admit how wrong it has been.

Report: Ann Romney passes on 'Dancing with the Stars'

http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/01/14/ann-romney-dancing-with-stars/1833917/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/01/14/ann-romney-dancing-with-stars/1833917/)

QuoteAnn Romney doing the cha-cha and quick step for the Disco Ball trophy? Alas, the wife of GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney reportedly won't be competing on Dancing with the Stars.

TMZ, the gossip website, reports Ann Romney was approached about joining the ABC competition show after Mitt Romney was defeated by President Obama. Ann Romney proclaimed herself a "huge fan" of DWTS after being spotted at last season's finale with a daughter-in-law and granddaughter.

An unnamed Romney spokesperson told TMZ that Romney "was approached, but she declined."

Ann Romney was her husband's not-so-secret weapon in the 2012 presidential campaign, often doing solo campaign appearances and interviews where she helped humanize the former Massachusetts governor.She had her own star turn as a prime-time speaker at the Republican National Convention last summer, plus appeared as a guest host on ABC's Good Morning America in the final weeks of the campaign.

Romney Makes Desperate, Last-Ditch Bid For Presidency

http://www.theonion.com/articles/romney-makes-desperate-lastditch-bid-for-presidenc,30975/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default (http://www.theonion.com/articles/romney-makes-desperate-lastditch-bid-for-presidenc,30975/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default)

(http://o.onionstatic.com/images/19/19283/original/700.jpg?5361)

QuoteWASHINGTON—With hundreds of thousands of onlookers assembled on the National Mall to celebrate Monday's inauguration, defeated Republican candidate Mitt Romney reportedly rushed out onto the stage to make one last frantic bid for the presidency. "My fellow Americans, I come to you at this late hour to plead with you to reconsider my candidacy for president of this great nation," a panting Romney said as multiple Secret Service agents attempted to physically drag the former Massachusetts governor away from the podium. "Please, if you'll just give me a second chance—Wait! No! Get your hands off me! IdosolemnlyswearthatIwillfaithfn—" At press time, sources confirmed that a weeping Romney was repeating phrases from the first presidential debate to himself as authorities escorted him into a waiting police vehicle.

Obama lauds progress on gay civil rights in inaugural address

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-lauds-progress-gay-civil-rights-inaugural-address-003753892.html (http://news.yahoo.com/obama-lauds-progress-gay-civil-rights-inaugural-address-003753892.html)

QuoteWASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's inaugural address on Monday marked the first time a president used the occasion to praise progress on gay rights, an indication of shifting public attitudes on the issue.

In the speech marking the start of his second term, Obama placed the struggle for gay rights squarely in the pantheon of two other defining civil rights movements in American history: those for blacks and women.

"The most evident of truths - that all of us are created equal - is the star that guides us still," he said. "Just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall."

The 1848 Seneca Falls, New York, convention was an early women's rights conference. Selma, Alabama, was the site of a pivotal 1965 civil rights march demanding equality for black Americans. The Stonewall riots of 1969 were protests against a police raid of a New York gay bar and opened the door to gay rights activism.

Obama's inclusion of gay rights - still opposed by many conservatives - among his list of priorities might have been unthinkably divisive as recently as his first inauguration in 2009.

"It really speaks to how public opinion has evolved on gay rights in the last four years," said Patrick Egan, a professor of political science at New York University. "You don't see that kind of change in public opinion happen very often."

A USA Today/Gallup poll published in December found that approval of same-sex marriage had risen to 53 percent in 2012 from less than 40 percent in 2005. Young adults were the most supportive.

Nine states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage. Last November, Maryland, Maine and Washington became the first states to do so through the ballot box.

But opposition still runs deep in parts of the country. The USA Today/Gallup poll found gay marriage opposed by a majority in the South. North Carolina in 2011 added a voter-approved ban to its constitution. Some 30 states have passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage.

The issue also remains far from settled in U.S. courts. The U.S. Supreme Court in late March will hear oral arguments in a pair of cases challenging laws that define marriage as a union of a man and woman.

While many of Obama's supporters believe the president always strongly supported same-sex marriage and letting gays serve openly in the military, his public backing has only recently been on display. He was heckled in 2010 by gay rights activists who believed he was moving too slowly on policies that required gays serving in the military to be quiet about their sexual preference.

That policy, known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," was repealed in 2011. Vice President Joe Biden's May 2012 expression of support for gay marriage was seen at the time as getting ahead of Obama's public position.
 
The president's speech on Monday left no doubt about his firm commitment to achieving full equality for U.S. gays.

"Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law," he said.

Other aspects of the inaugural ceremony underscored the prominence of the issue for the Obama administration. An openly gay poet, Richard Blanco, read the inaugural poem. The minister originally chosen to deliver the inaugural benediction withdrew after being criticized for making anti-gay comments.

Rights advocates welcomed what they viewed as Obama's unequivocal support.

"President Barack Obama made history today by connecting the lives of committed and loving lesbian and gay couples fighting for marriage equality to this nation's proud tradition of equal rights for all," said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a group that lobbies Congress for gay rights.

While gay rights support has traditionally been the province of Democratic politicians, many analysts see the ground shifting toward greater acceptance of gays and gay rights across the political spectrum.

While a narrow majority of Americans support gay marriage, backing for banning workplace discrimination against gays is much more overwhelming, said Egan.

"If we look at history and we look at the trajectory of support for women and African-Americans, our best guess is that politicians of the future of either party will call for equal rights for gay Americans," he said.

Heck of a difference in direction from this election aftermath.

Boehner says Obama's focus is to 'annihilate the Republican Party'

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/boehner-says-obamas-focus-is-to-annihilate-the-republican-party/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/boehner-says-obamas-focus-is-to-annihilate-the-republican-party/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29)

QuoteWashington (CNN) – House Speaker John Boehner told a group of Republicans the day after President Barack Obama's inaugural ceremony that the president's focus was to "annihilate the Republican Party."

In remarks to Republicans attending a closed luncheon sponsored by the Ripon Society, Boehner pointed to the president's speech as evidence Obama recognizes he can't achieve his agenda because of the GOP-led House of Representatives.

"Given what we heard yesterday about the president's vision for his second term, it's pretty clear to me that he knows he can't do any of that as long as the House is controlled by Republicans. So we're expecting over the next 22 months to be the focus of this administration as they attempt to annihilate the Republican Party," the House speaker said.

Boehner underlined his point, adding, "And let me just tell you, I do believe that is their goal – to just shove us into the dustbin of history."

Boehner's spokesman said the transcript of Boehner's remarks posted by the Ripon Society was accurate, and noted that the speaker regularly attends the event held by the mainstream Republican group.

In his speech Boehner explained his strategy to move forward with a three month extension of the debt ceiling that includes a provision to force the Senate to vote on a budget.

The Ohio Republican also talked about how he's had to reassure fellow GOP members and donors who have expressed frustration in recent weeks about the political climate, including text he received from former Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz. He's a longtime Republican supporter and Boehner friend who the speaker has tapped to give motivational speeches to House members.

Boehner noted that he had asked Holtz to come talk to the House Republican freshmen recently to prepare them for the fights ahead, but ended up having to convince Holtz the party would sort things out.

"I said, 'Lou, would you stop it? We're Americans, we'll figure this out!' And I had to spend 15 minutes giving Lou Holtz a pep talk! I had to do it again last night!" Boehner said.

The speaker also noted that he and other House Republican leaders charted out a short term strategy at their retreat last week with all House Republicans, but the party needed to begin a broader discussion about the big policy debates ahead.

"And while a lot of the retreat unfortunately got focused on the next 90 days, there needs to be further work to talk about how we're going to navigate the next 20 months and what our goals are and how do we defend ourselves in what I do believe is going to be a very hostile environment. All I know is I'm up for the fight," he said.

Quote from: Townsend on January 23, 2013, 04:07:30 PM
Boehner says Obama's focus is to 'annihilate the Republican Party'

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/boehner-says-obamas-focus-is-to-annihilate-the-republican-party/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/boehner-says-obamas-focus-is-to-annihilate-the-republican-party/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29)

Quotencluding text he received from former Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz. He's a longtime Republican supporter and Boehner friend who the speaker has tapped

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_totodwFkuMA/SsSZ_T_Qg2I/AAAAAAAAA-0/kMhTsxQAlU0/s400/surprised+orangutan.jpg)

Quote from: Conan71 on January 23, 2013, 04:16:56 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_totodwFkuMA/SsSZ_T_Qg2I/AAAAAAAAA-0/kMhTsxQAlU0/s400/surprised+orangutan.jpg)

QuoteHe's a longtime Republican supporter and Boehner friend who the speaker has tapped

Oh.  My.  Stars.

Boehner doesn't realize it's the crazy wing of his own party that's destroying it? How cute that he thinks Obama cares that much about them.

Quote from: nathanm on January 24, 2013, 11:22:53 AM
Boehner doesn't realize it's the crazy wing of his own party that's destroying it? How cute that he thinks Obama cares that much about them.

He knows.  What's he going to say to the crazy wing?  "You guys so crazy."