Showing posts with label -Pablo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label -Pablo. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Friday, August 16, 2013
Monday, August 12, 2013
Friday, August 9, 2013
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Monday, August 5, 2013
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Friday, August 24, 2012
The Michelle Bachmann of the Left
Sorry, folks, I have been gone awhile. I am just too busy these days, but I did want to share this video with you. Anderson Cooper destroys Debbie Wasserman-Schultz over her insistence in lying about Mitt Romney's record on abortion in order to raise funds. My favorite part is at the end of the video when she slams Romney for being "disingenuous." Her slam comes one breath after she admits to lying about an LA Times story.
We need to watch videos like this, not just so we can all have a good laugh at DWS, but also so that we can make sure we don't allow our own side to sink to the same level. And trust me, in the past several years, we have had plenty of the liks of DWS on our own side.
Enjoy!
We need to watch videos like this, not just so we can all have a good laugh at DWS, but also so that we can make sure we don't allow our own side to sink to the same level. And trust me, in the past several years, we have had plenty of the liks of DWS on our own side.
Enjoy!
Saturday, June 16, 2012
That's Flip Flopping Done Right
Folks, I have been arguing for some time now that Romney has no intention of maintaining his immigration views from the GOP primaries. I had no idea, however, that he would begin the flip flop before the election. I thought for sure that Romney would save it until after he is elected, but Obama has forced his hand. Anyway, his immigration flip flop may be more spectacular that I first imagined.
Second, his attack on Obama's position is centered on the fact that the President's position "makes it more difficult to reach that long term solution." In other words, Romney is no longer thinking about those pesky illegals and their law-breaking. In fact, he implies that they are innocent. His thinking is concentrated on the best way to help them.
That my friend is flip flopping done right.
Nevertheless, folks, buckle your seats. I don't know that Romney could move any more toward a pro-immigrant position without losing the base. But just wait until the election is over. This flip flip is only the beginning.
Tom Tancredo just rolled over in his political grave.
“I believe the status of young people who come here through no fault of their own is an important matter to be considered and should be solved on a long term basis so they know what their future would be in this country. I think the action the President took today makes it more difficult to reach that long term solution because an executive order is of course just a short term matter, it can be reversed by subsequent presidents.”There are many ways to marvel at his statement. First, Romney, who blasted the Dream Act and promoted self-deportation, is now proposing that the "status of young people" should be "considered" and "solved on a long term basis." Hmm...
Second, his attack on Obama's position is centered on the fact that the President's position "makes it more difficult to reach that long term solution." In other words, Romney is no longer thinking about those pesky illegals and their law-breaking. In fact, he implies that they are innocent. His thinking is concentrated on the best way to help them.
That my friend is flip flopping done right.
Nevertheless, folks, buckle your seats. I don't know that Romney could move any more toward a pro-immigrant position without losing the base. But just wait until the election is over. This flip flip is only the beginning.
Tom Tancredo just rolled over in his political grave.
Friday, May 11, 2012
America Is Losing Its Mind
On the home page of the Washington Post, one can click on the following links:
"Capeheart: Romney hijinks were and are bullying"
"Cohen: What does Romney's bullying tell us?"
"Marcus: Romney's troubling response"
"Romney's School Pranks Had Edge"
That is only the Post. I have had to completely stop reading Andrew Sullivan. The Daily Beast is not far behind.
I kid you not, we are literally talking about a prank that a man committed 50 years ago as a teenager. This is beyond insane. I almost have to pinch myself to make sure that I am not dreaming this. There are people walking around on this planet who are outraged over this. OUTRAGED!
I would say that it is the lamestream media who is pushing a hit piece on their favored candidate's opponent. But this kind of pettiness is an epidemic in America. Republicans, beginning with entertainer Sarah Palin, have spent the past four years questioning Barack Obama's integrity. Prior to the Obama administration, Democrats spent eight years questioning the integrity of George W. Bush. Whoever wins in 2012 or in 2016 or in 2020 will be accused of horrifying acts of character-revealing misdeeds. It's a book that never ends and the chapters are all the same.
Instead of debating public policy and the actual issues facing our country, we are discussing the dog on Romney's car or the dog that Obama ate as a youngster. When we are not discussing dogs, we are discussing an entertainer who called a young girl a slut, or a washed-out rock star who make dangerous comments about the President. The Democrats have spent the past several months accusing Republicans of waging a war against women. The only thing that Republicans and Democrats can agree on is that the other is really, really, really awful.
It's not the media. They only deliver a product that we all enjoy. The problem is us. We join a certain team early in life and we are thus quick to call unjust any negative comment about our team. When the comments are meant to slander the character of the other team, then those comments become truth.
I believe that Mitt Romney would make a better President than Barack Obama. But I will not lie about Obama. I will not accusing him of character flaws, when there is no evidence that such flaws exist. I will not try to spin small insignificant incidences into something that reveals the "true character" of the President. I hate it when Democrats did it to Bush and now to Romney. I hate it when Republicans do it to Obama. It's wrong no matter who does it.
I need to go take a shower after reading the "news" today.
"Capeheart: Romney hijinks were and are bullying"
"Cohen: What does Romney's bullying tell us?"
"Marcus: Romney's troubling response"
"Romney's School Pranks Had Edge"
That is only the Post. I have had to completely stop reading Andrew Sullivan. The Daily Beast is not far behind.
I kid you not, we are literally talking about a prank that a man committed 50 years ago as a teenager. This is beyond insane. I almost have to pinch myself to make sure that I am not dreaming this. There are people walking around on this planet who are outraged over this. OUTRAGED!
I would say that it is the lamestream media who is pushing a hit piece on their favored candidate's opponent. But this kind of pettiness is an epidemic in America. Republicans, beginning with entertainer Sarah Palin, have spent the past four years questioning Barack Obama's integrity. Prior to the Obama administration, Democrats spent eight years questioning the integrity of George W. Bush. Whoever wins in 2012 or in 2016 or in 2020 will be accused of horrifying acts of character-revealing misdeeds. It's a book that never ends and the chapters are all the same.
Instead of debating public policy and the actual issues facing our country, we are discussing the dog on Romney's car or the dog that Obama ate as a youngster. When we are not discussing dogs, we are discussing an entertainer who called a young girl a slut, or a washed-out rock star who make dangerous comments about the President. The Democrats have spent the past several months accusing Republicans of waging a war against women. The only thing that Republicans and Democrats can agree on is that the other is really, really, really awful.
It's not the media. They only deliver a product that we all enjoy. The problem is us. We join a certain team early in life and we are thus quick to call unjust any negative comment about our team. When the comments are meant to slander the character of the other team, then those comments become truth.
I believe that Mitt Romney would make a better President than Barack Obama. But I will not lie about Obama. I will not accusing him of character flaws, when there is no evidence that such flaws exist. I will not try to spin small insignificant incidences into something that reveals the "true character" of the President. I hate it when Democrats did it to Bush and now to Romney. I hate it when Republicans do it to Obama. It's wrong no matter who does it.
I need to go take a shower after reading the "news" today.
Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Romney Still Not Uniting the Base
Oops, I meant to say that he is currently polling about 90% among Republicans. And this on the heels of a divisive primary season. There goes our Colorado speculation!
Oh and he is beating Obama by two points overall.
Oh and he is beating Obama by two points overall.
Concerning Right Wingnut's Latest Post
I suppose the sign of a good post is that it gets people to respond and so I want to add my thoughts to what Right Wingnut posted earlier regarding Romney and the Latino vote. RW’s assertion is that Romney will not win the general election without Rubio. While I agree with his underlying perspective, I think that statement is a bit off.
1. While the Latino vote is important, it is not make-or-break for Romney. Again, I went over this with lots of graphs in an earlier post. Of the 12-15 swing states, only four states feature a significant Latino population – New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Florida. Romney can win the general election without the first three. And while Florida may very well be make-or-break, it does not feature the kind of Latinos (if I may put it that way) that would be most opposed to Romney. Having lived in Miami for two years, I can testify that the older Cuban-Americans are fiercely Republican. Cubans also fall under different immigration rules and thus may be less driven by immigration policy. In short, Romney’s path is more difficult because of the Latino vote, but it is far from impossible.
Note: in all of the swing states he has a problem with women voters, so he might be better off finding a woman running mate. Especially, if Hillary joins Obama’s ticket.
2. Worst case scenario – Romney gets McCain level support with Latinos. The Fox News poll which Right Wingnut posted (and which I posted a month ago) should certainly concern us. However, it seems to be an outlier. I try to keep a sturdy eye on the demographic breakdown on polls as they come out and it seems that Romney is right around 30-35% of the vote. That is where I found him in my analysis on Nevada and Colorado. If Romney does get 17% of the Latino vote in November, then it is most likely because he has failed all around in his campaign and will likely lose more than just the Latino vote.
1. While the Latino vote is important, it is not make-or-break for Romney. Again, I went over this with lots of graphs in an earlier post. Of the 12-15 swing states, only four states feature a significant Latino population – New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Florida. Romney can win the general election without the first three. And while Florida may very well be make-or-break, it does not feature the kind of Latinos (if I may put it that way) that would be most opposed to Romney. Having lived in Miami for two years, I can testify that the older Cuban-Americans are fiercely Republican. Cubans also fall under different immigration rules and thus may be less driven by immigration policy. In short, Romney’s path is more difficult because of the Latino vote, but it is far from impossible.
Note: in all of the swing states he has a problem with women voters, so he might be better off finding a woman running mate. Especially, if Hillary joins Obama’s ticket.
2. Worst case scenario – Romney gets McCain level support with Latinos. The Fox News poll which Right Wingnut posted (and which I posted a month ago) should certainly concern us. However, it seems to be an outlier. I try to keep a sturdy eye on the demographic breakdown on polls as they come out and it seems that Romney is right around 30-35% of the vote. That is where I found him in my analysis on Nevada and Colorado. If Romney does get 17% of the Latino vote in November, then it is most likely because he has failed all around in his campaign and will likely lose more than just the Latino vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)