Rice for Vice President?

From Drudge:

Late Thursday evening, Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign launched a new fundraising drive, ‘Meet The VP’ — just as Romney himself has narrowed the field of candidates to a handful, sources reveal.

And a surprise name is now near the top of the list: Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice!

The timing of the announcement is now set for ‘coming weeks’.

Plus:  Massive excitement in the GOP base.  Clearly the smartest person in the room (we’d have to force Rice to speak with rags stuffed in her mouth just so Biden wouldn’t sound like a complete idiot during the VP debate).  Not only cuts the rug under the racism lie from the liberals but as they are sure to try and call her a “Tom” it will actually hurt them massively.

Minus:  Bit of a reminder of Bush who still remains unpopular (though his popularity is greatly rebounding as people take the full measure of his successor).

What do you think?

135 thoughts on “Rice for Vice President?

  1. 6206j July 12, 2012 / 9:25 pm

    This is a distraction from Bain etc. She’s pro-choice!

    • 6206j July 12, 2012 / 10:22 pm

      Actually it’s a diversion not a distraction but you get my gist.

  2. Ms Miller July 12, 2012 / 10:04 pm

    When hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast she stayed “on vacation.” On one outing her indifference was noted by an audience that booed her. Let her rest. We need to think of a person who could end up being a president…Jindal and Rubio are not qualified as their parents were not born in America. Ryan is okay but thosewho know our Constitution and understand how much danger we are in with the Muslims like Michelle Bachman would work out better.

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:54 am

      Hopefully we can find people intelligent enough to vote for candidates based on how well they can govern the United States according to its Constitution, and not silly American Idol type popularity polls. Things like carping about people not rushing into a situation like a flood or a fire are so petty.

      When Obama wanted to visit Colorado Springs during the fire, people did not want him to come, and said so. The feeling was that he couldn’t do anything but take important manpower away from what was really important, which was fighting fires and saving lives, and there was no interest in having him grandstand when his presence couldn’t do a thing to help.

      I think it was the mayor who made a point of assuring people that Obama had not been allowed to “get in the way”.

      I respect politicians who understand this and who put the welfare of people ahead of their own desire for publicity and self-congratulation. I always thought Bush did the right thing by staying out of the way of the people who were really doing the work during the Katrina mess, and I think the same about Dr. Rice.

  3. casper July 12, 2012 / 10:06 pm

    I think she would be a great choice. She’s smart and articulate.

    “Minus: Bit of a reminder of Bush who still remains unpopular ”

    And that would be her biggest problem.

    Is she even interested? She wasn’t in 2008.

  4. GMB July 12, 2012 / 10:43 pm

    Mitt could pick a broken mp3 player tht only plays recordings of sheriff joes gaffes over and over and win handily.

    I will not even concede Illinois to barky at this point.

    GTFO 2012

    • casper July 12, 2012 / 10:55 pm

      Great to see your excitement over the possibility of Rice as VP..

      • GMB July 12, 2012 / 10:57 pm

        Moot point now. Mitt aide says no Condi.

        VP’s don’t excite me. Mitt does not excite me. Putting king putt and queen mooch on the curb does.

        Fair enough?

      • casper July 12, 2012 / 11:04 pm

        Prepare to stay unexcited. Mitt’s Bain problems are starting to surface.

      • GMB July 12, 2012 / 11:22 pm

        Bain problems? Lol there Casper. I think you proggies would have better luck complaining about Anne’s horse again. That worked so well the last time.

        Mitt could sell sham wows to the sham wow guy, at a hefty profit to boot.

        Bain problems??? Can I laugh at that again?


      • GMB July 12, 2012 / 11:24 pm

        Casper, just as a by the by here, It is nice to see you back and participating again. I look forward to sparring with you again.


      • casper July 12, 2012 / 11:34 pm

        Same back at you. While I disagree with you most of the time I respect that you stand up for your beliefs and you stay away from the insults.

        I have been getting into shooting a lot lately. Picked up a Rugar
        LC9 and I’m getting my CCW later this month. Guess that will make me an armed Lib.

      • Mark Edward Noonan July 12, 2012 / 11:58 pm


        Trouble is, Romney doesn’t have a “Bain problem”. Obama and his troops are trying to invent one, but even MSM outfits are saying there’s nothing to it. Additionally, the election is about Obama, not about Romney – are you better off than you were four years ago? A majority answers “no” and so will vote Romney on November 6th.

      • casper July 13, 2012 / 12:09 am

        “Trouble is, Romney doesn’t have a “Bain problem”.”

        Then you have nothing to worry about, do you? The next couple of weeks should be very interesting.

        So Mark, if Romney doesn’t pick Condi, who would you like him to pick?

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:45 am

        Armed with a RUGAR?


      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:14 am


        a panty waste lib with a “gun” is still just that, dont fool your self into thinking you are a lib rambo, you are still just a bwany fwank fife

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:26 am


        a 9mm………FIGURES

      • casper July 13, 2012 / 9:44 am

        I knew you guys were jerks, I hadn’t realized you are also GUN SNOBS. LOL

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 10:32 am

        cappy, I am not a gun snob, but I do think it funny that you are so proud of being a new gun owner and you don’t even know what the gun is called.

        I merely pointed out that your knowledge is pretty superficial.

        As for having a 9mm, no big deal. It’s a perfectly good weapon, and I don’t know why neo sneered at it.

        My comment was just an indirect heads-up—–don’t be strutting around a firing range thinking you have handgun cred if you don’t even know the name of your weapon.

        (And for God’s sake, DON”T wear the Obama necktie!)

      • J. R. Babcock July 13, 2012 / 12:02 pm

        Picked up a Rugar
        LC9 and I’m getting my CCW later this month.

        Is that a knock off of the Ruger LC9, LOL? I looked at the LC9 as a potential CC weapon a while back, but the grip seemed awfully small — more or a woman’s gun.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:15 pm

        You nailed it, JR—-I’ve never heard of a Rugar either.

        I like a revolver, as I think they are more reliable, but I haven’t shot a lot. When I test-fired guns, though, I found the 9mm Ruger and Glock both jammed and the Colt Python never missed a beat.

        When my husband died my brothers went through his gun collection with me and pointed out a .38 I remembered him calling a “pocket gun” as it has no hammer, and this is probably what I will use when I get my CC permit. The Python is a beast and not that great to carry. I took mine with me when I was hauling horses through the south and southwest, tucked into a custom niche built into the console of my truck, but I never wanted to haul it around in a handbag or holster.

        As a side note, I know Wyoming was considering a law that said you wouldn’t need a permit for concealed carry. Evidently that did not go through.

      • Mark Edward Noonan July 13, 2012 / 1:54 pm


        My first pick if Bobby Jindal because if we’re a good nation and behave ourselves and pray for it we may one day be worthy of having a President of that quality. Down the list we go Rubio, West, Christie, Haley…Rice isn’t in the list yet because I haven’t had a chance to really consider it as she was off the radar until yesterday.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 2:52 pm

        I like Jindal, too, though I think Rubio is a better all-around prospect.

        But they both face the same problem, which is the lack of any specific ruling by the Supreme Court on the meaning of the term “natural born citizen”, and the evidence is so compelling, though some claim not conclusive, that the term means born to parents who were citizens at the time of the child’s birth, that it really has to be resolved before we get into any more shadowy areas of Constitutional law.

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 3:59 pm


        “this is my WEAPON, this is my GUN, one is for killing one is for fun”

        did you buy extra “clips” with that “gun”?
        a 9mm is not a bad small bore ccw weapon, but REAL men carry .45’s

        Rookie mistakes, but hey welcome to the club, next you will have a Palin and NRA sticker on the bumper….LOL 🙂

  5. Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:43 am

    “Bain problem” is a Loony Lefty whine.

    Bain found companies that were in failure mode, worked on reviving them, and usually succeeded. Sometimes they took more than one company destined for failure and combined them, so only some jobs were lost but not all of them. Sometimes they saved companies and jobs by sending some jobs overseas. Sometimes they did this while Mitt Romney was with Bain, sometimes after he left.

    As for jobs that did go overseas, I don’t believe any of them were funded with American taxpayer money.

    The very idea that anyone, even the Rabidly Radical Left or its mindless minions, could find something malignant in the saving of American companies and American jobs is so bizarre, it would be unbelievable if we were talking about anyone but the RRL and its mindless minions.

    They seem to be saying “We prefer a president who has never created one single job in private industry, who has never had a real job, whose policies have cost millions of jobs, to a man whose initiative and business acumen saved a few thousand jobs and created a few tens of thousands more but who could not save every job in every company he worked to keep alive.”

    “Bain problem”. What a load.

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:09 am

      Libtards STUCK on Stupid for their dumbed down drone plantation looters.

      Kooooke bros

      I would love to see Condi, But I really prefer Col West.

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:20 am

        Bain problem?

        how about a BRAIN problem =
        Carney sneers at reporter asking about college records…

        carney LOL get it? a “carney” for Ubama

        Urban dictionary
        To perform an action by clever and illegal means that is highly beneficial to the one performing the action.
        He pulled a carney when he snuck into the $50/ticket concert for free without getting caught.

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:23 am


      The very idea that anyone, even the Rabidly Radical Left or its mindless minions, could find something malignant in the saving of American companies and American jobs is so bizarre, it would be unbelievable if we were talking about anyone but the RRL and its mindless minions.

      thats why the loser lefties are union thugs, government employees (leeches,) and marxists, it is who these losers are…….OPM and hate is all they have.

      • GMB July 13, 2012 / 7:30 am

        Well, you see here, someone made a profit . It was not done for some altruistic reason of fairness but to return a profit for Bain’s investors.

        That just can not happen.

        No soup for you!! Capitalist pig!! 😛

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:36 am

        No WAY, No HOW……..

        Did Condoleezza Rice vote for Barack Obama?
        By Toby Harnden World

        Consider this scenario. A friend of yours is all coy about revealing the name of the candidate they’d voted for in the presidential election. But she opines that “the American people are wise in wanting change”. Then she says that “when the election took place and after the election took place, it was a special time for Americans”.

        Well, knock me over with a feather if you’d conclude that your buddy had voted for Barack Obama rather than John McCain.

        So who are the above quotations from? Step forward Condoleezza Rice, President George W. Bush’s Secretary of State. Of course, she might just have been being polite. But it seems much more likely – hat tip Al Kamen – that she was treading the same path as her predecessor Colin Powell, who very publicly plumped for

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:42 am

        coming to a city near you, with flash mobs, race mobs, black panther mobs, union thug mobs and citys burning to the ground.

        ‘Don’t F**k With Us’: Occupy Group Encourages Violence Against Police at RNC in ‘Action Planning’ Videos

        “Anything is possible…anything. Happy Action Planning!”

        ‘Kill Cops’: Occupy L.A. Protesters Violently Clash With Police in Riot Gear

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 7:45 am

        you see Bain is the distraction for the GOP,
        while Ubamas army take to the streets with mayhem, mobs, and rioting.
        Hitler would be proud of this regime ….well ……minus the black guy.

    • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 9:58 am

      If only the media would use a fraction of their effort in investigating Romney’s past and actually vet pResident obAMATEUR and verify the accuracy of his attack campaign.

      I’d have a better chance of getting world peace than the MSM going after their guy.

    • mitchethekid July 13, 2012 / 1:06 pm

      Again, you have no idea what the “Bain problem” is all about. It’s not whether he created jobs or not, or outsourced or not or even enriched himself at the expense of others. It’s whether he lied to the American people or to the SEC.

      Bain: He’s Drowning Not Waving

      This morning, we still have no explanation for why Mitt Romney was paid a six figure salary for three years while he “had absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies” in Bain’s words in their statement yesterday. We also have no explanation of why telling the SEC in 2001 that he remained the “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president,” while he was nothing of the kind. Yes, we have been told that his departure was dramatic, and that it took time to restructure a complicated business partnership, but for a company to declare a false CEO to the SEC for three years is either the mark of spectacular incompetence – and a potential felony – or a lie.

      I think it’s telling that the Romney campaign has not yet addressed these two core questions. But even its own line of response – to reiterate that even though Romney remained the formal CEO, he was completely AWOL – is now looking more tenuous with new data from HuffPo. In trying to fend off questions about his Massachusetts residency for the gubernatorial campaign, Romney stated that while he was running the Olympics,

      [T]here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth.

      My italics. That statement was under oath. So was this about the period in question:

      [I] remained on the board of the Staples Corporation and Marriott International, the LifeLike Corporation.

      Lifelike and Staples were Bain acquisitions. To repeat: Romney said he attended board meetings of Bain companies in a period in which Bain says he had “absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies.” And this was under oath:

      I returned for most of those meetings. Others I attended by telephone if I could not return.

      So now the story is the following: Romney legally declared himself the “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president” in a period when his company says he had “absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies.” But during that period, he attended board meetings of Bain companies and made several business trips back to Boston.

      So did Romney lie under oath or is Bain lying today? I’d say Romney’s best bet is to stick with his under-oath testimony and to his SEC filing and admit that he was responsible for what Bain did – legally and practically – in the period in question, even if he was part-time. Otherwise, he could have committed a crime. The only problem with conceding this is that it opens up a whole can of worms about investments and decisions by Bain in those years – and possible inquiries into conflicts of interest as he drummed up dollars for Salt Lake City’s Games.

      Which leads us to the following conclusions: yes, former Senator Santorum, your nominee was the “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president” of a private equity firm that invested in a post-abortion fetus disposal enterprise. Maybe if you’d known that, you could have brought it up in the primaries.

      • Count d'Haricots July 13, 2012 / 1:24 pm

        And CNN But, do keep up with this Bain attack, it’s been so successful.

      • Count d'Haricots July 13, 2012 / 1:25 pm
      • Mark Edward Noonan July 13, 2012 / 1:55 pm

        It won’t work – trying to paint Romney as a criminal is just not possible. But, keep at it, if you like.

        I love the smell of liberal desperation in the morning…

  6. Peter Marx July 13, 2012 / 9:27 am

    Stupid idea. She doesn’t want. In addition she is a backroom thinker type – not an out front leader type. It would be a sure loser for Romney. I’m assuming at this point he is smarter than that.

  7. Retired Spook July 13, 2012 / 9:41 am

    In addition she is a backroom thinker type – not an out front leader type.

    I agree completely. But then I’m not a big Condi fan. Just curious — can someone describe something she did in the Bush Administration that you admire. She’s not a particularly motivating or exciting speaker, and often has a problem articulating complex ideas.

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:58 pm

      I’m a very big Condi fan but that does not mean I think she is brilliant in all fields or a great politician or VP candidate. I like the term “backroom thinker”—I think she is incredibly smart, with a good concept of the big picture, and well versed in international affairs, but she is not a politician and never wanted to be, and would not be a good campaigner.

      I would be disappointed to learn that she voted for Obama, as she has always struck me as bright and pragmatic and committed to a Constitutional form of government, and Obama has always been transparently the antithesis of the Constitutional model in his governing philosophy. However, I am sick and tired of crystal-ball reading and don’t think Condi had any reason to tell anyone who she voted for. She made a point that she could understand why people would vote for Obama. So what?

      “The American people are wise in wanting change.” What is the context of this statement? Could it have been wise in wanting change from the expanding federal government model that had gone so far beyond the Constitutional limits? I don’t know, either. I do know that a comment like this can be taken in many ways, and that context is crucial.

      But it doesn’t matter. She would probably be a good VP, and definitely better than either the POTUS or VP we have now, but she doesn’t want a life in politics and isn’t as broadly skilled as many other possibilities.

      I do wonder, though, of putting her name up is a spin on the old cutting down on arsenic in drinking water ploy, where something is said to be in the works so when it is contradicted or laid to rest the Left can use it—in this case, as “SEE??? Conservatives would never CONSIDER a black VP!!!”

      • dbschmidt July 13, 2012 / 5:43 pm

        Dr. Rice has repeatedly pointed out the only position she would like is as Commissioner of the NFL. I am sure she would be willing to help the new Romney administration but not as VP–more in the “backroom thinker /adviser” role.

        I am still on the West or Rubio wagon but as always, being a Conservative, I am not privy to magic crystal ball.

        BTW Spook, I have never heard her speak but have read reviews that she has captivated audiences when she has.

      • Retired Spook July 13, 2012 / 8:59 pm

        BTW Spook, I have never heard her speak but have read reviews that she has captivated audiences when she has.

        DB, try to find some videos of interviews she’s done, where she’s speaking off the cuff in her own words. Anyone can give a good speech. Even George Bush gave pretty decent speeches.

      • dbschmidt July 14, 2012 / 12:25 pm


        How very true. Do not think I have ever seen her speak “off the cuff”–then again most smart politicians try to avoid it and I think Joe Biden should have learned that long ago. Me, personally, would like to see more of it from all politicians so we can better evaluate them and not their speech writers.

    • J. R. Babcock July 13, 2012 / 9:45 am

      Well, that’s the last straw. I guess I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for Barry, and just accept the consequences.

    • Cluster July 13, 2012 / 10:27 am


      Do you not think that democrats call for full disclosure from Romney is just a little, if not a lot hypocritical? Was Obama fully vetted? Where is his college transcripts, writings, etc? And The democratically controlled house of representatives passed a health care bill that impacts everyone in this country without even reading it, and you are worried about full disclosure on romeny’s personal finances?

      I think you have your priorities screwed up

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 10:28 am

      It’s often hard to tell what has cappy in a snit, but this, from his link, might be what bothers him.

      “The Obama campaign and other Democrats have raised questions about his unwillingness to release tax returns filed before 2010; his offshore assets, which include investment entities based in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands and a recently closed bank account in Switzerland; and a set of “blind trusts” that meet the Massachusetts standards for public officials but not the more rigorous bar set by the federal government.”

      1. Questions raised by the Obama campaign ! Ooooh! You just know this has to be relevant!

      2. Offshore assets. Illegal? Were US taxes paid? Then what’s the complaint? Aside from the fact that to the ignorant Lefty Lemmings, the very term “offshore assets” tells them that gee, SOMETHING must be fishy. (They are soooooo easy..)

      3. “blind trusts” that meet the Massachusetts standards for public officials HE WAS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL IN MASSACHUSETTS !

      4. not the more rigorous bar set by the federal government.” —-THEN. But then, he was not running for a federal office. Now he IS running for a federal office, and now his trusts DO meet this allegedly more rigorous bar. Are you claiming that he should have met these federal standards while a Massachusetts public official? Why?

      cappy, for a school teacher you are remarkably incapable of being able—-or willing—-to see through a hit piece like this. What does it say? Nothing. It makes sly references to “questions” allegedly raised by unspecified Others, and people like you take the bait and carry on as if any legitimate claims had been made.

      If the paper had evidence of wrongdoing they would have printed it. But they don’t so all they can is try to create an impression that somehow, somehow, somewhere, Romney was not on the up-and-up, coyly phrasing it as “questions” to avoid legal action for libel.

      They do know their readership, though, and no doubt many just like you have decided that there IS a “Bain problem”.

      • Cluster July 13, 2012 / 10:38 am

        Democrats want us to be more concerned about what Romney does with his own money more so than what Obama does with our tax payer money. Strange isn’t it?

        It has also been disclosed that Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Nancy Pelosi have “off shore” assets. Oh the horrors.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:17 pm

        Cluster, I understand that the word for people like casper is “Bainer”, a takeoff on “birther”.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:21 pm

        Too funny that the RRL and the PL drones like casper are fretting about old tax returns, but awfully complacent about missing Selective Service records, Social Security info, passport records, adoption records, college transcripts, and college papers from Obama.

        Romney’s life is an open book, completely transparent, and all they can focus on is his tax returns. Not that they think there is anything fishy about them, but his income can be used in their class envy tactics and there might be something about a foreign investment or something that will get the financially illiterate all wound up and looking for torches and pitchforks.

      • Mark Edward Noonan July 13, 2012 / 1:57 pm

        As Rush says – it isn’t the facts of the case but the seriousness of the accusation. For our liberals if an accusation is leveled against a GOPer then the GOPer is guilty even if he’s later proven innocent.

  8. Cluster July 13, 2012 / 10:21 am


    Give it up on the Bain thing, even Bill Clinton disagrees with all the Bain bashing.

    I like Rice, but prefer someone else for VP, and more and more I am thinking Ryan.

    • mitchethekid July 13, 2012 / 1:14 pm

      Bill Clinton Mitt Romney

      WASHINGTON — Former President Bill Clinton said Mitt Romney’s financial record is a matter of legitimate campaign scrutiny because he’s been selling himself as a fix-it man on the economy.

      Clinton told NBC’s “Today” show Romney’s hesitation to release all of his tax returns “struck me as a little odd.” Romney has released a full tax filing only for 2010.

      He explained, “I am a little surprised he only released a year’s worth of tax returns. That kind of perplexed me, because this is the first time in, I don’t know, more than 30 years that anybody running for president has only done that. you know, it’s typical we all release 10, 11 years. I think Senator McCain released over 20 years of tax returns.”

      Clinton said Romney’s record as the head of private equity firm Bain Capital is fair game and says taking a microscopic look at Romney’s finances is “just as relevant as going over my record as governor when I ran for president.”

      He said voters “ought to make up their own mind” whether they support someone who apparently sought to minimize his federal tax liability by parking large sums of money overseas.

      On extending the Bush-era tax cuts, he said, “If we’re going to have long-term debt reduction, we’re going to have to have some spending cuts and some more revenues and that’s the fairest place to get it. What the Republicans are trying to do is to put him in a position of giving all that up for another year, which I think would be a big mistake.”

      • Cluster July 13, 2012 / 2:14 pm


        The democrats extended the tax rate cuts in December 2010, so let.’s call them what they are – Obama’s tax cuts for the rich. You ok with that?

      • Amazona July 15, 2012 / 9:50 am

        Davey squeals: “So your excuse now is that he was an absentee CEO?”

        The determination of some PL dupes to ram home the understanding that they are totally clueless about business can be amusing. When it reaches the level of such shrill hysteria that windows are shattering and dogs howling in pain, it is just annoying.

        Davey appears intent on establishing and reinforcing the idea that he is simply not intellectually competent enough to process and understand the explanations for the transition of Bain management. But he is beating a dead horse. We already understand, Davey. Give it a rest.

        Perhaps when he got moved from the fry station to the cash register it was a little simpler than the transition to new management for a multibillion dollar company.

        I don’t blame Mitt for wanting to keep his options open when he was approached with the urgent need to take over the struggling/failing Olympic preparations. This was not something he decided he wanted to do, pursued, and achieved after a lot of thought on his part. What seems to be skipped over in the Olympic narrative is WHY he was chosen to step in and rescue the project.


        He was identified as the right guy for the job, because for so long at Bain he had been the right guy for the job.

        He was asked to immediately take on a monumental task, one incredibly demanding, one with a high possibility of failure, and one with a very high public profile so failure would be a well-publicized event. It was a monumental challenge and a huge personal and professional risk. Failure here could impact his own company.

        But he did it, and certainly not for the money. He didn’t take a cent for his work.

        Because of the urgency of the situation, he chose not to make a sweeping decision about the rest of his business career, a decision of great complexity and magnitude. A permanent decision to walk away from a company like Bain, a company he built, a company with such significance to him, would not have been one easily or quickly made, but there was no time to ponder and evaluate before agreeing to step in and take over the Olympic mess.

        So he did the pragmatic thing, retained his title while turning over day to day management to others, continued to be the official and legal presence, and devoted himself to making the Olympics a success.

        I am amazed at the lack of attention paid to this achievement. It is mentioned in passing. He took over the Olympics, ho hum. But in fact he stepped into a massive, convoluted, financial and organizational train wreck, and it was only his managerial skills that pulled it out of its death spiral and turned it around, to pull together a very successful Olympic experience.

        And I think he made a mistake in trying to explain that it was not his own business decisions that led to having one of the companies taken over by Bain declare bankruptcy. I can see why he did it, because it is a fact, but his explanation adds to the RRL and PL claim that this bankruptcy is somehow proof of business incompetence on the part of Bain.

        I’ve always seen a company like Bain as the business equivalent of an emergency room. You would not declare the doctor in charge of the E.R. a professional failure because the doctors on duty at the time could not save a patient already near death when he arrived.

      • Amazona July 15, 2012 / 10:03 am

        “...APPARENTLY sought to minimize his federal tax liability by PARKING large sums of money overseas…”

        Boy, the PL dupes get sucked in by this kind of sneaky rhetoric every time, don’t they? Ol’ mitche here quotes crap like this all the time, proving how gullible he is and how easy it is to lure him into believing it.

        Two big weasel words, here, mitche, from the Big Weasel hissownself.

        APPARENTLY. See how he waffles? Even Clinton is not willing to go out on a limb and be sued for slander and/or libel by making an actual claim that the purpose of overseas investment was to “minimize federal tax liability”. And why should he? With a mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, drooling mob of minions slavering for the next chunk of rancid meat thrown their way by their minders, the Left can be sure they will fall upon the IMPLICATION of wrongdoing, being intellectually incapable of thinking it through, so they don’t have to run legal risks by making overt statements.

        mitche proves the accuracy of this evaluation of the Lefty Lemmings.

        And the money is PARKED, doncha see. Not invested in business, business which will generate profit which is taxed when it enters the country, business which strengthens a U.S. company so it can also invest vast sums in companies within the U.S. Nooooo, it is PARKED. Because that appeals to the surly class envy aspect of this mob, by telling them that there is so much of this money that it is just PARKED somewhere, out of the reach of the IRS, by those eeeevil capitalist bastids.

        And mitche and his kind slurp up the swill and rush to their computers to quote it, to show what tools they are.

      • Retired Spook July 15, 2012 / 10:08 am

        He was asked to immediately take on a monumental task, one incredibly demanding, one with a high possibility of failure, and one with a very high public profile so failure would be a well-publicized event. It was a monumental challenge and a huge personal and professional risk. Failure here could impact his own company.

        But he did it, and certainly not for the money. He didn’t take a cent for his work.

        And I’m hard-pressed to think of a single thing Obama has done in his entire life that is remotely comparable.

      • Amazona July 14, 2012 / 12:52 am

        I see Davey is up to his old tricks, frantically trying to create the impression that people on the Right are “shaken up”, after so many silly posts claiming we are angry, hyperemotional, etc.

        Didn’t work then, Davey, and doesn’t work now. You seem to think this is a viable tactic but it’s just dumb.

        We watch the frantic scrambling of the RRL and you PL minions, trying to gin up scandals where none exist, babbling on about your own hangups like mitche’s obsession with linking the words “Palin” and “whore”, the efforts to shift attention away from the abysmal record of Obama, and we are amused. You guys are like Curley, Moe and Larry trying to run a campaign, and all you can come up with is political slapstick.

        Unless you count hilarity at your efforts (the “turbot” effect!) the only emotion you find in our reaction to you is amazement that anyone can be so dumb.

      • Amazona July 14, 2012 / 1:06 am

        Davey sneers at the rebuttal of PL smear tactics with a “THAT’S all you’ve got??”

        Don’t need much more than that, Davey.

        “As Fortune wrote earlier, Romney left Bain suddenly — rather than as part of an organized transition plan — after being asked to lead an Olympic organizing committee that had spiraled out of control. Moreover, it was unclear in February 1999 if Romney’s leave of absence would be permanent, or if he would return (as he had in 1994, after losing a U.S.Senate race to Ted Kennedy). He didn’t formally give up his title and firm ownership until 2002, once the Games had been successful and he was interested in other elective office. In the interim, he continued to fulfill legal obligations such as signing certain documents — but actual investment and managerial decisions were being made by others.”

        This explains it very clearly, to people who either have no experience in the business world or who simply don’t care about the truth. The lame response from the Obama camp?

        “Mitt Romney either misled the American people or misrepresented himself to the SEC. Romney has said he had no authority or responsibility for managing Bain since 1999, but that has been proven false. Regardless of whether he was on the management committee for this particular deal, he remained President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board and he was legally responsible for every investment and decision made by Bain.”

        In other words, they are going to try to stick with the lie that being CEO made him responsible no matter who made the decisions, a “the buck stops here” approach.

        Which they only seem to be willing to apply to Mitt Romney, and ignore when it comes to things like the Commander in Chief and CEO of the United States being legally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Mexican civilians after the decision was made to sacrifice them to further political aims here in the U.S.

        Romney had an official leave of absence, during which he played no role in Bain decisions, yet the RRL and its PL minions claim that his title makes him responsible. Obama never took a leave of absence, never stated that he was stepping away from his position, yet is not held accountable for anything that has happened in his administration.

        And BTW, the claim “Romney has said he had no authority or responsibility for managing Bain since 1999, but that has been proven false. ” is a lie. No that you people care—just pointing it out.

      • Retired Spook July 15, 2012 / 8:03 am

        I suppose it’s out of the question that you would just be honest and admit that Romney has been caught in a lie.

        And this bothers you why, Dave? I mean, Obama has been caught in dozens of lies, and you’re still going to vote for him — right?

        And FactCheck.org, not exactly a conservative organization, disagrees with you.

        But we see little new in any of these SEC filings, and a University of Pennsylvania Law School professor we spoke to sees no basis for the Obama campaign’s claim that Romney committed a felony.

        None of the SEC filings show that Romney was anything but a passive, absentee owner during that time, as both Romney and Bain have long said. It should not surprise anyone that Romney retained certain titles while he was working out the final disposition of his ownership, for example. We see nothing to contradict the statement that a Bain spokesman issued in response to the Globe article:

        Bain Capital, July 12: Due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romney’s departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999. Accordingly, Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on SEC filings during this period.


        We would reassess our judgment should somebody come up with evidence that Romney took part in specific management decisions or had any active role (not just a title) at Bain after he left to head the Olympics. But nothing we’ve seen directly contradicts Romney’s statements — which he has certified as true under pain of federal prosecution — that he “has not had any active role” with Bain or “been involved in the operations” of Bain since then.

        And we wish to note, we’re not alone in this judgement. Others include:

        Fortune’s Dan Primack — who covers Wall Street “deals and dealmakers” — addressed the Mother Jones reporting in a July 2 article that came to the same conclusion we do. Primack’s more recent reporting we’ve already noted.

        The Washington Post‘s Fact Checker, Glenn Kessler, rebutted the Boston Globe story in a July 12 piece. “Just because you are listed as an owner of shares does not mean you have a managerial role,” Kessler writes. We agree.

        Before the Globe story broke, the Columbia Journalism Review’s Brendan Nyhan stated: “[T]he specific cases cited by the Obama campaign largely concern actions taken by those companies during a period in which Romney was not making operational decisions at the firm. Journalists must be clear about this distinction.” After the Globe story, CJR’s Greg Marx wrote “there’s less new in the Globe article than the attention it has drawn suggests.”

        ABC News’ Devin Dwyer reported July 12, after the Globe‘s story appeared: “Team Obama does not provide any specific evidence to back up claims that Romney was actively managing Bain between 1999 and 2002.”

        Let’s face it, Dave, as someone said the other day — you’re an attacker, not a contributor. That’s just creepy, IMHO. You’re creepy, Dave.

      • Amazona July 16, 2012 / 12:48 am

        “It doesn’t bother me at all; I’m well aware of the lack of honesty that defines modern conservatism.”

        A pretty funny comment from one who refuses to define “conservatism” as a political movement and insists on dumbing everything down to his primitive level of comprehension, which is apparently limited to insult and attack and lies.

      • Retired Spook July 16, 2012 / 9:36 am

        I’m sorry you find pointing out the truth to be an “attack” and “creepy,” though. That’s a sad way for you to be.

        NOW I know who you are, Dave. You’re that guy in the black suit of armor in the Monty Python movie — right? Too funny — in a sad sort of way.

    • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 3:27 pm

      “… as a fix-it man on the economy.”

      And obAMATEUR does not deserve the same scrutiny? Well I guess since he is not presenting anything of his record (more attacks than self praises) then he should not be scrutinized.

      Romney at Bain did not have an endless supply of cash to spend at will. Romney was accountable to a board of directors as well as other officials.

      obAMATEUR on the other hand has access to almost endless amounts of present as well as future cash and almost infinite credit!!!

      Who deserves more scrutiny – a private individual accountable on more levels than the pResident who ran up over $4 trillion in debt with very little progress on the economy to show for it?

      So is obAMATEUR not running on the ability to fix the economy? Then what is he running on that will give him the votes he wishes?

      Or will the mindless drones and moochers vote for him because of the promised handouts and future entitlements?

      Mitchie, take you middle school view and go to the dalyKos, that way you won’t feel so foolish when you continue to dodge and evade challenges…..

      …. what is the NORMAL temperature of this planet? Since you feel you have all the answers from the “settled science” that should be an easy one.

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:03 pm

      WEST is the BEST for VP

  9. freethinker July 13, 2012 / 11:13 am

    I read this morning that a DC police officer threatened to shoot the First Lady, Michelle Obama. This officer had access to the White House as a motorcycle escort for WH officials. Considering the outrage when a reported said that Ann Romney had never worked a day in her life I would like to believe that the majority of posters here would be even more outraged by such a threat. You may not like the President and First Lady but surely no one wants either of them hurt. This officer was put on “desk duty”. That is even more outrageous that he was not immediately taken into custody for making such a threat. This goes way beyond freedom of speech.

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:05 pm

      Velma, what exactly is the point of this post?

      Are you upset because people you think might represent that scary “Right” have not responded in the precise manner you demand, on your exacting timetable, to this?

      As a conservative, I find a threat to kill ANYONE reprehensible and inexcusable, whether it is a single nutter threatening to kill a public figure or an organized racist group posting a reward for the death of a white man who killed a black man.

      However, let’s keep in mind that everything goes through the Velma filter, where it often emerges unrecognizable from what went in.

      I have not seen the story. Did this officer actually THREATEN to kill Mrs Obama or did he make a passing comment which included a very stupid and unfortunate reference to shooting her as part of another comment altogether?

      Note that I do not excuse the latter, as it is crude and stupid and inexcusable. But I have a hard time believing that a Washington DC police department would merely demote an officer who had made an overt threat, and think that probably what happened was closer to my second guess.

      People do stupid things, like “joking” with airport security that they had better look closely if they are going to find the bomb in your suitcase. This is NOT the same thing as THREATENING to bomb the airplane.

      So let’s take a deep breath and start over, shall we, Vel?

      If anyone at all actually made a THREAT to shoot the First Lady he should be arrested, and prosecuted, and I personally will lead objections to this kind of rhetoric—just as I objected so strenuously to things like internet instructions on how to assassinate George W Bush and a movie made about assassinating him, as well as the remarks from Hollywood and others on the Left about killing him.

      It is all bad, it is all wrong, it is all disgusting, and when it rises to the level of an actual threat it should be prosecuted.

      I don’t think OUTRAGE !!!!!!!!! is necessarily the best response, as this is for the most part the bastion of the hyper-emotional Left, which flies into hissy fits of OUTRAGE !!!!!! at every little thing. My personal preference is calm, measured but strong condemnation, and I find most on the Right to share this approach—which is why the vicious attacks on Ann Romney were met with analytical disgust but not with shrieking OUTRAGE !!!!!

      And do try to get over the silly “They don’t LIKE him” nonsense. Just because you vote based on who you LIKE or DON’T LIKE doesn’t mean that everyone is equally emotion-driven. Liking Barry and/or Michelle has nothing to do with analytical opposition to what they represent regarding how best to govern the nation.

    • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 12:06 pm

      Get off your high horse and tone down your faux outrage velma, I guess you missed this little detail:

      “”We don’t know whether there’s any truth to this or not, but it’s obviously serious enough to warrant a very intense … investigation,” Gray said while appearing as a guest on NewsChannel 8’s weekday political show.

      The Washington Post cited ANONYMOUS police (sort of like anonymous White House official state) officials in reporting the officer told colleagues he would shoot the first lady, and then showed a photo on his phone of a gun he would use.”


      Wow, a whole article about uncertain “facts” from anonymous sources about a first lady and her husband who is doing MISERABLY as pResident and in the polls…..

      ….I guess you gave them assurance in your sympathy vote. How many other drones fell for such flimsy “facts” and pathetic reporting?

    • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 12:09 pm

      BTW, velma where was your OUTRAGE against threats to the Bushs???

      Hmmmmmmmm….. strangely all that you offered were the sounds of crickets.

      Get a life. Why don’t you comment on the sorry state of the nation and the economy caused by this pResident and his party?

      Oh, that would force you to examine your conscience and face reality that he and his party have been a miserable failure!

      Or, are you like dennis who doesn’t what to legitimately criticize the pResident on this blog and acknowledge that we have been correct all along?

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:40 pm


      This goes way beyond freedom of speech.


      We have a Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go to catch to you commies.


  10. freethinker July 13, 2012 / 12:19 pm

    Exactly as I suspected. Posters here never fail to disappoint and be consistent in your snarky responses that never really say anything. Never mind. It was Michelle Obama – not Ann Romney or Laura Bush. So, no reason to find it alarming that a police officer would threaten to shoot her. No need to be concerned.

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 12:42 pm

      Really? THIS is what you got from my post? Thanks for illustrating how that Velma filter works, Vel.

      Let’s see—I used the terms “reprehensible and inexcusable, “, as well as saying “If anyone at all actually made a THREAT to shoot the First Lady he should be arrested, and prosecuted” and went on to say “…… and I personally will lead objections to this kind of rhetoric.”

      Oh, that’s right—I also said this: “It is all bad, it is all wrong, it is all disgusting, and when it rises to the level of an actual threat it should be prosecuted.”

      So: reprehensible, inexcusable, disgusting, calling for arrest and prosecution, and Vel is whining because the response was not—-what??? Shrill enough? Hysterical enough?

      And don’t forget, this is all about a CLAIM, so far unsupported, that a police officer was so stupid that he TOLD OTHER POLICEMEN he was going to shoot Michelle, and kept a photo of the intended weapon on his cell phone. Yeah, because cops don’t realize that what is on their phones can be so easily retrieved, or that threats to the First Family are taken very seriously.

      An ANONYMOUS claim, no less.

      An anonymous claim, with no supporting evidence, met with thorough condemnation for a threat IF one existed, and Vel’s panties are still in a twist because that mean old eeeevil nasty Right didn’t flip out into shrill hysteria, into vigilante mode (as we have seen regarding George Zimmerman) and declare a man guilty with no proof whatsoever.

      Thanks for filling our your portrait of Liberal Dupe, Velma. While it is hard to believe that anyone can be so dense and so easily led and so gullible, Velma proves that people like this exist. She is the ideal dupe.

      Between Vel melting down because no one met her level of strident hysteria over an alleged incident, and casper’s buying into a series of bogus “questions” presented by the Obama campaign to introduce into tiny minds the concept that there is something, somehow, in some way, wrong with Romney and Bain Capital, we get a very clear idea of what constitutes the Liberal base.

    • proudlib July 13, 2012 / 1:02 pm

      I think we should find out who this cop is and go get him. To hell with due process, same for Zimmerman the racist killer, this whole innocent till proved guilty thing takes to much time. why Bother. somebody said he said it thats good enough for me. Hang the bastid

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:46 pm

        we can show pictures of the cop when he was 10 yo and maybe he had a bag of “skillits” (al) and watermelon drink…. = LEAN!! koff koff

        then put a hit out on the Wookie and have the Klan scream for her arrest?

        Oh wait I have that mixed up……

    • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 3:17 pm

      Exactly as you expected velma?

      Really, you want to go on a chase of a person that may not exist?

      As I showed, there have been ALLEGED (you do know what that means being a “lawyer” and all?) statements FROM ANONYMOUS WHITE HOUSE sources and the investigation is not complete. For a lawyer, you are ready to lock-up and throw away the key before due process.

      And you also want a reaction to something that may not have happened?

      IF there has indeed been threats, I will give you your gotcha and make the appropriate statements, until then I will wait for confirmation. Until then, this could all be a stunt on the part of an out of control re-election campaign.

      As I said, you showed no outrage at the threats against the Bushes. You are consistently absent when there are real issues to discuss and debate and only pop up when a gotcha moment arises…..and are so easily manipulated, it is pathetic.

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:52 pm

      No need to be concerned.

      I agree,
      she is never in DC anyway, and he cant shoot all the way across the Atlantic, or to aspin. or to Korea or to Spain, or to hawaii, or to Kenya

  11. Cluster July 13, 2012 / 1:08 pm


    I am waiting a response from the liberal group that released the Bush snuff film before commenting on this egregious comment “overheard” by others.

    • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:49 pm

      DC CHIEF: ‘Conflicting reports’…

      a Ubama bot, vs a WHITE hispanic……Ooh my

    • bozo July 13, 2012 / 6:22 pm

      The Bush snuff film was released by the same wingers who released The Passion of the Christ, and condemned by the left. But don’t let facts get in the way of a good lie.

      • Count d'Haricots July 13, 2012 / 6:56 pm


        Gabe Range has a history of bashing Christians, Republicans, Americans and the Bush Administration; film was produced and released by a Brit company (Borough) having nothing to with Passion.
        One of the Distributors also distributed Passion but had not one damn thing to do with the production or release of either film.

  12. Count d'Haricots July 13, 2012 / 1:40 pm

    I, Liberal

    I’m sure that there could never be
    A man as virtuous as me.
    I’ve honed my precious self-esteem
    In ways no common man could dream!
    To feed my moral vanity,
    I preen for all the world to see;
    I thrust in everybody’s face
    The noble causes I embrace.

    And lest there be the slightest doubt
    That I’m no bitter, clinging lout,
    The bumper stickers on my Volt
    Affirm that I’m no right-wing dolt.
    As these credentials will attest,
    I am the brightest and the best —
    And true to my enlightened soul,
    Utopia shall be my goal!

    The planet should be mine to run;
    I know what’s best for everyone.
    My Nanny Squad will nag and scold,
    Until the plebes do as they’re told.
    My Social Justice Ministry
    Will outlaw inequality —
    With good intent unwavering,
    I’ll redistribute everything!

    I’ll be obscenely generous
    With subsidy and stimulus;
    To fund my drunken spending sprees,
    The fat cats’ profits I will seize!
    For those who fail, my heart will bleed,
    But woe to those who dare succeed.
    I vow to vanquish human greed —
    To each according to his need!

    There’ll be no want, there’ll be no war,
    My Welfare Corps will feed the poor.
    There’ll be no limit to my grace,
    When I control the human race!
    I’ll heal the Earth, I’ll low’r the Seas,
    My Healthcare Force will smite disease —
    And all will rightly worship me,
    The Savior of Humanity!

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/libs_say_the_darndest_things_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz20Wd6REng

  13. Cluster July 13, 2012 / 2:18 pm

    Let’s all keep in mind that liberals obsession with Romney is a clear admission that Obama is a complete failure. Otherwise they would be touting Obama’s record of success, so let them continue harping on Romney and dig their own grave.

  14. Amazona July 13, 2012 / 2:47 pm

    Maybe one of the Bainers can explain why it matters that Romney maintained a legal presence in Bain after he left the day-to-day management of the company.

    Then one of the Bainers might be able to explain why it would matter that one or more companies associated with Bain went bankrupt. What is the issue with this?

    Were they already plunging into bankruptcy with Bain being warned off, being told they were bad risks, but run by Bain cronies and therefore receiving billions of dollars of Bain money (which disappeared without accountability) before they finally went under? Because, gee, THAT would sure show some bad judgment and maybe even some fraud. And even then, the money handed over to cronies even in the face of certain failure would not have been TAXPAYER money.

    Are the RRL claiming that every single struggling company can be rescued, and that failure to do so is proof positive of some evil, malignant, or even incompetent characteristic? Because, gee, that would have to apply to Solyndra, etc., too, wouldn’t it? If putting money into a company that then fails is some sort of indictment of character or intelligence or honesty, let’s apply that standard across the board, shall we?

    But what this all comes down to is an effort at a GOTCHA!! by the RRL, dutifully regurgitated by its mindless minions, based on distortions of various statements to the SEC, because their efforts to brand a few (very few) failures to resurrect failing companies as incompetence in the business world have failed so miserably.

    They can’t convince intelligent people that an investment company has to have a record of 100% success in every single thing it does, so now they have to fall back on what they do best—The Politics of Personal Destruction.

    They realize that if Romney had tried to save 100 companies and only succeeded in rescuing and reviving ONE of them, only had one success where the company survived and flourished and ended up a national success story with tens of thousands of employees, it would still be 100% more success in business than Obama has been able to show. Obama’s only claim to salvation of a business is one where the stockholders were stripped of their investment (that is, people who had invested in GM, including pension funds and middle class people trying to plan for their retirements) and crony unions were handed the goods as payback for political support. And this is a business that then declared bankruptcy anyway, after all the shenanigans were over, and came back from bankruptcy just as it would have without the federal meddling, just with union ownership of more of its stock.

    And they know that losers like mitche, who have absolutely NO knowledge of big business, won’t be able to understand how or why certain administrative decisions are made at levels the mitches can’t even imagine.

    There are many reasons Romney would have had to, or even just wanted to, maintain some degree of OFFICIAL status at Bain, and even sit in on some of Bain’s meetings, while not being active in its actual management. And I see no reason why any of us should feel entitled to know those decisions.

    Was it illegal for Romney to maintain an official Bain identity while leaving the actual management of the company to others?

    Was it illegal for Romney to keep an eye on the transition team by attending meetings and so on, to make sure his company was being handed off to the right people who had the right mentoring to do the job well?

    Were his statements to the SEC, IN THEIR ENTIRETY , meant to be misleading or dishonest? I have testified and know that when a question is asked, you answer the question and only the question, so when different people ask different questions coming from different directions looking for different information for different reasons, someone can cherry-pick transcripts and find what might look like contradictions. The only way to know what was said would be to examine the entire transcripts, word for word, the questions and the answers, to see if there is a pattern of purposeful deception.

    Why do we have any right to examine the internal workings of a private company, if it has not broken any laws? Why should a prior involvement with a current political target make the company a target as well? The answers are easy: This is all the RRL has, as it can’t run on its ideology and it can’t run on its record and can only frantically try to scramble to convince people that as bad as Obama is, Romney is worse.

    • mitchethekid July 13, 2012 / 3:45 pm

      You are a master at projection Ama. And a mean, crotchity old woman at that. And just whom are you trying to convince of your intellectual superiority? The low information denizens of this back-water blog? I’m a loser?? Really? All you know about me is from what I write. The rest is speculation and ignorant stereotyping. You don’t know where I live or in what kind of home, what kind of fiends I have or what they do, the kind of relationships I have or the net worth of my business. Speaking of which, I know plenty about how to operate one successfully and I have a track record to prove it.
      You asked “Why do we have the right to examine the internal workings of a private company if it has not broken any laws?” The simplistic answer is if there is cause to believe that they have broken laws, then it is the obligation of the justice system TO examine their internal workings. Especially in this case, since Romney is running fro President. Period. And thus far he is doing a lousy job of defending himself. The easiest thing for him to do to prove that (1) he hasn’t mislead the public and (2) he didn’t lie to the SEC would be to release more than one yrs worth of tax records. You know, like his father did and every other presidential candidate in modern times.
      But since you have a character flaw wherein you reflexively defend the indefensible; as long as it pertains to right wing extremism, you are a slave to your own bias and intractability.
      Have you ever been capable of reflecting on how you preen and posture and prance around on this blog? Believe me madam, you are no authority. You are nothing more than an opinionated curmudgeon with a nasty attitude who despises the world.

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:33 pm


        IF only you morons were sooo worried about Ubama, holder, waters, rangle, reid, geitner, fwank, JFnK, slic, hitlery etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc breaking the law

        but hey, we read alinsky 101 for DUmmies also.

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 4:36 pm

        chicago…..Ubama, one of it’s leading community “organizers” he should be indited for mass murder and mayhem for his time at the helm by the donk “standards”

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 5:00 pm

        ‘The Communist’ Part I: Obama’s Mentor Frank Marshall Davis Exposed

        (at first I thought it was THOSE nekked pics of stanley)

        Imagine an American man so devout in his Communist beliefs, that during the Cold War the FBI placed him on their security index – meaning that if an armed conflict were to have erupted between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, Federal authorities would have looked to him as a prime suspect for treason.

        Now imagine that man mentored the leader destroyer of the free world.

      • neocon1 July 13, 2012 / 5:01 pm

      • tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 6:13 pm

        “… there is cause to believe that they have broken laws, then it is the obligation of the justice system to examine their internal workings”

        Ah, mitchie, too bad you and your party don’t want to apply that to the Fast & Furious scandal, while the pResident and Holder are refusing to release requested documents and hide behind Executive Privilege. The Justice Department will not hold Holder in contempt as well.

        So a fishing expedition is more important than the life of an agent gunned down with weapons supplied by Holder/obAMATEUR to create a “gun control crisis”.

        Pretty sad there mitchie.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 7:48 pm

        My oh my what a surly bigoted ageist little snit, there, mitche.

        Your whole squeal can be summarized as “waaaaa waaaaa waaaaaa”.

        Come back some time with something that is really about politics and not just personal attacks and exhibits of mindless bigotry.

        BTW, I do not claim intellectual superiority. That is just what comes to your mind when you read my posts. But it’s just relative.

      • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 7:50 pm

        Uh. mitche, you might take a quick refresher course in American law. Romney doesn’t have to prove a damned thing. The burden of proof lies with his accusers.

        This concept, as well as “innocent until proven guilty”, seems to really irritate you guys.

  15. mitchethekid July 13, 2012 / 5:14 pm

    The Blaze. Gag me. They ought to be set ablaze for all of their hysterical misinformation and fear mongering. They are no authority. They are another right wing extremist blog that panders to low information readers and foments paranoia and hate. Next thing you know, you’ll be using Glenn Beck as an “authority”. Or your pin up doll, Sarah I whore myself out for money Palin. Another laughing stock of American politics with her screechy voice and multiple wigs. Locke, Hobbes and Buckley would be ashamed that their rich intellectual insights have been hijacked by cretins.

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 5:52 pm

      mitche, just for grins, try actually saying something that is not just spite and malice. Yes, Sarah Palin makes a LOT more money than you, she always will, and that is because people want to hear what she has to say.

      You, not at all.

      Just for a change, tell us what you find on The Blaze that is not true. Not accurate.

      Pick out something they say, and rebut it with facts.

      Or, just pull another mitche and squeal insults and hatred.

      • Amazona July 14, 2012 / 12:19 am

        I thought I kept changing from another name, Dave.

      • tiredoflibbs July 14, 2012 / 6:32 am

        davey: “This post was better when it was under your latest sock puppet name.”

        Wow, are you the one to talk there dave aka – jeffy, bodie, monty, wally, etc. etc..

        New name, same old writing and attack style, no contributions.

      • Retired Spook July 15, 2012 / 8:08 am

        But you dodged the question: Why’d you change the name?

        Dave, I’d wager that you’ve changed your name on this blog several times. Why have YOU done it? Why is it that most of your comments here are simply projection on your part. Are you feeling a little insecure, Dave?

      • Amazona July 15, 2012 / 9:16 am

        Dave, you “established” nothing.

        You, a proven liar, made a claim. Sure, in your mind when you say something it is “established”. You seem to be saying, now, “Ignore all the many many lies I tell, on a regular basis, and believe this one thing I claim.”

        It’s like you PL drones denying something and then, based on your denial, claiming it has been “rebutted” when in fact it has only been disputed.

        I never know if this is a tactic of yours (plural ‘you’) which would imply a little more intelligence than I would normally attribute to you, or just the skewed way you see the world and your impact on it.

      • Amazona July 16, 2012 / 12:51 am

        Davey, I see you are still frantically and pathetically trying to get attention, but the simple truth is, you and everything you say are irrelevant. I know how desperately you need validation, which you seem to get only by goading people into arguing with you, but it has been amply revealed as nothing more than a sad pathology.

        Come back when you can actually talk about politics, and not just spew your vitriol.

      • theshadowiswatching July 16, 2012 / 9:39 am

        When I post I post as theshadowiswatching. If you see a post under the name TheShadowIsWatching it is from an imposter.

  16. Cluster July 13, 2012 / 6:06 pm

    You don’t know where I live or in what kind of home, what kind of fiends I have or what they do, the kind of relationships I have or the net worth of my business. Speaking of which, I know plenty about how to operate one successfully and I have a track record to prove it. – Mitch

    Well I always knew you were an idiot but I now can confirm that you are a loser.

    Mitch, do you not see the irony in your call for full disclosure on behalf of Romney? Can you not connect the dots on that one?

    • Amazona July 13, 2012 / 7:45 pm

      Does anyone really care what kind of “fiends” (sic) mitche might have?

      Sounds fishy to me……

  17. tiredoflibbs July 13, 2012 / 6:23 pm

    “… the net worth of my business. Speaking of which, I know plenty about how to operate one successfully and I have a track record to prove it.”

    Oh, mitchie, mitchie, tell me you did not just say that?

    First of all, you don’t want questions asked about you or assumptions to be made about yourself. Second, you will swallow the kool-aid coming out of the White House on their assumptions and questions that they pretend to be “valid”.

    But most importantly, Romney, as you have unwillingly admitted has a track record for creating jobs (“It’s not whether he created jobs ” – mitchie). You have a track record for a successful business and I hope creating jobs to obtain that success and keep it.

    HOWEVER, obAMATEUR does not have a track record for creating jobs or running a successful business. His brief stint in the private sector is described BY HIM as “operating behind enemy lines”. His track record is massive spending and accumulating over $4 TRILLION in debt with nothing to show for it.

    Again, pretty sad there mitchie.

  18. bagni July 13, 2012 / 7:24 pm

    oh clust
    full disclosure?
    now that’s funny
    ‘cept for noonan, no one fesses up on who they are on this site
    it’s what gives ama and neo their perceptual cojones

    • GMB July 13, 2012 / 8:02 pm

      I don’t see you in a hurry to post your bio there bags. Why not?

    • Retired Spook July 13, 2012 / 9:08 pm

      That’s not true, Bags. I’ve given just about every bit of personal information except for my real name. If you’ve been here for any length of time, as you have, you know how old I am, what high school and college I attended and when I graduated, how long I served in the navy and what my designator was, what I do for a living, and where I live. If anything it’s the Liberals who visit this site who tend to hide who they are.

      • GMB July 13, 2012 / 9:21 pm

        I do believe I have posted my name, my location, my age, what my current and former occupations have been, my military experience.

        How about you bags? Anything at all except for the occasional bomb throwing that is?

      • Amazona July 14, 2012 / 10:02 am

        The bagster has filled us in on his CV, over the years—-being an alien from another planet, merely observing the quirks of humanity from a distance.

        He is one of many fantasists who have polluted the blog over the years, who seem to think they will gain validity if they are from other planets, Hell, Norway, Canada, or England.

        It’s obviously easier than having coherent commentary on real issues. Between the fantasy role players and the insult machines, the Left has been represented here as pretty much impotent, angry and loony. Oh, and often as bone-deep dishonest.

    • neocon1 July 14, 2012 / 10:26 am

      Cleawwater Fl
      and I Zimmerman….capice?

  19. neocon1 July 14, 2012 / 10:25 am


    Romney Demands Obama Apology… Says president ‘reckless and absurd’… ‘Deceptive and dishonest’… ‘Beneath Dignity Of His Office’… ‘It’s disgusting. It’s demeaning’.

    even mittens agrees the muslim, marxist, fraud, usurper is a POS

    Psalm 109:8

    • neocon1 July 14, 2012 / 10:32 am


      ‘Pure Terror’: College Instructor Allegedly Required Students to Masturbate, Reveal Sex Fantasies in Order to Pass

      “His behavior borders on IS perversion.”

    • 6206j July 14, 2012 / 12:28 pm

      Mitt Romney… “Obama shouldn’t apologize for America but he should apologize to Meeeeeeeeeeeeee…..” LOL

      • Cluster July 14, 2012 / 12:54 pm

        What’s even funnier is this:

        “My understanding is that Mr. Romney attested to the SEC, multiple times, that he was the chairman, CEO and president of Bain Capital, and I think most Americans figure if you are the chairman, CEO and president of a company that you are responsible for what that company does,” Obama told WJLA. “Ultimately, Mr. Romney, I think, is going to have to answer those questions because, if he aspires to being president, one of the things you learn is you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of your operations. But again, that’s probably a question that he’s going to have to answer, and I think that’s a legitimate part of the campaign.”

        Obama is too stupid to see the irony in his own statement.

        “One of the things you learn is that you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of your operations”???

        When do you think Obama will start accepting responsibility? LOL

      • GMB July 14, 2012 / 1:42 pm

        Does this mean Mitt should be blaming atm’s, europe, or Bush for all the percieved problems that the proggies have labeled Bain with?

        I blame Boooosshhh!!!

        Lame as hell there proggies.

      • mitchethekid July 14, 2012 / 3:15 pm

        One more profanity or vulgarity and you will join the permanently banned. You walk close to the line with posts filled with nothing but insults and it won’t take much to push you over. You always get these kind of things deleted and you insist on trying again to get away with it. What happens is we just get tired of it and cut you off. //Moderator

      • tiredoflibbs July 14, 2012 / 4:09 pm

        mitchie are we having a tantrum today???

        You are all over the place, addressing items with dumbed down talking points and ignoring others that you were gung-ho yesterday.

        Typical mitchie.

        From your “source”:
        “Signed the Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act, which provides health care to 11 million kids — 4 million of whom were previously uninsured”

        Uh, then why the need for obAMASCARE? I thought one of the reasons for it was to insure the children. You mean we already had a program in place? Let’s not forget, SCHIP which also insured children as well. It seems the need for insuring children was not all that dire if we already had at LEAST TWO PROGRAMS IN PLACE – more lies and doom and gloom from the left.

        “Signed an authorization to close GITMO” – It’s still open….

        “Expansion of Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level”

        Medicare and Medicaid took a $500 BILLION cut thanks to obAMASCARE – making that program more insolvent.

        “Added 4.6 billion USD to the Veterans Administration budget to recruit and retain more mental health professionals”

        While cutting the benefits and tri-care for veterans effectively increasing their premiums and out of pocket expenses. His defense cuts have consequences.

        And the biggest lie of the list: “Created more private sector jobs in 2010 than during entire Bush years” – more BS from the BLS!

        The rest of the list DOES NOTHING FOR THE ECONOMY!!!! Nobody cares if he “Appointed the first Latina to the Supreme Court” or “endorsed same sex marriage” and other “feel good” legislation. THEY DO NOTHING TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMY OR CREATE JOBS!!!!

        You are exceptionally dense today mitchie. Why don’t you address the other DOZENS of challenges to your posted crap for the past few days, rather than running away onto something else will little emotional control???

      • Amazona July 14, 2012 / 6:24 pm

        “mitchie are we having a tantrum today???”

        Let’s see—is it a day that ends in “Y”?

        In that case, yeah.

      • GMB July 15, 2012 / 8:41 am

        OMG!!! Newest Mitt scandal!! Hot off the presses!! Mitt had an over due library book in the third grade!! Paid a 10 cent fine!!!

        What a vicious criminal!! Get bomber mitch on the case!!

      • neocon1 July 15, 2012 / 12:02 pm

        bmitch is on top of it as we speak….

      • mitchethekid July 15, 2012 / 12:02 pm


      • tiredoflibbs July 14, 2012 / 1:41 pm

        So drone #6206j, you are admitting obAMATEUR has some apologizing to do to the American people!

        A breakthrough!

      • Amazona July 15, 2012 / 1:25 pm

        ““Obama shouldn’t apologize for America but he should apologize to Meeeeeeeeeeeeee…..””

        So what’s your point?

        That Obama SHOULD apologize for America?

        That he should not apologize to people he has viciously and dishonestly attacked?

      • 6206j July 15, 2012 / 11:29 pm

        Boo Hoo 😦

      • neocon1 July 16, 2012 / 11:01 am

        the smartest thing you ever poster 6206j

  20. dbschmidt July 14, 2012 / 10:03 pm

    Well, I was just thinking that since the Liberals / Progressives that pollute this blog are now on the “full disclosure” bandwagon about Bain (which has been fully explained several times over) then I think it is full time to make a new standard that once the nominees of any party–Dem, Repub, Green, Lib, etc.–for President /Vice-President have been selected then every document from their lives since (inclusive) enrollment into elementary school should be released to the general public for full review.

    If full disclosure is not done then the name is removed from the national ballot. A minor error or forgetfulness may be excused but any blatant attempt, like Clinton or Obama who spent $12 B this year alone, will cause permanent removal from all ballots.


    • mitchethekid July 15, 2012 / 3:30 pm

      Explained by whom? If the shoe was on the other foot, you’d be taking full page ads out in every newspaper left in America. You’d be splashing it all over billboards, so spare me your feigned insight into what’s factual and what’s wishful thinking on your part. You’re great at dismissing out of hand anything that conflicts with your bias. But believe me, you’re no authority. You’re a poster on an insignificant blog who has an opinion.

      • dbschmidt July 15, 2012 / 11:10 pm

        Nice attempt at a dodge their kid. “Explained by whom?” The SEC, the WSJ, Business Daily, Investors Daily, among others but anyone that has any business experience could have made that call. The claim was one like “when did you stop beating your wife?” BS claim to begin with so I can see where your level of understanding (or lack thereof) is set at.

        “If the shoe was on the other foot, you’d be taking full page ads out in every newspaper left in America.” is strictly your projection because I like neither but Romney slightly more than I like Obama but if you actually comprehend anything you would already know that I a fiscally conservative Libertarian who has no real dog in this hunt short of getting rid of the anti-colonialist in the WH.

        “…dismissing out of hand anything that conflicts with your bias”–sorry kid, I only stated fact and that should not be outside of anyone’s bias except for the Progressives that have no tolerance for facts when they conflict with anything other than their high & mighty opinions. Suck it up–you are factually incorrect and can not stand the heat that is building.

        “You’re a poster on an insignificant blog who has an opinion.” and you are ??? What? The most insightful arbiter of all knowledge worldwide?

        BTW, never answered my original question. Fair? Full Disclosure should answer both your and my opinions / questions.

      • dbschmidt July 15, 2012 / 11:23 pm

        In full disclosure, when I stated “because I like neither but Romney slightly more than I like Obama” I am strictly talking about their policies and nothing personal as I have never met either person.

        Did not want Mitchie getting his panties in a twist again over nothing.

      • dbschmidt July 15, 2012 / 11:51 pm

        Here you go Mitchie~from a source you may deem reliable including Bain Managing Director Steve Pagliuca who was speaking on record to CNN.

        Is there anything other than the SEC filings to suggest a hands-on Romney role at Bain post-February 1999?

        No is the word from four sources who communicated with CNN on Thursday — all of whom have firsthand knowledge of Bain’s operations at the time in question. Three of the four are Democrats, and two of the four are active Obama supporters in Campaign 2012.

        All four told me Romney is telling the truth.

        Only one, Bain Managing Director Steve Pagliuca, would talk on the record. The others spoke only on condition of anonymity, citing either Bain’s low-key culture or the desire not to anger friends in the Obama campaign.

        Pagliuca, a Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2010, told CNN: “Mitt Romney left Bain Capital in February 1999 to run the Olympics and has had absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies since the day of his departure.”

        Read more after you get your panties out of a twist at:

        hijacked from http://www.bob-owens.com/2012/07/democrats-thru-cnn-say-obama-is-really-lying-his-ass-off-about-bain-and-romney-isnt-he/

        Now go back to the kiddies sandbox and play nice before you actually get hurt

  21. GMB July 15, 2012 / 5:46 am

    You wingnuts are making me sick again! Don’t you know, and the head shrinks will back me up on this, that phony ptsd is more debilitating than the real thing. It is a wonder that bomber mitch can have a coherent thought at all.

    Got to be a bummer waking up every morning screaming about something that never happened.

    Have a heart please for the bomber’s sake.

  22. mitchethekid July 15, 2012 / 3:25 pm

    This is really interesting. I’m accused of insults, but the regulars can get away with insulting me. That’s rich. And biased on your part moderator. The fact about Rice is she’s pro-choice and won’t get selected. Romney either was the CEO of Bain during the yrs in question or he wasn’t. Either way his credibility is being scrutinized and there are records and documents to back up the accusations. I thought the “etch a sketch” phrase was a little lame, but it sure seems to fit. Romney lacks the skills to change what has worked for him in the past. In this case, by obfuscating he’s making it worse for himself.
    This link is off topic, but I thought I’d share to give this little clique a sense of perspective. Not that it will have any impact on your word view, but it’s interesting none the less.

    • Amazona July 15, 2012 / 8:35 pm

      mitche, based on moderator comments it appears that your edits have been based on posting filth and/or only insults without any other content.

      And I’ve seen posts from others deleted for the same reason, though less for filth than yours, you potty-mouth, you.

      I can see that you find “scrutiny” be be pretty terrifying for a political candidate, and given who you support I can see why. Just remember that it is two-edged sword, and can cut both ways. Making it a centerpiece of attacks on Romney is only going to mean focusing the same standard on Barry, the Great Evader.

      Sure, there are some people like you, so stupid and primitive in your understanding of business that you can find it logical to attack a man for not spontaneously walking away from a complicated and highly successful business which HE built, to take on a temporary job of massive size scope and complexity, one which would require all his skill and expertise, as a public service. I am sure the vicious smear machine of the RRL will convince some people that wanting to take time to ponder whether or not he wanted to leave the company permanently was somehow a malignant decision based on dishonest intentions. I am sure that some of you will be completely bumfuddled by the need to retain a legal status and presence during the period of decision and then transition, never having had to deal with anything more complicated than “Do you want fries with that?” or “Where’s my union rep?”

      But not many are as stupid or as vicious as you.

      And people like you will also have to convince a lot of others that the simple fact of being unable to save every single company is proof of some horrible incompetence. Good luck with that. As I said, intelligent people understand that you don’t attack the head of a huge emergency room department because the doctors on duty were unable to save every single badly wounded or seriously ill patient they had to treat. Our national pastime is baseball, where no one ever has a perfect season, and where the winner has lost many games,but where success is measured by winning more than you lose. Honest, decent people will have no trouble understanding that Bain could have walked away from failing, floundering companies and let them die, but willingly took on the risks associated with investing in them and reorganizing them and trying to save them, and that there is no way anyone could expect this to happen without an occasional failure. Good people can look at a situation where three companies were in their death throes, and be glad that someone was smart enough and brave enough to risk his own capital to combine them into one successful company, saving at least some of the jobs in danger.

      Clearly you, mitche, and a few like you, do not fit any of these categories, so you will squeal about alleged misdeeds and lie, lie, lie. And why? Because you have a coherent political philosophy in opposition to the Constitutional Conservatism of Mitt Romney? Of course not! No, because he represents the Other, about which you are completely ignorant of everything except that you hate them and will stoop to anything to attack them.

      And more and more, you represent the Obama Base.

      • mitchethekid July 16, 2012 / 11:55 am

        What you said would be great except THAT”S NOT WHAT ROMNEY HIMSELF HAS SAID!

Comments are closed.