The Last 30 Days

I was reading today to gauge reactions to Romney’s smashing debate victory last night and I came across three interesting data points:

1.  The GOP is doing exceptionally well in early voting in Ohio.  This is quite stunning – keep in mind that McCain won Ohio among voters who voted on election day, but got so badly clobbered among early voters that he couldn’t make up the difference.  That the GOP is surging in early voting indicates two things – Democrats are lackluster in their support for Obama and Republicans are very enthusiastic…and that enthusiasm will only rise to a fever pitch after last night.

2.  In a certain suburban Chicago House district that Obama won by 23 points in 2008, recent polling shows Obama only leading by 2 over Romney and Obama is under 50%.

3.  Gasoline in Los Angeles is $4.34 a gallon and de-facto rationing is in effect as refinery outages drastically reduce gasoline supplies on the west coast.

The combination of waning Democrat support, surging GOP enthusiasm and the growing evidence of economic collapse opens up a new prospect for Mitt Romney – not just to win the White House, but to run a truly national campaign where he really presents to the entirety of the American people the stark choice facing our nation.  In my view Mitt Romney – while still pouring it on in the “battleground States” – should start to make time and resources available for the “blue” parts of the country.  A campaign swing through California is in order – and perhaps a bit of time in Illinois and Oregon, as well.

This would not be done with a mind towards actually winning those States – they are likely out of reach unless Romney winds up winning by some miraculous, 1932-like landslide.  But you do it because you want to tell all of the American people that you understand the trouble we’re in.  A trip through California would allow Romney to point out – in the example of California – just where Obama is leading us and what four more years will mean.  Do you want more cities filing for bankruptcy?  Do you want more tax hikes?  Do you want gasoline shortages to come to your part of the country?  Then re-elect Barack Obama – in California Democrats are entirely in control (as they are in rapidly disintegrating Illinois) and this is where they want us to go.  Not that they are wicked, but that they are simply fools to keep following the failed polices of Big Government liberalism and disaster is always at the end of that road.

It would also force Obama to follow Romney – Obama would either have to follow Romney to California (thus taking time and resources from the battlegrounds) or duplicate Romney by going to Texas and South Carolina (thus also taking time and resources away from battlegrounds).  It would take the battle straight to the liberals and force them away from trying to attack Romney in the battlegrounds and back on to a defense of liberalism in the blue States, something no Democrat wants anyone to notice until after November 6th.

This is an election about contrasts – the false promises of liberalism and their disastrous reality contrasted with a message of American renewal.  In that kind of a debate, we win – any time liberals have to defend liberalism, they lose.  They can only possibly win if they make the fight about what a mean, nasty person Romney is in liberal talking points.  Going to California forces Obama and the Democrats to defend liberalism.

And, who knows?, things are so absolutely catastrophic in California that maybe a political miracle will happen?

Advertisements

60 thoughts on “The Last 30 Days

  1. GMB October 5, 2012 / 7:14 am

    Mitt should invest some time and money in Illinois at least. Right now I would say the odds are at least 50/50 my home state will go red this time around. Just my anecdotal evidence here but the enthusiasm is just not here for barky now.

    I have opportunity to go by the Champaign County donkrat hq almost daily and it is always empty. The Peoria County hq about once a week and it is the same story. The signs in the yards are not there like they were in 08. The endless barky rallys are a thing of the past.

    Drive him, make him defend his home turf like owl bore had to do in, but did not, in 00. Make it a blow out, demoralize the donks. It will make things all more easier when Mitt sits down in the Oval Office on Jan 20, 2013.

  2. GMB October 5, 2012 / 7:19 am

    No comment from your humble dictator needed.

    • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 7:50 am

      And, who knows?, things are so absolutely catastrophic in California that maybe a political miracle will happen?

      Pray for it…

      Psalm 109:8

  3. Cluster October 5, 2012 / 8:22 am

    If Romney does go to California, he should go to San Bernardino where the city has filed bankruptcy largely due to the fact that nearly 71% of the city’s budget goes toward public pensions. Thanks unions.

    They can only possibly win if they make the fight about what a mean, nasty person Romney is in liberal talking points

    And they were doing their best last night on MSNBC. Ed Schultz and his merry band of followers, ie; Crystal Ball, etc., we’re trying to paint Romney as someone who wants to give all the money to the rich, take away Medicare and social security from seniors, kill the middle class and enrich the military. Why they delude themselves into believing these false premises I have no idea. Working with the reality of their own failed positions would serve them much better.

  4. js03 October 5, 2012 / 9:24 am

    jobless rate drops to 7.8%…the month before the elections…go figure

    this administration has been caught tinkering with those numbers in the past…can we actually trust them to stick to moral behavior at this stage of the game…i think not

    the elephant in the middle of the room…what everyone knows but nobody talks about

    why isnt there a single criminal charge in light of the massive numbers of criminal acts this administration has committed…are they accountable to nobody for violating the laws and the constitution….or do they walk away…scott free…and retire on our tax dollars…forever shielded from our wrath?

    • GMB October 5, 2012 / 9:56 am

      That smell is the stink coming from the BLS cooking the books for barky. Three months worth of revisions right before the election? Ha!

      • GMB October 5, 2012 / 10:01 am

        U6 is still at 14.7% Same as last month. Looks like the kitchen at BLS has been cooking overtime. Maybe enough polution for the epa to shut them down.

    • dbschmidt October 5, 2012 / 1:20 pm

      7.8% U-3 number only due to a flood of 582,000 part-time jobs
      5.6% Barky’s promise
      14.7% U-6 number
      10.7% if labor rate participation was same as when Obama took office

      Take-home pay? Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen by just 1.8 percent. When you take inflation into account, wages are flat to down. The shrunken workforce remains shrunken. If the labor force participation rate was the same as when President Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.7%.

  5. js03 October 5, 2012 / 9:32 am
  6. Retired Spook October 5, 2012 / 9:52 am

    I said a while back that a month before the election the unemployment rate would magically get back to the 7.8% that it was when Obama took office, and VOILA!. What a coinkydink. And what’s interesting about it is economists forecast anemic job growth of 110,000 in September and predicted the unemployment rate would go up to 8.2%. Job growth in September was 114,000 (almost dead on the forecast), but the same economists MISSED the UE percentage by FOUR TENTHS of a PERCENT! There was a huge disconnect between the Labor Dept, forecase of 110,000 and the Household Survey of 873,000, and, contrary to recent history, the two previous months job growth were revised UPWARDS by a combined 86,000. Anyone else think those numbers are contrived?

    Oh, and one other thing; has anyone else tried to find out what the LAW is that rewards companies for moving jobs overseas — you know, the LAW that Obama hammered Romney with in the debate? The LAW that Romney wasn’t aware of? There isn’t any LAW! It’s a provision of the IRS code that allows companies (and individuals) to deduct moving expenses. Just sayin’

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 10:55 am

      “It’s a provision of the IRS code that allows companies (and individuals) to deduct moving expenses. Just sayin’”

      …..and if the Dems find it so offensive, why, in nearly four years, have they done nothing to change it?

      This is their dilemma—–when they carry on about something like this, even when they DON’T lie about it, it always comes back to “Why, if it is so bad, haven’t you done anything to change it”?

    • Retired Spook October 5, 2012 / 1:13 pm

      JS and Bardolf,

      It’s my understanding that the minimum real GDP growth required to move (just move, not drop by .4%) the unemployment number is around 2.5%, a number we haven’t seen in a year and double what the country experienced in the 2nd quarter. Any economists here who know the relationship between economic growth and unemployment?

    • Count d'Haricots October 5, 2012 / 4:03 pm

      It’s a linguistic obstacle course Spook.

      Businesses can take deductions for the cost of moving a business. Whether relocating to another facility or to another city/state/country the cost of the additional expense is used as a one-time deduction from taxable income.

      Mitt is right; there is no tax break for shipping jobs overseas but there is a tax break available for a (one time) relocation of a business.

      This is the only thing I’m aware of that generously comes close to the dimocrats’ claim which they used btw on Bush in 2004.

  7. bardolf October 5, 2012 / 10:18 am

    The B(L)S, the L is silent, comes in with a 7.8% figure at precisely the right time. Obama is the luckiest guy in the world bar none.

    I would be careful about questioning these things. Jack Ryan ran against Barack for the senate race and the next thing everyone knew his divorce records were unsealed showing him to be the kind of pervert who begged his wife to go to strip clubs looking for extra excitement. A couple days later and Obama is running against Alan Keyes.

    BTW Jack Welch, the guy who cooked the books at GE should shut up about cooking the books.

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 10:37 am

      dolf, thanks for reminding us of the voyeuristic Left’s penchant for sticking its nose into the bedrooms and sex lives of others and trying to make a big deal out of sexual fantasies of married couples. We just saw them fall back on this tactic again, in this case trying to tie it into their bogus “War On Women” meme, in their swooning in dismay over the private sex fantasies of Col. West.

      We don’t, and won’t, see any fretting about a homosexual bordello run out of the D.C. apartment of a high-ranking Democrat Congressman, but we have already seen a lot of attention paid to a man who asked his wife to engage in a sex act and who was refused, and to a man who wrote to HIS wife about a fantasy.

      (And, as Ann Coulter pointed out, in the Republican Party, our “sex scandals” never seem to involve actually having sex. They seem to stop at the word “no” or at toe-tapping, while the Dems, under their free pass from the Complicit Agenda Media, get down and dirty with no repercussions. It doesn’t seem fair, somehow. )

    • GMB October 5, 2012 / 12:14 pm

      So whats your point Bardolf? Jack Ryan was a pervert or barky was committed a criminal act and will stoop to any level to win? Both?

      Ryan’s mistake was not being open and honest to begin with. Honesty needs no sealed records. Right?

      • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 1:01 pm

        “Ryan’s mistake was not being open and honest to begin with. Honesty needs no sealed records. Right?”

        Wrong. Jeri Ryan made these claims in a court proceeding, during a custody hearing, where it is common for ex spouses to exaggerate or distort facts in an effort to convince the court that the other spouse would not be a good choice for parental custody.

        For this reason, and to protect the children from these kinds of accusations against the people who are, after all, their own parents and caretakers, it is common to seal the records of these proceedings.

        The issue is not what Jeri Ryan claimed, but that these supposedly sealed court records were made available to Obama operatives (legal issue) and then spread all over the media (ethics issue).

        There is no indication that Jack Ryan was dishonest. His private life is his own business. When you look at the claims, they boiled down to a married man asking his wife to engage in sexual activity that did not interest her, and her saying no. But the timing of this salacious revelation, and Ryan’s decision to spare his children the experience of having their parents’ private and sexual lives made the stuff of public ridicule, resulted in his stepping down from the campaign.

        In his successful bid for the Illinois Senate, Obama operatives had to get every one of his opponents removed from the ballot, so he could run unopposed. In the Ryan case, they had nearly the same effect, as the last-minute candidate was not a really strong candidate and did not have time to mount much of a campaign.

        Then he ran against another weak candidate, John McCain, and even then had to run a campaign that pretty much consisted of “If you don’t vote for me you are a racist” and “I’m Not Bush”.

      • bardolf October 5, 2012 / 1:14 pm

        My point is Obama is the luckiest guy in the world. He literally does zero and waits around as things magically fall into place for him and somehow they do.

        I don’t care about Jack Ryan. I don’t want to know about anyone’s sex life because moving such things to the public arena is always creepy because of the voyeurism involved. I wouldn’t care about Eliot Spitzer if he hadn’t prosecuted people for doing the exact same thing.

        Again, Obama is the luckiest politician in recent memory bar none.

      • J. R. Babcock October 5, 2012 / 1:20 pm

        He literally does zero and waits around as things magically fall into place for him and somehow they do.

        That’s sort of like saying NFL team A hires a new coach, replacing a coach who went 4-12 in his last season. The new coach goes 3-13, 2-14 and 4-12 in his first 3 seasons, getting back to the record he inherited, and he says the trend is up, he’s back to where he started and deserves a contract renewal. And that just “magically fell into place for him”. You’re just too funny.

      • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:20 pm

        dolf, I see what you are saying but I think establishing Obama’s situation as “luck” has to go pretty far back, and is kind of like trying to pin down how much a person “built” his business if you take into consideration the fact that there were already roads and electric lines and the telephone had already been invented, etc.

        Obama stepped into a carefully constructed political machine, one built to order according to a blueprint for gradual takeover of a nation, which is the new template for Leftist revolution. So he is “lucky” only in that he is a Marxist in a world set up to welcome a charismatic Marxist.

        It has taken decades to undermine our educational system, a little at a time, to substitute partisan Leftists for the teachers of old, to dumb down the curricula, to lower the standards, to get to the point we are now, and this has included a very feeble token effort at teaching American history tempered with a disinclination to teach American exceptionalism. So Obama has stepped into a nation where most of the citizenry under, say, 50 has not been taught the amazing stories of our founding, the basis for the way our system of government has been set up, the success of that system when it was strictly adhered to, and the failures of the system fighting to overtake it.

        It has taken decades for this rot to extend into our bastions of “higher learning” and it has all been helped by the erosion of our press, from a source of unbiased information to an active participant in the “fundamental transformation” of the nation.

        Obama’s “luck” has been in being in the right place, at the right time, with the right credentials. But the way has been paved for him, right up until the moment he was presented to us as a savior, even to the details of so thoroughly demonizing his predecessor to create a backdrop against which he could appear as a stunning contrast.

        I speculate that the Left machine would have preferred a candidate with a little more substance, but Barry had the looks, the racial profile, the solid Leftist background of political indoctrination, the lack of real affinity for and allegiance to the United States, and the charisma, and I think they figured they could coast on that and fill in the cracks.

        They just happened to get a White House occupant who reminds us of the crackers who won the lottery and immediately started filling a tacky McMansion with tacky gimcracks and doodads—-people so enamored of the trappings of their position that they started to act like royalty instead of like humble servants of the people. And who don’t LIKE the actual work involved, and who haven’t bothered to cram for the next test.

      • bardolf October 5, 2012 / 3:46 pm

        JR

        According to the BLS the 7.8% is better than when he took office not just the same. BTW I’ve heard coaches claim exactly what you said, that things were going down hill and they turned them around.

        It’s not just the position that matters, also the direction, velocity, acceleration.

        Heck, I’ve heard claims for the rate at which things are getting worse is decreasing as a justification from some top dogs. Not that things are good. Not that things are getting better. But the rate at which things are getting worse is slowing down.

        Amazona

        I’m not disagreeing with you. I’d like to add that Obama has run against two of the worst GOP candidates in memory McCain and Romney. Romney will win by the skin of his teeth if at all. Newt, Tim, Herman … all would be way ahead of Obama by now.

      • dbschmidt October 5, 2012 / 9:59 pm

        Aside from Obama sidelining all possible candidates against him (both Democratic and Republican) through less than honorable means. I cannot believe you are hawking the BLS numbers. Even though I try to see an even handedness in you view–you have become nothing more than a dung beetle for this administration.

    • GMB October 5, 2012 / 1:21 pm

      Just trying to understand your point there Bardolf. You are right, barky has got to be the luckiest political hack in history.

      He has a media that carries his water and repub leadership that doesn’t have half a spine between the three of them.

      Maybe in a couple of election cycles things will be better?

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:04 pm

        GMB

        barky has got to be the luckiest political hack in history.

        No luck involved, Affirmative Action, the chi-cago mob, and Muslim money you have a trifecta for political success…………..that is until YOU have to perform!!!

      • bardolf October 5, 2012 / 3:58 pm

        The media carried water for Clinton, still we know about Monica. They adored Reagan (Yes they loved Reagan no matter what anyone says a 49-1 win only comes with love) and yet Iran-Contra. They carried Kerrey and yet the swiftboats and littlegreenfootballs.

        There is a right wing media too. Fox and B4V and Rush and Malkin and Coulter … but the Obama is in the right place at the right time to avoid the big sack.

        The poor repub leadership is an angle that needs its own blog.

    • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 2:46 pm

      baldork

      Ill give you one jack ryan, and up you one larry sinclair and a hit of crack in Ubama’s limo

      • bardolf October 5, 2012 / 3:48 pm

        neoconehead

        if the story catches on and buries Obama you can say he’s unlucky, else he’s the luckiest guy ever

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:53 pm

        baldork

        so you do not see any negatives with the zip-O and all with Romney?
        You are voting tor the pos again?

      • bardolf October 5, 2012 / 4:22 pm

        Neo

        I never voted for Obama the first time. I see lots of problems with Obama, somehow they don’t stick. He literally is willing to kill children who survive abortion. The economy is in dumps … and yet he is still the odds on favorite to win over at intrade. I can only think to use the word lucky.

        IMO Romney is a horrible candidate who had a good night. I’m underwhelmed.

        How Romney can get people like me to the polls. 1. Say he has a litmus test against murder and will only appoint pro-life judges to the SC. 2. Tell me he thinks Afghanistan is a mess and Iraq didn’t achieve squat, i.e. promise not to waste US soldiers lives. 3. Stop throwing young men into prison for using substances that do less damage than alcohol. 4 Get rid of the Fed. 5. Promise to eliminate lefty programs like the DOE and NCLB.

        Of course that prescription might just get other people out to vote against Romney, so he might be correct in moving to the center.

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 4:38 pm

        baldork

        so if you stay home it is a vote for al-Ubama,
        you can vote for a known SHIITE sandwich, or you can vote for baloney, not prime rib but also not $#it.
        think about it.

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 4:43 pm

        1. Say he has a litmus test against murder and will only appoint pro-life judges to the SC. 2. Tell me he thinks Afghanistan is a mess and Iraq didn’t achieve squat, i.e. promise not to waste US soldiers lives. 3. Stop throwing young men into prison for using substances that do less damage than alcohol. 4 Get rid of the Fed. 5. Promise to eliminate lefty programs like the DOE and NCLB.

        Annnnnnnd

        the IRS, ATF, FEMA, OSHA, NEA, and BUILD the damn WALL!!

        good we 90% agree

  8. dennis October 5, 2012 / 2:19 pm

    Unemployment rates at their lowest in 43 months? That’s not a bad way to enter the last 30 days of the campaign. I see Fox News is still depicting the glass half empty and people here calling BS on the stats. So what’s really new?

    If the right sees the figure as BS, the spin machine is still on full speed for the first debate. Mark talks about Romney’s “smashing” victory as if something really momentous happened. The credulity of the public picking up this narrative has been amusing to watch. It’s like the “liberal” media that “carries [Obama’s] water” had pre-ordained that if Romney didn’t self-immolate in the first debate he would be designated winner, never mind the facts. (Juan Williams’ take is more rational – see his Fox News commentary.)

    Seriously, if anyone minded the facts there’s no way Romney would be able to show his face publicly except as a figure of ridicule. Did anyone count how many times he accused Obama of taking $716 billion from Medicare? That’s long been known to be false, and far from the only whopper by Romney. The $5 trillion tax cut he disowned was even bigger. The unnamed studies Romney cited to try and discredit that figure by the bipartisan Tax Policy Center was a Hail Mary pass to escape the discomfort of the moment.

    Even more ludicrous was Romney’s repeated accusation that in one year Obama put $90 billion into green jobs, and then saying half the businesses invested in had failed. Where to start with that? The $90 billion figure reflects the total budget for the DOE’s Recovery Act which is not a single year program but started in 2009. Only a small fraction of $90B has gone to renewable energy. The majority has funded efficiency programs and environmental cleanup, mostly of nuclear weapons production and storage sites. Upgrades to America’s transmission grid account for more than twice as much as was allocated to green energy companies. Research into carbon capture and storage, essential for burning coal cleanly as possible, accounts for about $3 billion. Romney is on record as supporting this research.

    Moreover the particular program that offers $16B in loan guarantees to green energy companies include many industries besides solar and wind. Some of these guarantees won’t be accepted, as companies fail to meet the conditions for their award. Most that are awarded will be paid back with interest. Half have not failed – the actual failure rate is far less than what Congress budgeted for. Tesla Motors, mentioned by Romney as one of the failed companies, is very much alive and has actually started making early payments on their loan.

    The list goes on and on. How do you debate someone who just makes stuff up? Or who spouts memorized punch lines developed by a focus group? The fact is, Obama was synthesizing facts and information from a broad base of knowledge during the debate, thinking on his feet, while Romney felt free to simply dispute and dismiss known facts for tactical advantage. Romney showed no consideration for the American people’s right to know something at least resembling the truth. Sure, the superficial difference made him appear quicker and more confident – but there’s a profound difference between working from knowledge of facts and throwing up chaff.

    Finally, why didn’t Obama go for the kill? Surely he had plenty of opportunities – but I don’t think he has the killer instinct. I think he’s a basically dignified person without the stomach for calling his opponent a liar in a public forum. That’s where much of the disappointment on the left seems to be coming from. Maybe, as js02 suggested in the prior thread, Obama is allowing Romney to expose his weaknesses now so he can deliver the coup de grace later.

    But maybe Obama just trusted the American people would see Romney’s dishonesty for what it is. After all, he has now pivoted from being a “severe conservative’ (anybody remember that?) to suddenly feeling sorry for all those unemployed, to saying how “completely wrong” he was about the 47 percent. Wasn’t it here on this very blog that Cluster and others were lauding Romney’s 47 percent remark for finally laying the issue on the table? But that Etch-a-Sketch just keeps getting shaken – right down to the election itself, it appears.

    An addendum – Lehrer’s question about healing the partisan divide (and Romney’s facile answer) deserve a separate, more in-depth critique. But suffice it to say in Massachusetts Romney didn’t have a spiteful, extreme Democratic majority to deal with, but a rational group of people working in the state’s best interests. The “my way or the highway” side on Capitol Hill wasn’t the president, but his adversaries who explicitly declared their priority from the start. And it wasn’t America’s best interests, it was to make Obama a one-term president.

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:31 pm

      Gee, dennis, it looks like you’re not going to vote for Romney.

      Nice recitation of RRL talking points, though. Good doggie denny.

      Your tail-wagging enthusiasm for Obama is clear whenever you post, but this gem stands out:

      ” I think he’s a basically dignified person without the stomach for calling his opponent a liar in a public forum. ”

      Oh, surely you jest. This is even funnier than blaming the altitude. Obama is a wimp, which is not the same as “dignified”. He is so used to having a cadre of handlers around him to cover for him, protect him, lie for him, attack his opponents, etc. that without this he just crumpled like wet tissues.

      He got called on his lies, he got called on his failures, and instead of being able to counter what Romney said with facts, he just sulked. You can call petulance “dignity” all you want—he folded under the challenge of a fellow American in a debate on issues he should have known, which is just more proof that he doesn’t have what it takes to handle real opposition from foreign leaders who can eat him for lunch.

      Romney could have lied in every word he said and still made it clear he is a vastly preferable alternative to sour, sulky, cowed failure Obama. The fact that he DIDN’T just makes him more appealing as an alternative.

      • Cluster October 5, 2012 / 4:28 pm

        And I remember the “dignified” Obama inviting Paul Ryan to a speech on health care, where Paul sat in the first row, only to be labeled an uncaring baffoon by Obama and who wanted to take health care away from autistic children without a chance for Paul to respond. That was highly dignified and very Christian I am sure in dennis’s bizarre world.

        Seriously, if anyone minded the facts there’s no way Romney would be able to show his face publicly except as a figure of ridicule. – dennis

        The leftist media has had two days now and is still having trouble identifying the lies, much like yourself. Obama press babe Stephanie Cutter just admitted that the $5 trillion dollar tax cut, isn’t real, so you may want to catch up on that dennis.

        Oh and do me a favor dennis, don’t vote for Romney. I do not want to be affiliated with you in any way.

      • Cluster October 5, 2012 / 5:04 pm

        Here’s some more NO SPIN on the 7.8% unemployment dennis. That number DOESN’T include the 8+ million people that have dropped out of the work force since 2009.

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:34 pm

      Remind me here….just who was it who smirked that Republicans could attend policy meetings but would have to “sit in the back of the bus”?

      Just who made that dignified statement?

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:36 pm

      But thanks for the explanation. Now we realize that Obama was not just staring down at the podium because he couldn’t meet anyone’s eyes, or was bumfuddled by being challenged, or sulking.

      No—he was really SYNTHESIZING .

      Good to know

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:39 pm

      ” How do you debate someone who just makes stuff up? Or who spouts memorized punch lines developed by a focus group?”

      You mean like we have to do all the time on this blog, when people like you post?

      I guess the same way we deal with you guys—you just recite the facts and ignore the lies.

      Of course that works best when you HAVE the facts, which is why Barry was in such a snit.

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:40 pm

      “Maybe, as js02 suggested in the prior thread, Obama is allowing Romney to expose his weaknesses now so he can deliver the coup de grace later”

      Yeah, like the Raiders did against the Broncos on Sunday.

      • M. Noonan October 5, 2012 / 3:53 pm

        And the clever plot by New Orleans to go 0-4 just to make the Chargers feel like it’ll be easy this Sunday…

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 4:45 pm

        LOL 🙂

    • Amazona October 5, 2012 / 2:57 pm

      Evidently Obama was also too dignified to repeat what his campaign ads have been saying, though he did not find it beneath his exalted dignity to say he approved of the message—-that under Mitt Romney, employers will DENY ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.

      But just for women, you understand.

      Of course, this would have opened the door for Mitt to explain that this would really slash unemployment, as employers would then have to hire people to make sure no women actually try to ACCESS HEALTH CARE.

      And small business would thrive, as sales of baseball caps, fake beards and bulky Carhart jackets would boom, as more women try to disguise themselves to slip into clinics to ACCESS HEALTH CARE.

      Yep, all that dignity really cut into his chances to score on Romney

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:11 pm

        Yep, all that dignity

        pot
        crack
        XXXXXXXXXXXXXX //Moderator
        wright
        farracan
        ayers
        FM davis
        resco
        tax cheats
        communists
        racists
        liars
        the Mooch

        yeah “dignity” thats the ticket…….

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:11 pm

        OOH

        and OPM

    • M. Noonan October 5, 2012 / 3:52 pm

      When you’re after-debate spin is “the other guy lied!” then you lost it decisively.

      • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:56 pm

        Mark

        ANNNND he lied Sooooo much you couldnt keep up, and had to just stand there slack jawed……..do you smell smoke??

      • M. Noonan October 5, 2012 / 7:02 pm

        Only when the Choom Gang is in town…

    • dbschmidt October 5, 2012 / 10:03 pm

      Denny,
      Obama just got bitch slapped like he and people like you desire. My follow-up will be, well, following.

  9. neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:44 pm

    Romney’s NON stop lying?
    ROTFLMAO………NEXT EXCUSE for the empty suit at the empty podium?

    reminds me of barry in his golf jacket in the BACK corner of the room while OBL was taken down, or the LIE about 9/12/12 invasion on US soil……….while he slept

    LOSERS are US…..LOL

    • neocon1 October 5, 2012 / 3:54 pm

      9/11/12 correction

  10. Cluster October 5, 2012 / 5:22 pm

    These definitely are the last 30 days of Obama’s political life. Remember when Obama said that when a candidate is out of ideas, they resort to attacking the challenger? Well, enjoy this from Axlerod:

    …top campaign adviser David Axelrod convened a phone call with reporters telling them that the “question” for them “is really one of character and whether or not a candidacy that’s so fundamentally rooted in hiding the truth and the facts from the American people and deception is the basis of trust on which you assign the presidency to a person.”

    So Axlerod thinks that telling the American people the truth is important for a President? Really? For eight days, Obama flat out lied to the American people over the Libyan Embassy attack, and just today, Obama is telling lies about the 7.8% unemployment rate, not including and flat out ignoring the 8+ million people who are not counted.

    Liberals, like dennis, occupy their own distorted, make believe world. As Rush said earlier today, I know this country can survive Obama, but it can not survive the stupid people that vote for him.

    • Cluster October 5, 2012 / 6:15 pm

      And notice how Axelrod is telling the reporters what their “question is”

      Worst administration in the history of this country.

    • Cluster October 5, 2012 / 6:57 pm

      Spontaneous video my ass!

      ABC News has obtained an internal State Department email from May 3, 2012, indicating that the State Department denied a request from the security team at the Embassy of Libya to retain a DC-3 airplane in the country to better conduct their duties.

      I think this effectively kills any possible serious consideration for Hillary Clinton as POTUS as well.

      http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/email-shows-state-department-rejecting-request-of-security-team-at-us-embassy-in-libya/

    • js03 October 5, 2012 / 10:15 pm

      He is already scouting for a retirement home in Hawaii.

  11. M. Noonan October 5, 2012 / 7:02 pm

    Now we’re doomed – they’ve discovered Romney’s cheat sheet!

  12. GMB October 5, 2012 / 7:44 pm

    I think I have ripped Mitt to shreds over the last year. A couple of other conservatives have also done the same thing. We think. We reason. We have standards.

    The donks don’t. The ends justify the means. The state is all, all for the state. Lockstep, march in it guys.

    FORE!!!!ward

    • Cluster October 5, 2012 / 8:17 pm

      FORE!!!!ward

      That’s good.

  13. bagni October 5, 2012 / 11:39 pm

    obama got served
    however i thought this was kind of funny
    http://roboromney.com/

    • neocon1 October 6, 2012 / 10:22 am

      nanu nanu dork….

      Id like to see a side by side of al Ubama and Mitt on that site

      • neocon1 October 6, 2012 / 10:24 am

        Read em and weep

        BOUNCE IN POLLS:

        R PULLS AHEAD IN VA…

        R +3 IN FL…

        R +3 IN OH among those ‘certain’ to vote…

Comments are closed.