Mark Sanford, the former disgraced governor of South Carolina, who cheated on his wife, used public funds to see his mistress in Argentina, while lying to his constituents that he was hiking in the Apalachians… won the special election for a Congressional seat in South Carolina.

_{Pictured: Sanford with his mistress, I mean, girlfriend, I mean just announced as fiance.}

Sadder pictures. The two young boys are his sons:

His opponent was Elizabeth Colbert Busch. Yes, sister of comedian Stephen Colbert. However, as a candidate, she stood on her own. From a posted comment from one of the local newspapers:

Elizabeth Colbert Busch, has spent 20 years in the maritime industry that is intimately connected to our area’s history and economy. (The District where she was running is on the coast of South Carolina.) She has worked in a public-private partnership to establish a forward looking research facility (Clemson-renewable energy) that will provide employment and investment for years to come. She has served on the boards of the Chamber of Commerce, Maritime association and others proving she knows how to work with diverse groups to accomplish a mutual goal. During her professional career she also raised three children, and although divorced she accomplished this difficult personal moment in an adult manner. When she says she will work for the good of the First District and not toe the party line I believe her. When she acts it is been with reason, maturity, and honesty. This is the sort of person that we need to be our representative to the congress.

Somehow she lost by 9 points. If we look at the gridlock in Congress, we shouldn’t blame Congress. We should blame the voters who put those people in Congress.

For a humorous look at the race, here is a clip from the Colbert Report earlier on in the campaign:

Click on the above image for the video. Colbert was responding to a clip where Joe Scarborough was saying that Elizabeth Colbert Busch had her own TV show, so on the Morning Joe Show, they spent time praising Mark Sanford for his “honesty”! What?

No wonder it’s so difficult to make any real progress. 1 week ago

Originally posted on Apr 16, 2008. Recently updated with replacement links for the videos.

I wish I could post a humorous Daily Show video to help offset the grim reality that not only has US used torture to try to extort information out of suspects, but also it has now been recently revealed that those high in the administration were involved in the decision. And although we should be used to the fact by now that this administration thinks nothing about lying to the American public, it is disgusting to see how blatantly they do it.

Click the following link if you don’t mind hearing people lie through their teeth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gqaw5UnHA4

I would like to remind people that many held at Guantanamo Bay are not known terrorists or even “enemy combatants”. Some were “people of interest” who the government felt they needed to question without being subject to any laws. It’s well known that boys as young as 14 years old were held at Guantanamo. In addition, it’s also known that many (most?) of those held at Guantanamo who were later transferred to custody of their current home country (such as Australia and UK) were released because there was not enough evidence to hold them on any charges.

Also announced today was Pulitzer prize winning AP photographer was released after being held for 2 years by US military in Iraq. He was never charged with any crime. Can you imagine if one of your loved ones was just taken by the military/government and held in prison without charges for two years?

Reference: USA Today

Grabbing people off the street, holding them in prison without any charges, torturing suspects… To me, this sounds more like Communist Russia, not USA. Are we really so scared of terrorists that we would be willing to sacrifice our principles and become exactly like those who we criticized and ridiculed in the past? It’s a shame…

PS. And this is the same administration who received a memo on August 6, 2001 entitled “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U.S.” and did nothing because they thought the document was “primarily historical”.

OK, for those of you would need to have a good laugh after reading this, here is the video from the Daily Show.5 years ago

Nicole Hockley, whose son Dylan was one of the victims at Sandy Hook, spoke at her son’s memorial a week after his death:

Some autistic individuals rock their bodies, roll their heads, or flap their hands. Dylan was a flapper. Whenever he got excited or happy, he jumped up and down and flapped as hard as he could. One day I asked Dylan “Why do you flap?”

In all honesty, because Dylan had underdeveloped language skills, I wasn’t expecting him to answer, but he did. He said “Because I am a beautiful butterfly.”

It has been said that something as small as a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a hurricane half way around the world, that a small change or a single occurrence in one place can result in large differences elsewhere. It redefines the future.

Dylan is our butterfly. All of the children and adults who lost their lives last week are our butterflies. And if one butterfly can cause a hurricane, then 26 butterflies can change the world. I refuse to accept this as a senseless tragedy. I believe Dylan and the others that died with him are catalysts.

And while I selfishly wish that my child were with me and while I fear the empty space in my heart will never be filled, I am also at peace taking comfort in the knowledge that his death will have meaning. There will be a positive change from this.

The following Rachel Maddow segment shows Nicole Hockley’s emotional tribute from Dylan’s memorial:

Click the above image to see the video.

In the same clip from the Rachel Maddow Show, there is also a segment from 60 Minutes with the Sandy Hook parents. In the segment, Sandy Hook parent David Wheeler pleaded:

I’d like every parent in this country, that’s 150 million people, I’d like them to look in the mirror… and look in your eyes and say this will never happen to me, this will never happen in my school, this will never happen in my community, and see if you actually believe that.

And if there is a shadow, the slightest shadow of doubt about what you said, think about what you can do to change that, in your house, in your community, in your school, in your country. Because we have an obligation to our children to do this for them.

It’s going to happen again. It’s going to happen again. And every time, it’s somebody else’s school, it’s somebody else’s town, it’s somebody else’s community until one day, you wake up, and it’s not.

However, it has been a very depressing day in politics. Even though approximately 90% of Americans want increased background checks, the Senate could not pass the bill.

Some of the arguments for rejecting the bill:

Ted Cruz (R – TX) – In my opinion, adopting mandatory federal background checks… puts on the path to a push for federal regulation.

• So per Ted Cruz, even though there is no federal regulation proposed in this bill and even though this bill is beneficial for Americans, he cannot vote for this bill just because what might happen at some unknown point in the future, which anyway would be a completely separate vote.

Richard Shelby (R – AL) – I believe we should not restrict transactions between law-abiding citizens especially since we will not prevent such transactions between criminals.

Tom Coborn (R – OK) – We need to recognize that we cannot legislate away the evil that is about us.

Charles Grassley (R – IA) – People who steal guns do not submit to background checks.

• First, background checks does not restrict the transaction between law-abiding citizens.

• Secondly, if we follow their logic that criminals do not follow laws, and that’s why there’s no need to pass this legislation, that means as well, there’s no need to pass any drug laws since criminals do not follow those laws and no need to pass laws against murder or stealing for the same reason.

• Finally, some argue that not all gun violence will be eliminated by this legislation. Based on that argument, there’s no point in passing any legislation unless it can get rid of the problem 100%. Therefore, no need to pass any drug regulation unless it can eliminate the drug problem 100%, etc.

As John Oliver reports, Australia passed sweeping gun control laws in 1996. In the prior 18 years, there were 13 mass homicides (defined as 4 or more) and since 1996, there have been none. In the decade after the legislation was passed, homicide rates with firearms declined 60%, suicide rates declined 65%.

The following was part of the exchange between John Oliver and gun lobbyist Philip Van Cleave:

Click the above image for the John Oliver clip from the Daily Show.

Can someone remind me why we vote the above type of politicians into office? My view in life is that if you do nothing, nothing will change. Can someone tell me why we are paying these politicians to be in office if they basically refuse to do anything as a result of Sandy Hook?

And the Republican-controlled house is known as a do-nothing congress. The only reason such bills like the Hurricane Sandy relief bill was passed was because of the Democrats. Only 49 of the 234 Republicans voted to provide relief due to Hurricane Sandy. The Violence against Women Act only passed because of the Democrats. Only 87 of the same 234 Republicans voted for this act. The house needed to pass a bill in order to continue maintaining commemorative battlefield sites (like Gettysburg). Only 101 Republicans voted to continue maintaining these sites. So you see, if we had to depend on Republicans for these bills, these bills would not have passed. They really are do nothing. You can see the Rachel Maddow segment on this point here: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#51524338. This segment was taped when Maddow was being optimistic that the Senate would pass the background check bill and there would be pressure for the House to do something, but we know what happened in the Senate.

• http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/ 4 weeks ago

Conan sometimes has some good stuff. This was hilarious… From “spin alley” after the 2004 Presidential Debate.

http://www.devilducky.com/media/21318/

Since Stephen had looked at this entry recently, I was checking the link(s) to the videos. Unfortunately, I can no longer find the 2004 video. Here is a video from the Obama/Romney debate:

http://www.prefixmag.com/news/watch-triumph-the-insult-comic-dog-crash-the-presi/71157/

Where possible, I also updated the other references to working versions of the videos, but in case I don’t remember anymore what the original video was, I was not able to find an updated link. Anyway, these updates now cause 43T to say this is a recent entry even though it was from 2006.

Lots of good lines…

Insult Dog: (To Karl Rove) You’re Bush’s Brains, Karl… I was expecting a much smaller man.

To Bush spinner: So tell me, how painful was it when the doctor removed your sense of shame.

Bush spinner: The President won tonight. I’m just one of those helping the President do the job that he has to do.
Insult Dog:Yes, I believe the term is “whore”.

To Bush (female) spinner: Thanks for your time. Have a safe trip back to Stepford.

Bush spinner to Insult Dog puppet: You’re insulting me and you have a hand up your butt?
Insult Dog: And you don’t?

Other videos:

• Too bad the president doesn’t know the number of days in February…?
• Bush making fun of a blind reporter wearing dark glasses
• Bush not answering question in typical Bush style
• Aren’t you glad that making suspects believe that they are going to drown is considered legal in the US and not torture?
  • (And just in case you would like to have some actual informative background about what Bush is trying to do by redefining torture and retroactively changing the law, you can view this video...)
  • And the Daily Show did a recap of the Today Show interview
• Is Bush an idiot?6 years ago

Republicans found in the last elections that their policy of exclusion cost them the election. That was the conclusion of their report entitled “Growth and Opportunity Project” which they were themselves calling an “autopsy” to uncover what went wrong in the last election. The report said that they need to reach out more to youths and minorities. They plan to spend $10 million to have paid people go out in community to promote their message.

However, their message of being more inclusive seemed to have not been heard by those attending the Conservative Political Action Conference, who continue to bury their heads in the sand, make false accusations, and evade reality and facts.

For a humorous view of CPAC from the Daily Show, click the above image for the video. For the video segment prior to the above video, you can click here.

It doesn’t help that during a panel of CPAC titled “Trump the Race Card: Are you tired of being called a racist and you know you’re not one”, one of the participants sarcastically responds to a comment about a slave who wrote a letter to tell his former slave owner that he forgives him, “for giving him food and shelter all those years…?”

Click the above image for a video of Larry Wilmore from the Daily Show with some good advice for Republicans on how to get more votes from minorities and a video clip of the previously mentioned exchange.

It doesn’t help the Republican message when a Michigan Republican posted the article ””Everyone Should Know These Statistics On Homosexuals” on his Facebook page, where the article said gays are “filthy” and stated that gay people “account for half the murders in large cities”.

It doesn’t help the Republican message when North Carolina Republican Governor McCrory within 3 months of being in office, closed the Office of Hispanic/Latino Affairs despite Hispanics being the fastest growing population in NC and despite the office being in existence for 14 years.

It doesn’t help when Alaska Republican Congressman Don Young uses the term “wetbacks” when referring to Hispanics. After it was pointed out to him that it is a derogatory term which should not be used, his initial statement said he “meant no disrespect”. The Anchorage Daily News pointed out thought that he didn’t even apologize, so he later did apologize.

To “express…admiration today for the romance of the latin culture”, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul read a Pablo Neruda love poem at the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce meeting. Not quite the content you’d expect at a chamber of commerce meeting. And it’s definitely a surprise for a Republican to quote a poet who was pro-Communist and an elected Community Party official. Conversely, if Pablo Neruda were alive today, since he was a Communist, I am sure he would not be happy with someone who supports making cuts on the poor to be reading his poetry. It would be like a politician using a band’s song in a commercial or during the political campaign when the band does not support that politician. (Both Silversun Pickups and K’naan had issues with the Romney campaign using their songs.)

You can see Rachel Maddow’s segment on the above points here:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/vp/51377470

What seems to be consistent about the Republican Party is that they don’t seem to care about an issue unless it affects them directly.

Republican Senator Rob Portman came out to say that he now favors gay marriage once his son came out of the closet. (Interestingly enough, after Portman was re-elected.) Dick Cheney also toned down his view point against gay marriage due to his gay daughter.

Incredibly, 31 Republicans also opposed Hurricane Sandy relief, even though they had supported other similar bills when the disaster aid was proposed for their own state.

Sometimes it’s hard to know what Republicans candidate believe because they say something and their office has to later “clarify” they didn’t mean what they said.

This happened when Republican Ohio governor John Kasich said “If you want to have a civil union, that’s fine with me”, but later, his office had to put out a statement “The governor’s position is unchanged. He opposes gay marriage and he opposes changes Ohio’s constitution to allow for civil unions”.

And while around 90% of Americans believe in more comprehensive background checks for gun purchases, and even though House Majority Speaker Boehner stated in an interview: “They should actually do a real background check on everyone”, his office later had to clarify Boehner’s position is that he does not support more extensive background checks.

You can view a video segment from Rachel Maddow how Republicans’ statements contradict their own policies here: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-maddow-show/51283038

The following is an emotional video of father Neil Heslin who lost his son at Sandy Hook:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3wNQZnR6og

And another strong testimony of father David Wheeler who also lost his son at Sandy Hook:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdKj920Xvqk

If you think the above makes the Republican Party look backwards, there’s more. Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli has been making an effort to make oral sex illegal in Virginia again. And Tennessee state senator Stacy Campfield who wants to reduce welfare money to families who have children with failing grades in school. And this is from a guy who seems to have an education deficit himself as he thinks AIDS started because of a guy having sex with a monkey and then having sex with other men. I think Stacy Campfield got his information from the same medical expert who advised Senate candidate Todd Akin that women who are raped don’t get pregnant because they have a “way” of shutting their reproductive organs down.

Click on the above image for the video from the Daily Show. While the bit itself is campy at times, it’s worth watching the video and the next one to cover both Cuccinelli and Campfield. (Just in case the second video doesn’t properly start after the first video, the second video is here:http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-9-2013/sodomy%2d%2dzygotes%2d%2dwelfare%2d%2d%2d%2dstate-laws)

• http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/26/republicans-play-catch-up-on-gay-marriage.html
• http://www.wisconsingazette.com/national-gaze/republican-national-committee-member-pressed-to-resign-after-anti-gay-facebook-post.html
• http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/16/another-pop-group-tells-romney-to-stop-using-its-song/
• http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/01/29/1510041/sandy-aid-republican-hypocrites/ 1 month ago

on mistakes that were made and how things could have been done better.

However, don’t ever expect the neocons to admit any mistakes.

Dick Cheney said in a recent interview “I did what I did, it’s all on the public record, and I feel very good about it. If I had to do it all over again, I’d do it in a minute” with no mention of how things could have been done better if he could do it all over again.

While I’m a believer not to have any regrets about what I have done in the past, I am a believer in learning from your past and if I had an opportunity to make things better, I would.

Cheney’s views really shouldn’t be surprising. As per Paul O’Neill who was Bush’s initial US Treasury Secretary in the Bush administration, stated that 10 days after Bush’s inauguration, which is 9 months before 9/11, Bush wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein and told his cabinet to “find me a way to do this”. When 9/11 occurred, the Bush administration tried to link 9/11 to Saddam Hussein, but couldn’t. After the war in Afghanistan, then they had to find another way which was to say Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. As we know now, this wasn’t true.

As pointed out by Ron Suskind in a discussion with Chris Matthews, “when you have a big lie, you got to have a big denial to follow it.” The denial is what we are seeing from the neocons. (The Chris Matthews segment is here)

In a recent interview, Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense under Bush, said that the Iraq War could have turned out better if only they had known how much manpower would be required to provide stability to Iraq.

What? Army Chief of Staff General Shinseki gave an estimate of several hundred thousands of troops required for peacekeeping in Iraq, at least twice the planned number. However, the Bush administration decided not to listen to him. Instead, they treated him more as an outcast and his influence as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was never the same after he gave that estimate. Is this the way to treat someone who has dedicated his life to protecting our country?

Anyway, not surprising as we found Bush do this during his presidency, the neocons are trying to rewrite history. My concern is not for the neocons (except for the fact some people consider Condoleezza Rice a good candidate for President), but the fact that you can still find this pattern of behavior the GOP today.

• http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews#51295404
• http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-592330.html
• http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/20/opinion/mills-truth-teller-iraq 1 month ago

questioning why McConnell and Republicans want to prevent a ban on assault weapons and background checks.

There’s nothing in the Constitution which says Americans are guaranteed the right to assault weapons, just as there are no guaranteed rights to own cluster bombs and nuclear weapons. The second amendment only states the right to bear “arms”. It’s unreasonable to think that any “arms” are allowed, so the line has to be drawn somewhere.

Click the above image for the video. Or click this link if you’d like to help get the message out: https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/gun_mcconnell_2_response?refcode=e1-v2

For the record, this is the wording of the amended second amendment as stated in wikipedia:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I am sure Thomas Jefferson who ratified the wording as Secretary of State would be greatly disappointed how we have taken the second amendment which was intended to help ensure a free nation to how people are given the right to own assault weapons for no real reason. (Protection? Really…?) It was Thomas Jefferson who stated:

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

_{Image from naturalhistorymag.com}2 months ago

From the article:
Republican Rep. Ed Orcutt says bikes are bad for the environment because they cause cyclists to have “an increased heart rate and respiration.” “You would be giving off more carbon dioxide if you are riding a bike than driving in a car,” he said, before admitting that he had not “done any analysis” of the difference between carbon dioxide emissions of bikes and cars. Of course not.

There’s been an update to the article where Orcutt later “recognizes that bikes emit less carbon than cars”.

Do we really think people like Ed Orcutt is a good use of taxpayers’ money?

OK, the above image has nothing to do with the article, but I don’t even know what skit that is from…

• http://now.msn.com/ed-orcutt-seattle-representative-defends-bike-tax-by-saying-bikes-are-bad-for-the-environment
• Unknown Monty Python skit… Oh, it’s Bicycle Repair Man, which can be seen here. 2 months ago

But comedy shows like The Daily Show do not need to worry about finding material as long as the Tea Party is around. In fact, the writers do not even have to worry about coming up with material. All they need to do is interview Tea Party members.

The Daily Show’s Al Madrigal did a story on the Florida Tea Party being concerned that the government is interfering with their rights to be able to ride manatees. Again, their premise is they should be able to do whatever they want, independent of the impact to others (people or animals) and independent on whether it is good for the country.

Click the above image for the video. 2 months ago

Especially in light of billions of profits being pulled in by big oil. 2 months ago

From the referenced article:

Eight Senators on Monday voted not to consider the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, a bill that protects victims of domestic violence. The Senators who voted against moving to debate on the bill were:

Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Mike Lee (R-UT)
Tim Scott (R-SC)
Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Rand Paul (R-KY)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
James Risch (R-ID)

Someone in the comments pointed out that Ted Cruz is not up for re-election until 2018. However, his fellow Texan John Coryn is up for reelection in 2014.

From the commenter:
“Coryn voted against the Veterans Jobs Bill during the last Congress. I (as a Vet) won’t forget that betrayal.”

• http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/04/1540321/senators-block-vawa/ 3 months ago

No surprise, but it didn’t take long for partisanship to rear its ugly head.

Republican House speaker Boehner put out soundbites saying that the President should “get serious”. Obama has already made it clear that he wants to reduce the deficit by raising taxes on those making over $250,000. The Republican plan only raised taxes for those making over $1,000,000. Now which side seems to be the one which is not taking reducing the Federal deficit seriously?

And then Boehner wanted to push through his “Plan B” tax plan, even though he knows Obama will not sign it. Just another waste of time rather than trying to solve the problem.

However, the non-partisan Tax Policy Center has looked at the details of the Republican’s Plan B and discovered on average, besides raising taxes on those making over $1,000,000, it would also raise taxes on those earning less than $200,000! In fact, 1 in 5 who earn less than $20,000 would see an increase of over $1,000! What? And not only that, it would decrease taxes for those earning between $200,000 and $1,000,000.

Anyway, so Boehner wanted to push Plan B through the house, but he discovered he does not even have enough Republican support for the Plan. So rather than risk an embarrassing defeat, he’s called off the vote and recessed the House for Christmas.

Now, where was that post about Republicans wasting millions of tax payers money on “symbolic” votes…? Oh yeah, it’s here.

Update: The scary part about Boehner not being able to get enough votes from Republicans is because tea party members do not want to have any tax increase, even for the rich. Aren’t we glad we have such extremists in our government blocking progress? Anyway, it might be the only chance Boehner has of passing anything is to get a plan which Democrats will support and some moderate Republicans, too, leaving the tea party members out in the cold. Of course, the chance of Boehner supporting a plan which the Democrats support is likely very slim. Maybe we are headed toward the fiscal cliff.

Update 2: This AP article has an interesting analysis of the situation. It’s the old premise be careful what you wish for because you may get it. The Republican Party was able to resurrect itself on the popularity of the Tea Party movement and pledging no new taxes. Now, they can’t even pass meaningful legislation even though they are the majority.

• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/11/fiscal-cliff-john-boehner_n_2278112.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
• http://finance.yahoo.com/news/plan-b-actually-raise-taxes-184648865.html
• http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-push-own-fiscal-cliff-plan-talks-frozen-005408461%2d%2dbusiness.html
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/boehner-budget-failure-conservative-groups_n_2342979.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=122112&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
• http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-gop-policies-led-fiscal-cliff-blowup-222503056%2d%2dpolitics.html 5 months ago

Also, congratulations to Tim Kaine, Elizabeth Warren, Chris Murphy, Sherrod Brown, Bill Nelson, Claire McCaskill, Bob Casey, Joe Donnelly, Tammy Baldwin, Jon Tester, and Heidi Heitkamp on winning their Senate seats and increasing the Democratic majority.

I can’t list all the House races, but one which is noteworthy, congratulations to Tammy Duckworth for winner her House seat, showing once again not only was she a hero in Iraq but she can also be a hero for the people she represents.

By the way, I will keep this goal open until the Republican party stops trying to dictate morality, until the Republican party stops putting interests of corporations above people, and until the Republican party starts representing all Americans. 6 months ago

Mostly because I wanted to take the granbeanie with me the way I took her mother and the way my mother took me into the voting booth when I was a child. My mother explained to me that that was one place no one could tell her what to do, what to think, and that her vote was equal to the vote of any other person in the whole country. So, now I’m too dizzy to stand but I’m voting anyway, even if I have to bring a bag to puke in with me! My SO will go with me and stand in line for me so I can sit and wait my turn. This will not be comfortable for me but I will do it because I believe there’s a lot at stake this year. Don’t make excuses. Vote. Make a difference. 6 months ago

For those of you who may remember the Joe Isuzu commercials, someone noted that Mitt Romney’s campaign stump sounds a lot like Joe Isuzu commercials. Stuff which sounds good, but in the end, where are the facts to back him up? Where are the plans to show how he will accomplish these things? So basically, we have to “trust” him.

So they took the words from Romney directly and incorporated it into a Joe Isuzu-like commercial.

For those of you who may to be too young to remember Joe Isuzu: People have a negative image of stereotypical car salesmen because they have an image that they will say anything to sell a car, with no disregard whether what they say is true or not. Isuzu (which stopped selling cars in the US a few years ago) built a character around this image called Joe Isuzu and used him in their commercials. For example, there was one commercial where Joe Isuzu said you can save $2,000,000 in buying an Isuzu. And he would add his tagline at the end of the commercial “You have my word on it.” In this particular commercial, the catch was that you’d have to buy 1,000 of Isuzus as the rebate was $2,000 per car.

If the above video is not your taste, here’s Rosie Perez agreeing with what Mitt said in a secretly recorded video that he’d be a shoo-in for getting elected if only he were Latino.

I’ve always liked Rosie Perez…

Click the above images for their respective videos. And if Mitt’s joking about being Latino isn’t offensive enough, perhaps as Jay Smooth points out, his comment about the 47% of Americans being freeloaders might be.

Jay Smooth’s video can be found here. 6 months ago

Perhaps it’s ironic that such a terrible storm hit a densely populated area in the US just prior to the election:

When I step into the voting booth, I think about the world I want to leave my two daughters, and the values that are required to guide us there. The two parties’ nominees for president offer different visions of where they want to lead America.

One believes a woman’s right to choose should be protected for future generations; one does not. That difference, given the likelihood of Supreme Court vacancies, weighs heavily on my decision.

One recognizes marriage equality as consistent with America’s march of freedom; one does not. I want our president to be on the right side of history.

One sees climate change as an urgent problem that threatens our planet; one does not. I want our president to place scientific evidence and risk management above electoral politics.

These are the words of Michael Bloomberg in his endorsement of Obama for president.

What this disaster shows is that the government is needed in times of crisis. Can we imagine private sector picking up the slack? Even the state and local governments are overwhelmed by a disaster of this magnitude. It takes a strong federal government to provide the needed support.

Click on the above image for a clip ClimateChange.org put together of Romney making climate change jokes at the RNC. Obviously, not appreciated by ClimateChange.org.

And four years ago, when the country was heading into an economic crisis, something which we had not seen since the days of the Great Depression, this was a different type of crisis, but one just as devastating. We needed the federal government to step in.

Republicans, like Romney, had no better idea what to do in the crisis. Instead, they would have left it to the private sector. According to Romney, we should have let our auto manufacturers go into bankruptcy. Ooops, wait, who would have floated the companies loans to stay afloat during the bankruptcy proceedings…? Private financial institutions? Whooops? They were going through their own financial problems at the time… And who would have ended up buying our auto manufacturers… Foreign interests, like from China or any other country with money at the moment. It is true that Daimler ended up buying Chrysler and later sold it off to Fiat, but if all of our auto manufacturers would have been bought by foreign interests, it would have taken away a lot of sense of pride in the US brand name.

Sorry, I digressed. Since we were in a major economic crisis, the federal government did step in. And yes, now we have a big debt, but that is the price we pay for having the government help us out.

Some people say the debt wasn’t worth it. The problem is how can they say that? How do we know how bad it would have gotten if the government had not stepped in? What would have happened if we would have gotten to 25% unemployment like in the Great Depression. That would have been worth it?

Bill Clinton said it best in his speech at the DNC: “We’re in this together” is a far better philosophy than “You’re on your own.”

At the time Obama took office, polls showed that people thought it would take YEARS to get over the economic crisis. How quickly people forget. When Obama was campaigning for his first term, he said he would help get the unemployment down to 8%. Now that it’s lower than 8%, people are complaining. When Romney says something like “this doesn’t feel like a recovery”, that’s true. He’s never experienced anything as bad as the economic crisis we went through. Since it was compared as the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, then it’s only fair to try to compare it to the Great Depression. When Herbert Hoover took office and then the Great Depression hit, it took about 3 years to hit bottom. As supported by the writer in the referenced article, the fact that the government took quick actions during our recent economic crisis is what was able to turn the economy around so that we did not experience a 3-year spiral like they did during the Great Depression.

The following article makes a comparison between Obama and Hoover. Interest reading.

Obama vs Hoover

Oh, and for the record, the latest economic news released yesterday:

• Consumer confidence is at a 5-year high, and everyone knows that consumers power 70% of the economy
• Retail sales up
• Auto sales up
• Manufacturing up
• Construction up

• http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/31/obama-vs-hoover/
• http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-01/a-vote-for-a-president-to-lead-on-climate-change.html
• http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/business/economy/claims-for-us-jobless-benefits-drop.html 6 months ago

The infamous Richard Mourdock, Republican Senate candidate for Indiana, who stated that it was God’s will if a woman is impregnated from rape, was interviewed by a local TV station for clarification of his rape statement. He went on to confirm that he believes that abortion should be outlawed in all cases except in the case where the mother’s life is at risk. The interviewer then asked if Mourdock stands by his position if it were a 13-year who is raped and impregnated because of the rape, and Mourdock responded that people can throw out any hypothetical situations they want, but he has already made his position known.

Click on the above image for the video from the Rachel Maddow show if you want to sit through and cringe during the Mourdock interview.

Please, please everyone, vote. 6 months ago

Lying to voters is a Romney tactic.

Remember back in 2004 when Dick Cheney said “It’s absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we’ll get hit again [by terrorists] and we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States.”

Flash forward to 2012 in Ohio.

Romney says in a campaign stop in Ohio on October 25 that the people at the Jeep plant in Ohio are going to lose their jobs because “I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state Jeep — now owned by the Italians — is thinking of moving all production to China.” He goes on to say, “I will fight for every good job in America. I’m going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it’s fair America will win.”

The only thing is that the story of Jeep moving all production to China is not true… not even close. In fact, Chrysler which owns Jeep plans to increase production in Ohio.

From one of the referenced articles below:
Chrysler Group LLC has begun accepting applications for the new workers it will need next year when the automaker launches an all-new Jeep and a second shift at the Toledo Assembly complex… Chrysler announced in November [2011] it would spend $500 million at the Toledo complex and create 1,100 jobs — until Tuesday morning it had been a waiting game for the thousands of people expected to show interest in the jobs.

How could Romney get it so wrong? Oh… He read it somewhere… a right-wing blog… who had misinterpreted a story from Bloomberg who was saying sales of Jeeps in China were going so well, they were going to increase production there. Absolutely no shifting of production.

Doesn’t it get tiring listening to a guy who will say anything, even something completely false, to get elected?

You can also see Rachel Maddow’s reporting of it on MSNBC. Fortunately, I found the link for a specific Rachel Maddow Show. Here is the link from the opening segment for October 26:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#49576203

Unlike the above graphic which implies he is forgetting his previous views, now it just seems all too coincidental to be forgetting. He just seems to blatantly lie.

• http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5936960/ns/politics/t/cheney-says-wrong-choice-would-risk-attack/#.UIt-q2_A9sc
• http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121026/POLITICS01/210260402#ixzz2ATj0RQ7k
• http://www.toledoblade.com/Automotive/2012/08/15/Chrysler-accepting-job-applicants.html 6 months ago

You’d think that with the race as close as it is, Paul Ryan would be front and center helping to sway voters to vote for the Romney-Ryan ticket.

Where is Paul Ryan scheduled to be these days? From the referenced article:

On Wednesday evening, Ryan raised money in an event in Atlanta, Georgia that closed down major roads during rush hour and produced some aggravated tones from commuters on social media.

On Thursday morning, Ryan raised money ($25,000/couple) in an event in Midland, Texas.

On Friday morning, Ryan is scheduled for two fund raising events in Greenville, South Carolina, one for $5,000 per couple, the second at $25,000 per couple.

On Friday afternoon, Ryan will hold a fund raising lunch in Huntsville, Alabama.

Let’s see. Georgia, Texas, South Carolina, and Alabama, not exactly “battleground” states.

Could it be that Paul Ryan doesn’t fit Romney’s attempt to re-position himself as a moderate? Could it be that they are trying to hide Ryan especially in light of Mourdock’s view of abortion, considering Ryan basically has the same view? Keep in mind that he co-sponsored a bill which would withhold federal funds for abortions except for “forcible” rape as I posted here. And when Ryan was further asked to clarify what “forcible” rape is, he wouldn’t respond even though he co-sponsored the bill? Could it be that Ryan is the MOST conservative VP nominee ever, going back to 1900? Using the DW-Nominate scale of evaluating the politician’s ideology, Ryan was rated MORE conservative than Cheney or Palin? And why would we want such extremists in the White House?

Rachel Maddow asked the same questions on her Oct 25th show which you can see here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/49562117#49562117

In addition, this clip also includes Colin Powell’s endorsement for Obama. This is not a surprise, but it is worthwhile to listen to the clips WHY Colin Powell endorses Obama. As would be expected, he uses a very logical view to demonstrate why one should pick Obama over Romney.

Her video also includes the fact that Glenn Beck headlined the fund raiser in Texas for Romney, so in case we have forgotten, Maddow reminds us what a nutcase Glenn Beck is.

• http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2012/10/25/why-is-paul-ryan-in-states-that-dont-matter/
• http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/11/1119032/-Paul-Ryan-s-ideological-twin-Michele-Bachmann 6 months ago

Typically, I don’t want to judge people because it’s difficult to know what they have been through in their lives…

However, I don’t know what other emotions to have when Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock stated when a woman becomes pregnant due to rape, “it is something that God intended to happen.”

And he is leading in the polls.

Let’s just forget the fact that most logical candidates would avoid making such statements, even if asked, which would be considered extreme by maintstream voters. Thus, apparently he doesn’t think his views are that extreme.

To try to look on the positive side for Mourdock, one might feel good for him to have such strong convictions… But it’s hard for me to cheer someone on whose beliefs are based on ignorance. Even if he strongly feels that way, his statements shows he has little sensitivity for those who are victims of rape.

Do we really want someone like that to be put in one of the most powerful government positions in the US? Since the Senate is close to 50/50, he may be the one to make a deciding vote on an important subject. I hope the good people of Indiana realize this and not vote for Mourdock.

Reference: http://news.yahoo.com/mourdock-god-rape-leads-pregnancy-005625738—election.html

His statement and apparent narcissistic views demonstrate that the political party who claims to be the moral majority are really morally bankrupt.

Is it any surprise that one of the clients of the recent infamous Maine Zumba prostitute is a former Republican mayor of the town. The list goes on and on regarding those who spew being moral feel what they say apply to others, not themselves.

Thus, it’s time to send a message to the Republican Party. Quit trying to dictate morality. We need to stop condoning such behavior, and the only way to get them to stop is to make sure that they are voted out of office and have little political influence. Maybe at that point, they can then start focusing on helping improve America rather than trying to enforce its own view of morality upon Americans.

This applies to Romney as well. While by his early political career, he sold himself as a moderate, changed to be an ardent conservative during the Republican primaries, and now trying to position himself as a moderate again, there are many reasons not to vote for Romney as I indicated in past posts. However, another reason is to send a message to the Republican Party that they are not fit to govern all Americans until they can learn to embrace all Americans.

And speaking of ignorance, it’s well known of Romney’s gaffe during the last debate where he stated “Syria is Iran’s route to the sea”.

Whooops. With getting such basic geography facts wrong, isn’t it even a bit scary that this person might be basing his decisions in office by wrong facts?

Oh, by the way, the only Senate nominee which Romney has created an ad for is Richard Mourdock. Of course, there’s no way that Romney would have known that Mourdock had such extreme views when Romney made his endorsement… which is a problem in itself, isn’t it? And it’s also interesting that Romney is still supporting Mourdock: “We disagree on the policy regarding exceptions for rape and incest, but still support him.” So even disagreement in views of rape and incest is not enough to stop endorsing a candidate.

• http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/iran-blog/2012/oct/23/romney-gaffe-syria-iran-route-to-sea
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/26/jon-stewart-mourdock-rape-comments_n_2022692.html
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5779129
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5776280
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5748957
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5731331
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5724900 6 months ago

Our country is at stake here. Do we want to go back? Back to women needing the permission of some man to work, or get contraception, or an abortion? Do we want the policies that brought us to the Great Recession? I don’t know about any of you but I had money in Wall St. and under Bush I lost half of it in a day. War is serious shit. People die. Think twice about this. One candidate holds consistent views and acts on them; the other changes with the sunlight. Who do you trust with your country? Our President has been called reprehensible names; his citizenship has been called into question by people who apparently don’t know that having one parent who is a citizen is all it takes. This is civics 101. We’re at a tipping point. The economy is turning around but it could still fail. War is receding but threats still abound. Integrity is essential in our leader. And voting is the only option. 7 months ago

I get that people have a difference of opinions about how this country should be governed. I get that people are fearful that we are spending our way toward some kind of undoing. I get that people are angry that they work hard and others just “get a check.” I get it. What I don’t get is how this translates into a blurring of church and state. I don’t get how denying women abortions or contraception helps the country. I don’t get why anyone in government belongs in our sex lives or how that gets us out of debt. I don’t get how a candidate who changes his positions dependent on his audience can garner trust or support. I don’t get how people can ignore the stated platforms of the two parties or somehow say they are both alike. And I don’t get how people can say with a straight face, “facts have a liberal bias.” Or accuse all media as being liberal, except, of course Fox, which is oh so unbiased! It just defies logic. Science means something. Facts are not subjective. Don’t vote for a label. Vote for a direction. And be clear where that direction leads. 7 months ago

By some accounts, Romney told 27 lies/myths/untruths/whatever you want to call them in the 38 minutes he spoke during the debate. That’s almost one per minute.

In my previous post, the fact that he said he’s been in business 25 years and has never heard of giving tax breaks to companies who open operations overseas is just one of them. Of course, it could be true that he didn’t know, but then it would also be true his 25 years in business means diddly-squat.

Another incident is when he bragged that his plan covers pre-conditions. Whooops, only if you keep the same insurance company… He sort of left that part out. Or is this another case where he “didn’t know”, even though it is his own plan?

Another incident is when he said during the debate “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief in the middle class, but I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high income people. High income people are doing fine in this economy… My #1 principle is that there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit… but I do want to reduce the burden paid by middle income Americans, and to do that, that means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high income Americans, so any language to the contrary is simply not accurate.” Ooops, during the Republican debates, he said “I said today that we are going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%, including the top 1%.”

I saw where someone made a comparison of Romney to Bill Murray’s character in Ground Hog Day. Every day is a new day for Romney to say whatever he wants, regardless of what he said the previous day, to see what gets him more votes. I can’t believe voters are going for this, but you get what you want. If people vote in Romney, we can expect another era like the Bush years.

Here is a YouTube video from the debate and the Republican debate:

Click on the above image for the video or from the list of references below.

In another of Romney’s statements which also got him style points: “I think about half of [the green firms Obama invested in], of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.” I’m not sure where Romney learned math, but it was 3 out of 26 or 11% went out of business. Oh yea, 11% is about half, right?

• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5776280
• http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/fact-check-romney-told-27-myths-38-minutes-during-debate?paging=off
• http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/opinion/krugman-romneys-sick-joke.html?_r=0
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2GQMiOEng8 7 months ago

Polls indicated that people felt Romney had a better performance than Obama in the first debate.

However, it seems like other Republican candidates, Romney doesn’t bother to let facts get in the way of arguing a point.

When Obama said that the US should stop giving tax breaks for companies opening plants overseas, Romney received style points for his response:

“(You) said you get a deduction for taking a plant overseas. Look, I’ve been in business for twenty-five years. I have no idea what you’re talking about. I maybe need to get a new accountant. But—but the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.”

Unfortunately for Romney, he is wrong. Closing this tax loophole is something which Republicans and Democrats have been discussing, but have not accomplished yet. Unfortunately for informed voters, the uninformed voters are swayed by Romney’s style points, not worrying about validating whether his statement is true or not.

The U.S. tax code has, since the 1980s, provided multinational corporations with tax breaks for moving jobs overseas. This was likely a case that Romney just didn’t know, even though this topic was debated in the Senate as recently as July 2012 when the Democrats tried to pass a bill called “Bring Jobs Home Act” which would give tax breaks for moving jobs back to the US but also would have rescind ed tax breaks for moving jobs overseas. And guess who blocked this bill? Right, the Republicans.

But back to Romney, how can we trust someone to know what the right thing to do is if he doesn’t even know what is going on? And the worse part about this exchange? The part where, if Romney truly was not aware of this, instead of stating how wrong something like this is, said that he should get a new accountant so that he can get even more tax breaks on his 14% income tax.

Reference: http://www.thenation.com/blog/170368/mitt-romney-debate-win-gives-obama-winning-issue

This leads me to the infamous 47% Romney quote. You know, the one where he said 47% of Americans are leaches because they believe they are deserving of government hand outs:

“All right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what … These are people who pay no income tax”

He tried to explain away an earlier infamous quote that he doesn’t worry about the poor because they have a safety net. Based on the leaked video, he seems to indicate he doesn’t worry about the poor because he feels they are freeloaders. Since he cannot convince them to stop being freeloaders, his job is not to worry about these people:

“[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

Romney made it sound like they don’t pay any taxes. That’s not true. They may be paying other federal taxes, just not income tax. If we look at who the 47% are:

• About half don’t earn enough money for a household of their size to owe income tax. For example, a family of four earning less than $26,400 wouldn’t pay.
• About 22 percent get tax breaks for senior citizens that offset their income.
• About 15 percent get tax breaks for the working poor or low-income parents.
• Almost 3 percent get tax breaks for college tuition or other education expenses.

So all those freeloading senior citizens who worked 40 years of their lives should get off their behinds and earn their keep. And who cares if they hardly make enough money to make a living, it’s obviously more important to let the ultra-rich keep their tax breaks because that would be “more” fair.

Finally, actually, per the referenced article, about 4,000 of the households which did not pay any income tax last year actually made more than $1,000,000 but were able to have sufficient tax loopholes to not pay any income tax. Remember we are talking about people who EARNED over $1,000,000 in one year, not people who have over $1,000,000.

Anyway, even though the Romney camp tried to spin his 47% many different ways after it was released, he has now come out stating it was wrong, although he doesn’t elaborate. So which Romney are we supposed to believe? The one who seems to despise the poor because they don’t have to pay federal income tax or the one who says those statements were “wrong”. I think the only consistency about what Romney says is he’ll say whatever he thinks will get him more votes. He knows that despite his campaign’s original attempts to spin the quote, he was being slammed for his 47% comment. He now figured the best way to get over the quote is to admit it was wrong.

Reference: http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20120920/DA1DCK8O0.html

For a humorous look at his 47% quote, here is a clip from The Daily Show. And Jon Stewart discovers that Romney’s own dad was given government assistance when he first moved to the country.

Click on the above image for the first part of the video. The continuation of the video is at the following link.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-18-2012/the-millionaire-gaffemaker%2d%2d%2dmitt-romney-s-bed-head 7 months ago

All over the country legitimate voters are being hassled and in some cases kept from voting because the Republicans fear in-person voter fraud. (There have been fewer that 100 cases of this nationwide.) Yet, today the Republicans were found committing voter fraud on a wide scale. This is a once-proud party reduced to its idiot fringe. How can anyone take them seriously? I understand fiscal conservatism. This is not it! 7 months ago

On the day Romney was secretly taped dismissing half the country as dependent victims who don’t take personal responsibility, the woman who does my lawn calls from the ER at the local hospital. See, she has MS, like Romney’s wife. But unlike Ms. Romney, this woman has to cut my grass to make ends meet. When her MS acts up she has to go to the emergency room for treatment. I know she should probably “take personal responsibility” and take in some equine therapy like Ms. Romney does, but I guess she just likes being a victim and waiting around ERs. She was able to call because she gets a few free minutes on a crappy cell phone each month. She can’t pay for any real therapy, doesn’t get welfare, can’t pay her ER bills, but I guess we should kick her off food stamps. Never mind that MS keeps her from working any kind of regular job. Romney would just wish this woman out of existence. Does anyone think he’ll even try to represent her: female, alone, ill, poor? 8 months ago

I may have to update this over time, but if I don’t go ahead and post this, it may never get done.

I’ve spent a lot of time pointing out why a Romney/Ryan ticket would be the wrong choice (here, here, and here) if we want the US to be back on the right track. However, just because Romney/Ryan would be the wrong choice in itself does not mean Obama should be re-elected (except for the fact if Obama is not re-elected, that would mean Romney/Ryan would be in the White House). But ignoring that, this entry is to point out why Obama deserves re-election.

The Republican argument is that he hasn’t accomplished anything in his 4-years in office. From my point of view, I would not call the following as ’’not accomplishing anything’’:

• He stopped the freefall of the US economy to a point where we now have 30 consecutive months of job growth.
• Congress passed the Affordable Care Act which gives all Americans access to health care.
• He ended US military involvement in Iraq, bringing our overextended troops home.

If this is what he was able to accomplish while fighting tooth and nail against the Tea Party movement in the Republican party, then he will be able to continue to make progress in his second term as well.

“It’s the economy, stupid.”

The economy and in particular jobs are on everyone’s minds. Everyone has seen the anemic jobs reports in the last few months. The last one showing that only 90,000 net jobs were created last month. However, has everyone forgotten where we were 4 years ago? We were in a downward economic spiral. The economy was hemorrhaging 500,000 jobs per month! Did everyone forget that Obama inherited an economy which was losing over a million jobs just in the first few months in office? If anyone asked back then what people would feel about 30 consecutive months of jobs growth, I am sure everyone would have been relieved and ecstatic.

The above chart only goes to January, but the positive job growth has continued every month since January. You can see the what kind of situation Obama inherited from the Bush era and how it’s turned around.

Even though last month’s numbers were disappointing and lower than expected, it should be noted that there was not a big stock market sell off. There are a lot of rich people who make a lot of money off of the stock market, and if the jobs report was a premonition for some economic disaster, those people who make money in the stock market did not see it. The reason there was not a sell off is because people already expected a weak August jobs number and the lowered number was still within the range of expectation. The jobs report did not provide any new information which wasn’t already expected and wasn’t already factored into the market.

In addition, there might be some good news in the horizon regarding jobs. Obviously, this is only speculation, but productivity is still high. You know, this is how companies ask the current workforce to work harder, so that those companies do not have to hire more people. (In my particular company, we’ve been “asked” to work a minimum of 20% overtime per week, every week.) Since many companies are still showing good sales, at some point, companies will have to hire more people. You can only ask your current workforce to do so much. In addition, Automatic Data Processing reported that private businesses added 201,000 jobs in August. As counting jobs is not an exact science, the ADP is actually considered a more accurate number. However, the way the US government does it remains the same way it has done it for many years. Therefore, comparisons should be made only with similar metrics.

• http://www.marketwatch.com/story/overworked-employees-may-see-relief-in-new-hiring-2012-09-06
• http://www.marketwatch.com/story/private-payrolls-post-largest-gain-in-five-months-2012-09-06
• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5474107

“Obama is anti-business”

I’m not sure why this point is ignored by most people but the Fortune 500 companies in the US last year posted a record profit of $825 billion. That’s 20% higher than the best year under Bush. The economy actually can’t be that bad if companies are making record profits. And while corporate profits are at all-time highs, wages are relatively speaking at all time lows. And this isn’t class warfare?

And while the stock market is not an indication of the economy, but it is an indication what people with money think about the economy. The people who have money will quickly take their money out of the market if they think the economy will be tanking. Since Obama has taken office, the stock market has increased almost 55%. The recovery is even more incredible considering, like the job market, the market was still spiraling down when Obama took office and hit a low of 6626.94 in March 2009. Those were extremely frightening days as people watched their retirement funds getting wiped out.

• http://www.43things.com/entries/view/5653999
• http://www.alternet.org/story/156042/corporate_profits_at_all-time_high%3B_wages_at_all-time_low%3A_can_we_call_it_class_war_yet

“Obama has increased our national debt…”

For people who do not want to ignore the facts, do you know which president has the lowest increase in national spending since President Eisenhower? You guessed it. Obama. How could this be when we are facing record deficits? The record deficits actually came from Bush. You have to remember that when a president takes office (such as Obama in 2009), the 2009 budget is actually inherited from Bush. Obama did not set the budget for 2009, Bush did. Of course, there are the arguments that the budget came from the House, which is true, but Bush could have vetoed the budget. The Republicans had no ideas on what to do, so he didn’t.

• http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

Here is a pre-Democratic Convention speech by Obama that we need to finish what we started:

(OK, obviously this dog is not Bo and has nothing to do with the video but still, this is a nice picture.)

And if you’d like a more entertaining view of a case for Barack Obama, here is the Obama girl singing she still has a crush on him.

Click on the above images for the videos. 8 months ago

I hate that this election is likely to be swayed, not by reasoned argument, but by the purchase of millions of dollars in political ads backed by billionaires that see this as an investment in protecting their artificially low tax rates. Politicians who are bought and paid for don’t do the people’s business; they look after those who own them. I hope the middle class sees through these “empty chairs” and pays attention to the real facts. And even more than this I hope they see that this is not just the 2% against the other 98% but is for the heart and soul of this country. Who are we? What do we value? When we achieve success do we reach back with an open hand as Michelle said the other night, or do we simply go on with the attitude of “I’ve got mine”?

Do we face our problems honestly, squarely, fairly, and with open discussion and compromise or do we do it in backrooms with pay-offs and secrecy? What kind of leader do we want? One who flies another nation’s flag on his boat? One who hides his record as Governor and as CEO? One who releases or hides his taxes?

People have to vote to preserve that right. Independent sources have found about 89 cases of voter fraud across the country. Hardly a massive problem and yet large numbers of voters without the ability to get the proper ID will be disenfranchised. You see, they’re not likely to be rich or even middle class, so to some they don’t count. So vote. Please vote. And vote for the America you want your children to grow up in. 8 months ago

http://www.assistedlivingofflorida.com This industry is going to be hit hard by this in a few years 8 months ago