Cheney concluded: “But there’s no question but that we’re weaker than we were when Barack Obama took office. And if he has four more years, we may well be unrecognizable.”
An Associated Press fact check last week determined that President Obama never apologized for the United States or expressed sympathy for the people who attacked the U.S. embassy in Libya.
“The claim that Obama repeatedly has apologized for the United States is not borne out by the facts, especially if his full quotes are viewed in context,” Washington Post fact checkers wrote in 2011. “Note to GOP speechwriters and campaign ad makers: The apology tour never happened.”
As for the claim that Obama “abandoned” Czechoslovakia, that country was dissolved in 1992 — over 16 years before he took office.
The sickest part is how she blames him for doing things he didn’t do to countries that don’t exist. I will say though…at the end of this episode Jake Tapper came out and said how objective he was because he doesn’t vote. It would violate his integrity. Quick question…doesn’t airing blatant lies without correction violate some ethical standards? Or is it only when you invite someone back who displays this behavior that it becomes an endorsement of said behavior?
Here’s the problem with forcing “balance” upon yourself in today’s media climate — you end up with mediocre employees who don’t deserve the job they have, all so you can proudly say “we represent all sides … we’re Balanced!”
Case in point: Jennifer Rubin, “conservative blogger at @WashingtonPost’s Right Turn, recovering lawyer and friend of @Israel.” She’s a Republican shill, which is fine and all, but she’s so bad at it that it continues to give her paper a bulls-eye and a bad name.
“Carried interest was intended to motivate managers going forward,” said Victor Fleischer, an expert in carried interest at the University of Colorado law school. “In cases like the Romneys, it just shows it is really all about fancy tax planning. It’s not motivating managers going forward. Not only is Mitt not providing any future services, Ann never did.”
In recent years, the carried-interest deduction has proved controversial on Capitol Hill. There have been several unsuccessful efforts to eliminate the tax break, which critics say improperly treats profits like capital gains, and tax these earnings as ordinary income at 35 percent.
Some tax experts worry that the arrangements Romney benefits from set a bad precedent for a president. “He looks for every tax angle to a degree that is unbecoming in someone who would be the executive in command of the administrative apparatus that enforces the tax law,” said Lee Sheppard, a tax lawyer and contributing editor for Tax Analysts, a publication for accounting and legal professionals.
Only the rich and connected get to treat their labor as if it were capital (and thus get a 50%+ “motivational” tax break) . This is *the* problem, not a solution.
After that I learned to appreciate Obama in a different way. I appreciated that he inhabited a world in which idealism — and ideology — could never by sheer force of will overcome objective reality, and the hard compromises, uneasy truces, and constant errors that must be made to live in that world. I especially felt better about this position when I learned that John McCain carried an indian feather around FOR LUCK. This was not how I wanted my country run. By myth and superstition and magic tokens.
It just makes a whole more sense that trying to paint him as a radical. Unfortunately for many on the left, that’s not good enough, and appears to be the same as Romney. As Hodgman notes, that’s generally loser talk.
And make no mistake, the rational folks are losing this country…one little election at a time.
Those on the right who began wishing in 1980 to dismantle the Great Society, de-regulate and de-unionize business, and starve the beast of the federal government are, you may have noticed, very close to succeeding. I am not saying this to scare you; maybe you agree with them. But the point is that it happened because they endured the compromises, hypocrisies, and retreats needed to get the wins, and profoundly change policy in ways we barely noticed — the repeal of Glass-Steagall; the massive tax cuts; the empowerment of corporations as political donors. These things did not happen because conservatives who believed in them kicked Reagan out of office in 1984 for failing to outlaw abortion immediately. It happened because they won elections.
Mitt Romney, sitting alongside his wife, appeared taken aback by the story, leading CBS interviewer Scott Pelley to ask if he’d heard that story before.
“I hadn’t heard the story about Craig coming home from school that day and being so devastated,” said the presumptive GOP nominee. “I’m not surprised. He’s a very tender heart and a wonderful father today himself.”
As to the title…if abortion is murder…miscarriage is manslaughter. If this was a real person that died, as the Republicans want to change the law to say it was, there should be an investigation.
Was it irresponsible actions that led to the death? An absent father? My guess is that conservatives will whine more about the tone of this post than the obvious and impssible legal situations their own policies would create (of which the post title is one).
McDonnell: We’re affirming that we’re a pro-life party.The details certainly are left to Congress and, ultimately, to the states and the people on how they ratify such an amendment. More importantly, what they do at the state level.
Stephanapoulous: So is the party for a rape exception or not?
McDonnell: The party didn’t make any judgment on that. It’s a general proposition to say we support human life. The rest of the details are up to the states and the people respectively, George. That’s simply not covered.
On top of that we also get this wonderful euphemism for rape from none other than Paul Ryan.
Here’s the problem…Republicans want to somehow claim that giving into religious extremists on birth control, outlawing all abortion (even in the case of “illegitimate methods of conception”), and bashing Obama’s achievements in gender equality is somehow *in support* of women, and it’s really the Democrats who are waging a “war on women”.
(As a quick aside, I find it hilarious that the champions of the annual TV-event, the “War on Christmas”, take such umbrage about the usage of the term “War on Women” to describe the methodical nature of Republican’s attempts to limit the rights and freedoms of women. It’d be more funny if it wasn’t so blatantly hypocritical…but I guess that’s why it *is* funny…so I’m left in something of a pickle in my not-so-quick aside.)
So, yea…there you have it. Sure, publicly Republicans denounce Todd Akin as an outlier…but the reality of the party’s platform is that it is 100% aligned with the heart of Akin’s comments; “Rape ain’t no excuse, no abortions for anyone…life for all.”
Yes, folks, for a little while in Florida this week, as bizarro universe melds with ours as religious leaders keeping secular employees from getting birth control is called “religious freedom” (as is banning the building of non-Christian places of worship), and “small government” is all about controlling what the majority of the population can and can’t do with their reproductive organs.
States have cut more than $1.6 billion in general funds from their state mental health agency budgets for mental health services since FY2009, a period during which demand for such services increased significantly. These cuts translate into loss of vital services such as housing, Assertive Community Treatment, access to psychiatric medications and crisis services.
Modest increases in state general fund mental health spending fail to compensate for the loss in federal Medicaid revenues that hit states due to reductions in federal Medicaid rates implemented at the end of June 2011. Moreover, to make up for these lost federal Medicaid revenues, states such as Arizona and Ohio have shifted state general fund mental health dollars to Medicaid recipients, leaving many non-Medicaid recipients with serious mental illness without services.
This has been a fairly consistent theme by Republicans. It’s a political move, built on rhetoric and repetition, designed to push the indredibly destructive idea that Obama isn’t really American and secretly hates the country. The entire birther movement is predicated on this assumption about the current President.
The sad part is how well it resonates with low-information and low-intelligence voters who have no functioning political memory (I.e. Obama is European for passing a stimulus…but Bush’s stimuli were all fine and dandy...just like Paul Ryan said at the time). Further to this point, if anyone brings up something Bush did in the context of Obama, it’s always about “blaming Bush”…even if one is simply pointing out what happened and what was said sometime during history.
Most of Obama’s voters — 73 percent — say they are voting “for” him rather than “against” Romney (23 percent). The reverse is true among Romney backers: 54 percent say their support is more “against” Obama rather than “for” Romney (40 percent).
The poll also indicates why Republicans are going after low-information voters. These are the ones that think approving a pipeline that will ship oil out of the country will somehow lower prices here.
Update: This has been flowing around…but recall what was said a mere four years ago…
I’d also wager, rather safely, that oil company profits, when reported, will once again be approaching record territory. A populace squeezed at the pump is looking to point a finger, and one particular media company in particular is more than happy to do so with every outlet at their disposal. They do, falsely claiming the same thing was done four years ago. I’ve already provided evidence that it is they who have changed their story.
Now let’s see how many gullible folks they convince that while they were wrong then, they are dead-on right now, and gas prices are actually singularly controlled by the President. Probably with a little lever or dial.