Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Don't Know Much about Geography ...


This is one of the memes coming out of last night's debate.  The other is the "horses and bayonettes" comment in regard to Romney comparing today's navy with that of 1917.  One really has to wonder what the strategy was here, because Republicans have long saw Foreign Policy as their turf, but here was Romney conceding point after point to Obama, offering very little resistance.  This put off right wing pundits like Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin, but surprisingly the mainstream media viewed this passive performance as part of Romney's strategy to protect his lead in the Gallup Poll, which is 7 days behind other polls.  Jeff Greenfield seems to think this assumed strategy may backfire, as Romney did little to distinguish himself in last night's debate.

38 comments:

  1. Steve Schmidt believed the campaign wanted to make him look as acceptable and mild mannered as possible to the broadest possible audience. And they assumed (he believes) that no one would know the difference.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And I should add not the saber-rattling war monger as he has appeared.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In my opinion Romney did nothing to help his cause last night. Whether the imbecilic undecided voters who are holding the rest of the country hostage noticed how completely unprepared and in over his head Romney was is anyone's guess. I hate to say it, but this election is in the hands of morons who still haven't made up their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, it does seem pretty straight forward to anyone who pays any attention at all about what the issues are. But in defense of the morons, my guess is there are some people who like and/or voted last time for Obama and dislike Romney, but are still hurting in this economy, That might make it harder to decide.

    I did some canvassing for the dems a couple weeks ago and was surprised by some of the comments I heard particularly people clearly living right on the edge. Worse, were the people who said they don't vote. You can't complain if you don't vote, but the answer was they don't!


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what has Romney said about fixing the economy that those morons could possibly believe?

      Delete
    2. It's all about jobs -- or so he says ....

      Delete
  5. I have to wonder if it is "undecided" or simply persons who can't bring themselves to vote for either Obama or Romney. I felt the same way several times around, '88, '92, '96 and even 2000, although I now regret voting for Nader in 2000.

    I wasn't happy with Pere Bush, but at the same time I couldn't stand either Dukakis or Clinton. My first choices those years were Jesse Jackson and Paul Tsongas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have had to hold my nose while voting more than once, but I've always voted for one of the two candidates who had a chance of winning. A vote for third party candidate has never made sense to me. And a vote for Nader obviously helped Bush, although it wasn't crystal clear how much it would help him until after the fact.

      Delete
    2. ... which is why I say I regretted that choice, as I voted in Florida in 2000. As unappealing as Gore was at the time, Bush turned out to be a nightmare.

      Delete
  6. I have voted third party before at all levels, but in Montana it was always a given the republicans would win (or it has been). I was a big Jesse Jackson supporter, too. Felt like the first time since McGovern I'd had a chance to vote for someone I actually wanted to win. Used to drive Robert crazy that I didn't like Humphrey -- who in retrospect wasn't as bad as he appeared to me at the time.

    I voted for Clinton both times but never liked him. The first vote was a proxy for Robert Reich, the second for Clinton's wife.

    Interesting how low Hilary fell in my eyes after her misguided (and totally uninformed) vote for the Iraq war. But I will be out there working for her next time. I think she may have learned her lesson -- at least I hope so. She sure has done a great job at the State Dept.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just looking at this overview gives you some idea of where the nation is, and some of these endorsed Obama last time. Salt Lake City is the most interesting:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/newspaper-endorsements-for-president-romney-or-obama/2012/10/23/85d9a948-1d62-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_gallery.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. I love how Fox Nation is running with the "Horses and Bayonets" comment,

    http://nation.foxnews.com/2012-presidential-debates/2012/10/22/obama-trivializes-us-navy-bayonet-joke

    can anyone take this "news" seriously?

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Dallas and Orlando papers going for Romney is a bit of a surprise, but I don't think a newspaper endorsement carries much weight these days. I'm waiting for Trump's "Octsurprise." ; )

    ReplyDelete
  10. Trump goes for the white guy from America -- what do you think?

    I actually thought this one in particular was interesting because as they write, Utah is in a position to know Romney, and like him.

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html

    But it is interesting to read some of the endorsements for the other side. We can't pretend that these papers don't know the "issues" at stake.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I assume they know the issues, but the endorsements are a reflection of the editorial boards and the newspaper syndicates they represent. Salt Lake City appears to be a fairly liberal place, unlike the rest of Utah. I remember Obama doing well in SLC the first time around, and probably will do well again.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Agreed, but these are the arguments that have convinced half America (alas).

    ReplyDelete
  13. Trump must truly be desperate for attention, if this is his "octsurprise,"

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/24/donald-trump-announcement_n_2009914.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. I like the intro -- if you don't feel like clicking on this ... I don't.

    I always assumed he was looking for the born in Africa application letter, but the assumption apparently is that Obama got in because of affirmative action. Otherwise, unlike someone like George Jr. (who got into Yale through white people's affirmative action), Obama is not smart enough to have gained admission to the schools he attended. This from a man who is only smart enough to get national media attention by jumping up and down from time to time and flipping his hair.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I couldn't find where this was first mentioned, so will slip it in here since Romney represents the 1% so well.

    I heard most of the Bill Moyers show on the radio en route to a meeting on Wednesday. Both Taibbi and and Freeland were great. I think of her as a member of the financial press which sort of explains her access I guess -- or maybe former access. They both really got at the culture of that very elite, and how they view themselves as the "job creators."

    I was intrigued that Moyers is going to start a book club and Freeland's book will be their first read. Might be fun to read that one.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Also saw Colin Powell's very measured, very wise endorsement of Obama on the news last night. And Carolyn Kennedy is going out to campaign. I think people are feeling the tightness of the race and wondering what in the world America is thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well, at least Romney can count on Meat Loaf's endorsement:

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/meat-loaf-backs-romney-citing-candidate-backbone-024350047--election.html


    Meat Loaf has a long history of drug addiction and alcoholism. He "offered a meandering and sometimes slurred endorsement of the GOP nominee" who, like him, dodged the draft in the 1960s.

    No surprise that these two birds of a feather flock together.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think Obama was counting on Meatloaf. The Republicans always put together a rogues' morgue of celebrity endorsement. Meatloaf was sharing the stage with two guys from the country group, Alabama, who I think only play at Mullet festivals and Myrtle Beach these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess I should have said gallery, but these guys look like zombies.

      Delete
    2. Oh, yeah, just one of the guys! That is hysterical.

      Delete
    3. " The Republicans always put together a rogues' morgue of celebrity endorsement "


      Voter fraud alert:


      https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/527356_462675207118346_544748910_n.jpg



      Meatloaf isn't even registered in his own state. That's a fine endorsement for Romney. ;)

      Delete
  19. Freeland would be interesting. I was also intrigued by these two books put out by Verso books,

    http://www.versobooks.com/books/1151-the-communist-horizon

    http://www.versobooks.com/books/1145-the-making-of-global-capitalism

    Looks like a truly "liberal" press.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Romney's deregulations and the meningitis outbreak:


    The fatal meningitis epidemic sweeping the United States can now be traced to the failure of then-Gov. Mitt Romney to adequately regulate the Massachusetts pharmaceutical company that is being blamed for the deaths.

    At least 344 people in 18 states have been infected by the growing public health crisis and 25 have died so far.

    But the epidemic may also play a role in the presidential campaign, now that state records reveal that a Massachusetts regulatory agency found that the New England Compounding Co., the pharmaceutical company tied to the epidemic, repeatedly failed to meet accepted standards in 2004 — but a reprimand was withdrawn by the Romney administration in apparent deference to the company’s business interests.

    “It goes all the way up to Mitt Romney,” said Alyson Olive''



    http://www.salon.com/2012/10/30/romneys_lax_regulation_fueled_meningitis_outbreak/



    More deregulation = more deaths.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ditto on why we have government agencies. I want to know that the food and drug supply is safe. Republicans on the other hand assume that with enough deaths, the market will sort itself out.

      Delete
  21. Republican governor Christie of New Jersey was Obama's biggest critic (biggest in more ways than one) is now his pal:


    http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/21795_10151319714031457_1494151824_n.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  22. Heres an interesting article on the origins of the Book of Mormon:

    http://lareviewofbooks.org/article.php?id=1135

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for that link - very interesting article and commentary which follow.

      While I have no expertise on the subject, there are some claims made by Mormons apologists which make absolutely no sense. One claim which often appears in You Tube is that those Israelite refugees from 600BC became the Olmecs. But history clearly shows that their origins can be traced to many hundreds of years before that era. Further, there are no Hebraic inscriptions on the statuary and other artifacts left behind by those pre-Aztecs, none of which even remotely resemble extant arts created by Hebrews.

      Mormons apologetics make for interesting reading. But even a rank amateur like me can readily ascertain that they are all bogus having no historical merit whatsoever.

      Delete
  23. I think De Voto drew the analogy between Bunyan and Joseph Smith as well, but can't be sure. Anyway, I had heard of this connection.

    I heard an interesting new term (atleast for me)- "Paleo Evangelists,"

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2012/10/paleo-evangelicals-as-reluctant-republicans/

    at first I thought this was some kind of Christian archaeological team, similar to the Mormons digging around in Central America, but apparently they are against blending American civil history with religion, and have taken exception to Barton's book on Jefferson, among other attempts to fuse the Founding fathers with Evangelism.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It is interesting the depth to which people will go (sometimes literally) to "prove" their religion.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I had heard the Bunyon story, too, but had long ago forgotten it. Maybe from DeVoto as you say. But I love the whole American aspect of the story. And the comments are fascinating as well.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Republican are vainly trying to make an issue of what they call Benghazigate. They even say Obama should be impeached and put on trial for negligent murder of 4 Americans.

    But if that is the case, bearing in mind that 31 Americans were killed in embassy attacks under Bush and that there is no statute of limitations on murder, this would put Bush into deep trouble:

    https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/578554_557231807635839_2014973682_n.jpg



    Even the right wing sellout artist Geraldo Rivera admits the Fox network is lying about all this:


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/geraldo-rivera-benghazi-eric-bolling_n_2064006.html

    ReplyDelete
  27. I heard an interesting discussion on NPR today -- the Benghazi outpost was really a CIA operating base, and not technically an embassy, so they have totally different rules for protection. And there wouldn't be a military presence there for obvious reasons.

    One of the speakers (one was David Sanger and a couple others) noted that the ambassador was probably there because it was the safest place in the area, but not because it was an official post. That could account for some of the initial vagueness about what was going on there.

    ReplyDelete
  28. It was purely an attempt to make a mountain out of a mole hill in the last month of the election. I sympathize with those close to the Americans who were killed, but even the mother of the killed Navy Seal, Glen Doherty, told Romney to back off,

    http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/10/986301/romney-navy-seal-mother-libya/

    ReplyDelete
  29. http://www.tomkerrigan.net/cartoon.MittSpray.jpg


    Liar, liar!

    ReplyDelete