I posted this as a comment in another diary and it was suggested that I post it as a diary of its own.
These are the questions that I would ask the ex-governor of Florida in his quest for the office of President of the United States.
I understand that the likelihood of anyone asking any of these questions is zero.
The GOOPERs will try to enact legislation in PA, NC, VA, OH and FL to split the electoral votes by Congressional district.
President Obama has proved that a strong ground game in a key counties can get all those states electoral votes
This allows VA and NC (formerly deep red states) to become competitive. GA will join that list. The GOP has no offsetting advantage in any blue state.
The only solution the GOOPERs have is to change the winner take all and implement proportional voting by Congressional district (similar to what Maine and Nebraska have) PA tried doing this earlier this year. The GOOPERs tried it in CA also.
Through gerrymandering, the GOOPERs can dilute Latino and African American voters.
The GOOPERs can't win with the current electoral college set up. They can't win the popular vote. This will be their final stand
Watching Chris Matthews today one could easily forget the role he played as water carrier for the right wing during the Clinton years.
During those embryonic days of the Internet in 1998, what we now call 'concern trolls' routinely cited Matthews attack on Clinton as representing the voice of true Democrats. They repeated that one who worked for Jimmy Carter and Tip O'Neil was pointing out that Clinton should be booted out of office.
Later, Matthews made no attempt to hide is dislike of VP Al Gore and his admiration of the AWOL drunk, GW Bush. Matthews, IIRC, said that VP Gore would have the indecency to take the oath of office if he lost the popular vote.
Thousands of Americans died because an AWOL drunk and his band of clowns were in power in 9/11/2001. Matthews did his level best to maker sure those clowns were in power. Let us not forget that unlike Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, the GOP was terrified of attacking Islamic fundamentalists The official policy of the GOP is to negotiate and grovel before terrorists.
Matthews lauded the AWOL drunk in 2003 after the Mission Accomplished banner.
Let the record show, that Matthews was a strong supporter for nearly 10 years of the likes of "GOP before USA" types as Dan Burton, Chuckie Krauthammer, and Dan Senor.
All patriotic Americans should shudder that the MSNBC carries the ilk of Matthews not once but twice every day,
Would that we had someone like the Saint Ronald of Reagan to deal with today's problems. His solutions to the problems of the 1980s still affect the lives of every American today. Would that more Americans heed the advice of the Nawab of the GOP, Grover Norquist, and reflect on how the Saint's solution impact us and what we can learn.
The National Debt. The Saint Ronald of Reagan signed into law the largest tax increase in US history (as a % of GDP), a record that still stands, and still managed to increase the national debt by 78% in his first term. The Kenyan Muslim Terrorist signed into law no tax increase and only managed to increase the debt by 50%.
Iran. The Saint Ronald of Reagan knew how to deal with the Shia fundamentalists. After they released our hostages in 1981, and despite his campaign rhetoric, the Saint did nothing. When the Iranians seized more hostages, the Saint went into action. He sent a planeload of arms, a cake shaped like a key, and a Bible and begged the Iranians to release our hostages. Would that the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist have such confidence in dealing with Iran today.
Middle East. We know that there are Sunni and Shia. When Sunni fundamentalists went on a rampage, the Saint was there. The Saint Ronald of Reagan provided weapons, training, and funding to help establish the organizations that have since killed tens of thousands in terrorists attacks. The Saint compared Islamic fundamentalists to our Founding Fathers. The Saint dedicated a space shuttle to them. The Saint invited Islamic fundamentalists to the White House for photo ops and tea. Would that the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist had such class and dignity and know how to use a thundering velvet hand.
Banking System. The Saint Ronald of Reagan would not allow banks to fail (especially in an election year). He created the Too Big To Fail Policy. Why should a bank fail because of management incompetence when the US Treasury was around. The Reagan Doctrine (starting with Continental Illinois Bank in 1984) said that the taxpayer would gladly absorb any loss caused by management greed and / or incompetence. The legacy of that policy shines in the zombie banks that now take tens of trillions in taxpayer subsidies. Would that the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist have such economic wisdom.
The typical GOOPER strategy since 1968 has been to work in secret to derail / damage US policy to help win an election. From Nixon to Reagan to Bush (pere and fils), the record is compelling. Interesting to note that the 'he is not a US citizen' tactic actually started in 1992 against Bill Clinton -- but I digress.
Romney's public attempt to damage the USA seems out of character. While this list is familiar to all, I produce it below the fold for the record.
Glen Hubbard, Willard Romney's Chief Economic Advisor wrote in 2003:
"my assessment of the firm’s liquidity risk management practices leads me to conclude that a “liquidity crisis” for Fannie Mae is an extremely remote possibility."
"These facts suggest that Fannie Mae’s overall asset risk is lower than that of other financial institutions."
"Fannie Mae has procedures in place to measure and manage its market and credit risk"
"To summarize, the discussion above suggests that Fannie Mae’s assets are more transparent, more easily priced, and more marketable and actively traded than those of
Why can't we refer to Mitt Romney as "policy polygamist" given his multiple stances on various public policy issues?
Why can't we link Newt Gingrich and Hayley Barbour (Barbour was RNC chairman in 1994) and refer to the "Barbourous" era in Republican politics
Why can't we say that Sarah Palin is promiscuous with the facts (I have no idea what that means, but it sounds good)
Second attempt at this diary.
Under George W. Bush, the number of people on 'food stamps' increased 95%
In his first term alone, the number of people on 'food stamps' increased by 45%
Under William J. Clinton, the number of people on 'food stamps' dropped by 45%
The concern for work ethic seems to be an new phenomenon in SC. In 2004 and 2008, the massive increase in people on 'food stamps' didn't matter in their choice for President.
Also, the total spent on 'food stamps' since 1969 is around $850 billion. In January 2009 (days before the inauguration of the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist Socialist), Bush II provided nearly $500 billion in taxpayer guarantees to the share holders of Bank of America and Citibank. In two days, Bush (the favorite of the SC voters) handed more than half the money spent on 'food stamps' over the previous 40 years. The good people of South Carolina rightly blame the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist Socialists for what happened prior to his inauguration.
I dare anyone in the media to ask why the people of SC twice voted for a 'man' under whom the number of 'food stamp' recipients doubled and who handed over $500 billion in taxpayer money to two banks (one of which has a big influence in the economy of SC).
The link for any member of the media
Treason Thy Name is GOP
In FY 2001 (The AWOL Drunk is cowering in his bunker), 17.3 million people on 'food stamps'
In FY 2009 (OBL is still enjoying the good life in a Pakistani military cantonment and his tab picked by the US taxpayer), 33.7 million people on 'food stamps'
An increase of 95%during the regime of our MBA/War Hero President.
I dare a single news source to do this basic analysis and confront Fatboy with the numbers.
But Fatboy rests comfortably knowing John King and Erin Burnette don't know how to use a search engine.
And also have a member of the media point out to Fatboy that in the days before the inauguration of Obama, Bush gave $500 billion in free insurance to the share holders of Citibank and Bank of America. In two days, Bush gave 20 years of what was spent on 'food stamps' to two private enterprises.
The debate over 'free markets', 'job creation at Bain Capital' is akin to debating the role played by Bozo the Clown in drafting the Constitution.
Other than GOOPERs and their fellow travelers in the media, everyone knows that the US Government is largely responsible for our modern economy. The transcontinental railroad, the telegraph, Panama Canal, land grant universities, airplanes, airlines, transistors, computers all result from the heavy hand of the federal government. We are indeed fortunate that the Saint Ronald of Reagan and the Nawab of the GOP, Grover Norquist were not around in the 19th century.
And it is not just the US government. This continent was discovered when the Spanish Government funded Columbus' voyages. The Bain Capitals of the 15th century would only provide a portion of the funds needed. Queen Isabella gave the rest.
Alexander Graham Bell started what became Bell Labs with a grant from the French government.
Transistors, delta wing technology, jet engines were all developed in Germany with the assistance of both the pre-war and Nazi governments.
Silicon Valley exists because of the federal government. MIT and the UCal systems were started with land grant funds from the federal government. The research that led to transistors came form funds provided by the War Department to counter and then improve radar.
The missile and space program provided both the seed funding and customers for the nascent computer (both hardware and software) industries.
Alas, the Saint Ronald of Reagan, voters in the US South, the Nawab and the Begum Grover Norquist have done their best to impair the greatest generator of jobs the world has ever seen.
All this talk from Gov. Romney about how he can directly apply the skills he acquired at Bain Capital in creating 100,000+ jobs reminds me of the hubris exhibited by Robert McNamara in the 1960s and our first MBA President, Bush II and the horrors their policies inflicted on the world.
Romney actually combines the worst traits of McNamara and Bush. McNamara and Romney differ from Bush in that they both had a record of success in the private sector that elevated their sense of confidence. Romney sounds as if he actually believes that he personally created 100,000+ jobs. Romney and Bush are similar in that they both grew up as sons of privilege yet believe themselves to be self made men. Romney sounds as if he actually believes that growing up as the son of the chairman of AMC and the governor of Michigan gave him no advantages in life.
Regardless, the record of the last 60 years shows that attempting to implement policies and procedures that might have worked in the private sector have had catastrophic consequences when used to implement foreign or domestic policy.
Indeed, the mindset of a private sector tycoon is the opposite of what is needed in government
What venture capitalist invested to create the transcontinental railroad, lay telegraph lines, build the Panama Canal, electrify the Tennessee Valley, send a man to the moon? The venture capitalists were around back then and they shunned the very projects that made the USA the great economic power. Go back even further, venture capitalists could not fund Columbus' voyage in 1492. The risks were too great. Let us be grateful that Queen Isabella did not have the VC mindset of a Gov. Romney.
Private sector experience is equally irrelevant in prosecuting wars. MBAs are taught that any problem can be solved by throwing enough resources. Alas, we learned from Vietnam and Iraq and Afghanistan that is not always the case.
At, least I hope that the American voter has learned that lesson.
President Obama is set to announce a new mortgage plan where homeowners home values far below their mortgage principal balance will be allowed to re-finance at lower rates.
The GOOPERs, the media, the Wall Street Welfare Queens will rail against 'socialism'. Rick Santelli will scream that George Washington never would have tolerated such an action and will wax nostalgic about how Ronald Reagan never bailed anyone out.
The reality is this -- the plan is a nothing more than a backdoor bailout of Bank of America. Right now, BAC faces massive losses from mortgage 'put backs' -- Fannie/Freddie can demand payment from fraudulently issued mortgages by Countrywide. That number totals in the tens of billions. Any mortgage that is re-financed now will have its 'put back' extinguished. And the new mortgage has no 'put back' provision.
This is yet another massive transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to the banks.
For the life of me, I can't understand why President Obama would sign off yet another bailout of the banks and get hit by the right.