Skip to main content

So it looks like Mitt Romney has decided settled on a strategy for overcoming the leaked video of him writing off nearly half of all Americans: he's going to ignore it. Instead, he'll attack President Obama for something he said 14 years ago: that he believes in redistribution at least in so far as it gives everybody a fair shot at success.

As you can see at the top of the post, the RNC has already released an absurdly dramatic video that makes Tim Pawlenty's ads seem tame by comparison and earlier today the Romney campaign released a memo going after the 1998 audio clip:

In a newly-unearthed set of remarks, we can hear Barack Obama in his own words advocating for government as a means to redistribute wealth:
“[T]he trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot.”
Mitt Romney has a very different idea. He knows that we need to foster growth and create wealth, not redistribute wealth, if our economy is to grow the way it has in the past.
Of course, as I pointed out yesterday, what Obama said (again, 14 years ago) is something that almost all Americans agree with. It's the reason we have public schools and Medicaid. In fact, when Romney went on Fox yesterday to hype this audio clip, he said virtually the same thing:
I believe the right course for America is one where government steps in to help those that are in need. [...] And the right course to help them is not just to have government handing out but instead government helping people to get back to good jobs.  
So Romney says he thinks government should help people who are in need, but he also says he thinks government should also help those people get jobs. It's worth noting that's much less harsh than what he said behind closed doors, but if that's the position he's going to take now, it's hard to see how he can possibly justify any criticism of what Barack Obama said.

And again, I'll note Obama said those words 14 years ago. And to be clear, I'm not noting that to exonerate Obama—what he said is not at all controversial. I'm noting it to prove just how desperate Mitt Romney is.

Romney also took to the pages of USA Today, penning an op-ed promising explosive economic growth if people vote for him. The only problem is that he forgot to share any of the details of exactly how he'd accomplish that. His final paragraph read as follows:

My five-point plan will deliver the economic recovery we've all been waiting for and the jobs millions of Americans still need. This can be more than our hope; it can be our future. And it can start this November with your vote.
And that was literally as specific as it got. Romney said he has a five point plan. But didn't say what it was. He didn't even say where you could find it. But I will at least give Romney credit for this: as empty as his op-ed was, it still wasn't nearly as bad as the one he wrote in 2008, proposing his plan for the auto industry: to simply let Detroit go bankrupt.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Typical Romney (14+ / 0-)

    when you know your campaign is in trouble, instead of trying to address your trouble, you run from it and try to change the subject and try to play it to the media and on the campaign trail. Desperation I presume?

  •  My god that is a terrible awful ad. (13+ / 0-)

    Jesus Christ. These guys look like a half ass Senate campaign in Nevada.

    •  pitiful.... and something President Obama (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vote4Obamain2012, Judge Moonbox

      said, what, twelve years ago?

      They have nothing but desperation.
      And yet, almost 50% of the country still supports Mitt Romney.

      Teh stupid, it hurts.

      If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. John F. Kennedy ( inaugural address, January 20, 1961)

      by Outraged Mom on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:29:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If only everyone saw the world... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Judge Moonbox

      ...and government through the loony GOP base's distorted glasses.  Then EVERYONE would find Obama's sentiment to be HORRIBLE!

      Of course, if everyone (or even most people) saw the world that way, Obama would never have been elected in the first place, and I daresay America would fall apart.  But c'est la vie.

  •  Secret Plans ... (16+ / 0-)

    "To end the war in Vietnam"

    You know Romney is getting desperate when he pulls out the Nixon play book.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:45 AM PDT

  •  Romney's five point economic recovery plan (27+ / 0-)

    1) Elect me president and watch the magic happen
    2) See #1
    3) See #2
    4) See #3
    5) See #4

    "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

    by jkay on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:35:57 AM PDT

  •  I am Mitt Romney (18+ / 0-)

    and I promise that if I am elected YOUR kids WILL NEVER get a fair shot at success.

    Very inspiring message this douchebag has, don't you think.

  •  When their attack ad is actually.... not an attack (17+ / 0-)

    That signals that the wind has indeed been taken from the GOP's sails. An uncontroversial, optimistic video that includes helping all Americans versus Romney's classist, ignorant, hypocritical, and acerbic rant. Yeah, I'll take Obama any day in this life. I bid them farewell in these last six weeks.

    "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~Edward Abbey ////\\\\ "To be a poor man is hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships." ~W.E.B. DuBois

    by rovertheoctopus on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:37:13 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for the free publicity Mitt. (5+ / 0-)

      Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. John Leland

      by J Edward on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:49:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There are still a ton of hard core (0+ / 0-)

      red state types who hear the word "Socialist" and run to don their garlic necklaces.

      It seems the Romney campaign has (rather smartly, I think) decided to try and have Romney embrace his Thurston Howell/Gordon Gecko persona - hey, at least it gives him an identity, right?

      Problem is, that identity is only attractive to the "already have enoughs"...because in the video he pretty  much leaked his real attitude toward those who are struggling and dreaming of being in the "have" population...

      "When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him: 'Whose?' Don Marquis

      by hopesprings on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:03:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why does USA Today give him the space? (14+ / 0-)

    I could see if Romney had something new to say, especially a policy proposal or reaction to current event.  But the column reads like a press release straight from the campaign.

    On the other hand, subtly USA Today is letting us know that Romney still offers nothing new despite his campaign's repeated promise to re-invent him.  As the top comment to the USA Today piece says,

    Whatever dude... seriously... if you run the country like you run your campaign, we are all screwed.
  •  So is Romney advocating (12+ / 0-)

    Eliminating all taxes? The way I see it, that's the only way to avoid redistribution.

    Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

    by NMDad on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:37:37 AM PDT

    •  Or All Income? (3+ / 0-)

      We would be extremely competitive with the Chinese at those pay-rates.

    •  I see what you mean (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      J Edward

      but there's never an ideal, perfect world where redistribution doesn't happen. The question is when is it going to stop being sent upwards? Every time government makes a decision that involves money, goes to war, sets educational, environmental, transportation policy, or virtually any policy, it's directing wealth in one direction and not another.

      Romney fires people and then complains they don't pay taxes.

      by Red Bean on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:49:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not true. Setting educational, environmental, (0+ / 0-)

        transportation policy usually, or at least should barring cases of fraud, be distributing the wealth horizontally.

        Government creates jobs. Good government sponsored jobs create employment competition with the private sector on some level. Competition means the private sector has to offer better pay, benefits and the like.

        Government wealth distribution builds a robust middle class.

        Vote Tea Party Taliban! Bring the Burqa to America.

        by Pescadero Bill on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:57:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  nah- romney said just yesterday that people like (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      beltane, auapplemac

      paying taxes. well, he was talking about the 47%- romney thinks we are different

      "With malice toward none, with charity for all..." -Abraham Lincoln not a modern republican

      by live1 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:52:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If I am correct, the 47 percent number (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        spooks51, hopesprings

        actually probably does not include most of us. It is a real number but derived from two groups

        1. Who make less than 20k (so bad job bad wages)- yeah I could've said more "Elegantly" how you hate America and we owe you nothing, and was being "off the cuff" so just got caught saying what I thought

        2. The elderly

        He is confusing that with ppl that make money and still don't like him, like most ppl here.

      •  If people like paying taxes (0+ / 0-)

        Then why does he vociferously defend his right NOT to pay his own?

        "When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him: 'Whose?' Don Marquis

        by hopesprings on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:04:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Romney's got no counter-punch on this, NADA (7+ / 0-)

    80 % of Success is Just Showing Up ! ! !

    by Churchill on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:37:39 AM PDT

  •  Redistribution Resonates As A Dirty Word (12+ / 0-)

    Only with conservatives. Again he is trying to win the GOP nomination in the general election phase.

    •  and to bitter, white, male, high school graduates (7+ / 0-)

      It's a dog whistle that says loud and clear to them: "Undeserving and unworthy black and brown people are getting jobs they haven't earned."

      Warning: That light at the end of the tunnel just might be an oncoming train.

      by history first on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:55:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not just white males. There are plenty of low (0+ / 0-)

        learning women - waitresses, clerks, etc who immediately think of those on food stamps, in pubic housing, etc.

        They look at their lives and hate those that don't at least try.

        Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

        by auapplemac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:08:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This will resonate (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          hopesprings, auapplemac

          with people who have bought the Repug line that that the only thing standing between them and wealth is someone "mooching" off the govt.  These are people who make just enough to not qualify for these services but not enough to truly consider themselves middle-class.  My fear is that the only take away for voters like this is the line about 47% not paying taxes.  I live in a Southern red state and I've heard a lot of praise for Mittens for "speaking the truth"

          •  Funny story about that. (0+ / 0-)

            My stepkid goes to a very expensive private University.  I'm thinking it's probably as liberal as any University, but she's on the business track so guessing you'll find a lot of indoctrinated Repub kids in there.

            She came home for the first time for Thanksgiving freshman year, last year.  I asked her if any of her friends had been going to the Occupy protests in her city.  She said she knew one or two, but that's it.

            Then she asked (she's not very political at this stage in her life...and is very ambitious in terms of getting into a lucrative career) "My friend says that the Occupy Wall Street people want to make it a law that everyone has to be paid the same salary.  Is that true?"

            I nearly spit out my coffee.  I immediately corrected her and she nodded, saying, "Yeah, I told her that didn't sound right, but she kept insisting...."

            I asked her if she knew if her friend was on any kind of scholarship or loan program and she told me no, her parents are loaded.

            So there you have it.  Some Repub kid's parents tells their business major daughter that the Occupy people are going to prevent her from making the salary of her dreams.

            This is the mindset of the far "have it and don't want to share it" right.  Not that those less fortunate than they want a shot at being able to better themselves...but that those less fortunate than they want to take away what they have.

            This fear of the socialist masses climbing over the castle walls would be a winning strategy for Romney - if more people were in the "haves" category and actually had castle walls to climb over.  

            It is a terrible strategy for an era when many of us in the middle class now find ourselves struggling - tho we've been doing exactly all the right, prudent things that we always did.

            "When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him: 'Whose?' Don Marquis

            by hopesprings on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:15:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  If They Respond To It In That Way (0+ / 0-)

        they probably are not swing voters and can be counted on to vote Republican.

        •  There's redistribution and then there's (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Leo Flinnwood

          redistribution. Obama likes redistribution if it gives a poor kid a shot at getting out of poverty. Romney likes a different sort of redistribution: the kind that means a big new tax cut for Sheldon Adelson. So even if redistribution is as evil as the Republicans want us to think it is then it still boils down to a choice between Robin Hood (Obama) and Reverse Robin Hood (Romney). When the money-baggers started this class war they failed to consider that they are hopelessly outnumbered. So I'll throw out this question to anyone who has woodworking experience: should I choose oak for my guillotine project or will pine do in a pinch?

  •  What a loser. (5+ / 0-)

    What a desperate loser.

  •  I think we're seeing a spiral dive (10+ / 0-)

    He doesn't see anyway to pull out of this, and he's going to "auger in."  I'm just wondering where we'll find the wreckage.

  •  Taxations,roads, hiring Cops & firefighters...etc (8+ / 0-)

    are all part of Redistribution

    "Rick Perry talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans." --- James Carville

    by LaurenMonica on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:41:17 AM PDT

    •  It's how a society is built. A government can (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vote4Obamain2012, schnecke21

      collect fewer taxes and only offer a third class, desperately shabby society, or it can collect a fair share of the nation's aggregate wealth in taxes from the top earners down and create a first class, safe and efficient society.

      The wealthy don't create societies. The corporations don't create societies.

      Government creates the society we call America.

      Vote Tea Party Taliban! Bring the Burqa to America.

      by Pescadero Bill on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:05:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why doesn't he just say: "I am Sparticus"....and (5+ / 0-)

    we can all assume everything will be fine????

    •  Because he is not f*cking Spartacus (5+ / 0-)

      Mitt is like Crassisus.

      •  I'd Say given the Chance . . .Tiberius (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Phil S 33, MadRuth, beltane, Aquarius40, Matt Z

        Although NOT a chance he will have, more one he already played out?

        Tiberius was Emperor after Augustus, from 14 to 37, and did not care for the job. All he wanted was the luxury, and left the Senate to do all the ruling. The Senate despised him for this, and told the criticized him to the Roman populace, until he no longer trusted his safety in Rome and left for the island of Capri. He erected statues of his captain of the Guard, Lucius Sejanus, all over the city, and gave all the tasks of ruling to him. Tiberius more or less retired to Capri for the rest of his long life, only returning to Rome a few times.

        While he lived on Capri, he had a huge villa built for him, Villa Jovis, the Villa of Jove (Jupiter), in which he indulged his [unsavory non-comparison other than indulging in Mansions]

        - Considered the Senate Ran mass with their over-veto record seems fair
        •  I vote for Caligula (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ClevelandAttorney, spooks51, Matt Z

          who said

          “I wish Rome had but one neck, so that I could cut off all their heads with one blow!”

          If the Republicans ever find out that Barack Obama favors respiration, we'll be a one-party system inside two minutes. - Alan Lewis

          by MadRuth on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:54:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I gotcha but also wishes his Axe only cut (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            47% of the way into said neck? I still take Tiberius for only wanting the luxury, and letting lackies do whatever while he "indulged himself" in things I didn't want to post . . .

            And I think Pissing off the Senate is pretty comparable to what we know.

            •  I first heard this quote (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              when I watched the wonderful series "I Claudius".  Caligula was presiding over some games at the Circus Maximus and refused to allow a popular gladiator to live.  He got booed by the hoi polloi and said the bit about one neck.  When I researched the quote, however, it seems the lines were said privately. So I concede your point about Tiberius.  i always thought W was the perfect candidate for Caligula, anyway.

              If the Republicans ever find out that Barack Obama favors respiration, we'll be a one-party system inside two minutes. - Alan Lewis

              by MadRuth on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:06:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I will concede the general point (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                if you take away kill, rape etc and replace with ignore, get rid of programs helping etc, it is rather scary what comparable odd traits there are.

                Yes. I'd say Caligula-W is close/good with a bit of Nero and Elagabalus (spelling?) I think was the one who basically put down non-existant rebellions and historians credit with the Crisis of the Third Century. (I don't think W wanted to be a woman though, cowboy, jet-fighter, literate, etc. but don't recall anything womanly except holding hands etc with the Saudis).

            •  Well I guess in thinking about it really he wasnt (0+ / 0-)

              the only emperor. Just to play in the palace.

              Sorry, almost got a dual Major or Minor in hist, but was too lazy as only the Roman Hist and WWII classes interested me.

              But so many to chose from who if it were acceptable to just kill people I wonder how far off (I suppose stating you do not plan on "ruling" as I am sure Mitt sees is close enough).


              Nero used the office of emperor to suit his desire for an opulent lifestyle, and had absolutely no care for the welfare of the people. [SNIP stuff about him killing mother, and anyone who went against him]

              The Great Fire of Rome, in 64, has given rise to the legend that Nero fiddled while Rome burned. This is not true. He was away in Antium (Anzio), and returned to Rome to try to have the fire put out. He even paid for this out of his own pocket. [but]

              fire largely destroyed the city center [and homes], and Nero had a large part of this destruction rebuilt as his Domus Aurea. This was his gift to himself, a gigantic palatial garden complex of 100 to 300 acres, for which he heavily taxed the citizens throughout the Empire.

               His Guards deserted him in the palace, and he fled to a nearby villa, where a messenger appeared to tell him that the Senate had declared him a public enemy, whom they would beat to death. He had a grave dug, while he repeated, “What an artist dies within me!”

              Tough though, so many undesirables: Commodus wanting center stage, abusing animals, disgusting his constituents, and hated those that probably depended on the state (crippled etc . . .)
              Commodus once ordered all the cripples, hunchbacks, and generally undesirables in the city to be rounded up, thrown into the arena, and forced to hack one another to death with meat cleavers.
              He especially adored killing animals, and killed 100 lions in one day, to the spectators’ disgust. He killed three elephants singlehanded in the arena, beheaded an ostrich and laughed at the senators attending, brandishing the head and motioning that they were next. He speared a giraffe to death, an animal which the spectators did not see as fearsome at all.
              I am sure the giraffe "enjoyed it".


              Did have the lifestyle thing make him go crazy.

              For the first seven months or so, he was loved by all. He paid handsome bonuses to the military, to get them on his side, and recalled many whom Augustus and Tiberias exiled.

              But he became very sick in October of 37, and the disease has never been pinned down. Philo blames it on his extravagant lifestyle of too much food, wine, and sex. After the disease passed and Caligula made a full recovery, he had turned into one of the most evil men in human history.

              In the end I say Tiberius.
  •  I hear he pals around with terrorists (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    spooks51, Matt Z

    Or is that next week?  

    When the truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:41:42 AM PDT

  •  That's all he's got? (8+ / 0-)

    It's amazing how anemic Romney's response to release of the video has been.

    If his campaign had been paying attention they would have known this video was coming for some time. He had weeks - literally weeks - to formulate a response. And when it actually broke, his campaign just ran around like a chicken with its head cut off.l

    If this is how he responds to a leaked campaign speech, how would he respond to an actual Presidential decision (oh wait, we saw that last week with Libya.)

  •  I know what Rmoney's 5 point plan is. (5+ / 0-)

    1) me
    2) myself
    3) I
    4) only 'us'
    5) not them

    Although, I do understand that right up until the time the op-ed was submitted for publication the Rmoney team was debating whether point 4 should  'only us' or 'not you.'

    They opted for 'only us' because they thought it projected a spirit of inclusiveness.

    "When you're skating on thin ice, you might as well dance." Jesse Winchester

    by The Poet Deploreate on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:42:12 AM PDT

  •  time to bury the ugly wing of current GOP (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pescadero Bill

    the "non-compassionate" conservatism with zero empathy. The "let them die" wing of the party. The response of Romney and the 0.1% to globalization appears to be to turn America into China with low wages, no rights, long work hours, no housing, no health insurance, no regulation, pollution, no democracy as the country is run by a small elite ... We have to make sure that they fail big time. Only compassionate conservatism can be the basis for a center right party in America.

  •  He's only circling the bowl. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aquarius40, Vote4Obamain2012

    Lucky for the 47 percenters, we get to look down and watch him drift to the sewer.

    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

    by politicalceci on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:42:47 AM PDT

  •  Nixon had a secret plan too (3+ / 0-)

    to get us out of Vietnam.  Turns out, it included invading yet another country.  I haven't trust anyone hawking a "secret plan" since then.

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

    by SueDe on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:43:30 AM PDT

  •  Are his 5 points voting for him 5 times? (5+ / 0-)

    Or like 3 and stopping 2 "Obama Voters?"

    •  It rests on five ways to keep (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Democrats from voting before the election and doing away with five social programs after the election.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:06:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  if they really want to mine (11+ / 0-)

    soundbites from the 90's - and of a more recent vintage, there's a wealth of them with Romney uttering just about every GOP heresy imaginable on choice, guns, health care - you name it.

    Is this really a can of worms they wish to open?

    "after the Rapture, we get all their shit"

    the albany project.

    by lipris on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:45:02 AM PDT

  •  What? Taxes are redistribution.... (6+ / 0-)

    and Mitt is bitching about people not paying taxes.

    By definition Mitt favors redistribution. I guess in his case, however, he wants it to flow from the peons up to "the job creators" (i.e., those who like to jam 14 Chinese women in a room and surround the place with barbed wire while they make fucking widgets for their hell-bound overlords for pennies.)

  •  Romney subscribes to the Underpants Gnomes' (0+ / 0-)

    theories of economic growth?  Tell us, oh Mitt, what the "?" stands for, pray tell?

  •  Next ad: "OMG!! Obama breathes air!!" (4+ / 0-)

    Pearls available for clutching at your nearest mall kiosk.

    When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:47:14 AM PDT

    •  Restribution of air! The horror! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vote4Obamain2012, Egalitare

      He wants everyone to have free air! He thinks everyone should have equal access to air! That that's an entitlement! Well when I'm president, I will privatize air, subsidizing atmospheric leases, so that we create jobs bottling and canning air for people to breathe and put America back to work! Imagine! A new straw industry to jam up people's noses so they can breathe and feel good about the economy! Gosh!

      "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~Edward Abbey ////\\\\ "To be a poor man is hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships." ~W.E.B. DuBois

      by rovertheoctopus on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:15:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  More like- the ILLEGALS breathe (0+ / 0-)

      "the white-mans" air, that we earned because we were here first.

      (with a wink really to base anyone not white for that matter, even if they were here first)

  •  We already know the five point plan (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    beltane, jfromga

    1. Tax cuts for millionaires
    2. Tax cuts for billionaires
    3. Tax cuts for trillionaires
    4. Tax cuts for show horses
    5. Destabilize Islamic countries and start a war with them.

    Using my free speech while I still have it.

    by ebgill on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:48:23 AM PDT

  •  just saw stu rothenberg (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    on the chuck todd show on msnbc, todd asks whats with warren up for 4 polls, stu, well we've had this race up and down so i wouldn't take polls today as firm for nov, there goes stu making the best case he can for another goper, thanks stu for reinforcing my opinion that you are not to be trusted when giving neutral opinion on polls.

  •  the repubs dragged all this our four years ago (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    with a redistribution tape of obama. im still not really sure they are different tapes.

    anyone know?

    "With malice toward none, with charity for all..." -Abraham Lincoln not a modern republican

    by live1 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:48:34 AM PDT

  •  Fox's 2008 playbook; It worked so well for McCain. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    live1, Vote4Obamain2012
  •  I hope this election cycle mauls Citizen's United (4+ / 0-)

    and it's various billionaire benefactors in the wallet to the point where they are fearful about shitting away hundreds of millions again in a future cycle.

    That would be the only thing besides Democratic holds and wins to make this year even more delicious.

    What a disaster. What an utter total fucking beautiful disaster for the Right.

    What we are witnessing is a nightmare for Karl Rove and company. This, by all lazy paint-by-number conventional wisdom standards, and lazy paint-by-numbers conventional wisdom still governs much of our media, political discourse, and politics itself, should have been a Democratic Pigfuck to make the 2010 Pigfuck seem tame by comparison.


    It not only isn't a Democratic Pigfuck to be, it's actually may be turning into a potential Movement Conservative one right in front of the nation's eyes.

    And the Right is collectively saying 'how the fuck is this happening?"

    Let them blame Romney, and run Ryan next time.

    I'm all for it. That means they still don't get that they have to change.

    This election cycle is one of the most important in our lifetimes for many reasons, but one of the biggest reasons is that the demographci changes in this great nation of ours is at, or close to, the point where the GOP 'scare the suburban and rurual working poor white people with racism and lies' tactic becomes impotent and obsolete.

    They cannot afford to squander this one, and it appears that they are.

    Best of all, they don't seem to either understand why it's not working, and what to do to deal with that to prevent this from happening again in the future.

    They have to change how they do politics, and they not only won't, but they can't because they keep going back to Lee Atwater as if it's 1988. A party of white racism and top down class warfare facing the age of majority minority and all that means for the future.

    I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

    by LeftHandedMan on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:50:59 AM PDT

    •  Also (0+ / 0-)

      Could the Citizen's United and CrossRoads USA ads been worse?

      Awful, awful stuff.

      I live in Nevada, have seen them all, and the vast majority of them have been the worst ads I have ever seen in terms of effectiveness or persuasiveness.

      I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

      by LeftHandedMan on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:52:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually SCOTUS is my main concern (4+ / 0-)

      Another Thomas or Scalia and it is all over.

      Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. John Leland

      by J Edward on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:54:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think the ACA decision (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chloris creator

        was a bit of an indicator that they realized they had gone to far.

        In short I've said at length before how my Con Law professor shaped my view, which is that the SCOTUS has 12 bailiffs, why do we listen to them? Judicial Review is after all made up (Marbury v. madison). So they have a tight-rope to be relevant. As look at the federal Court's "Orders" to clean up asylums in the 60's-70s no one listened so we pretended it happened.

        They got close before striking down new deal plan after new deal plan. I don't know if I said on here, but I really thought the ACA would be upheld (but by a plurality) because if they did this, it would again make them look completely partisan. And why would a president/congress (if they start trying to run the country) listen, when the country is pissed, and well, I don't think their bailiffs out-number the coast-guard alone :-). That was much more snarky than my normal posts. But the point is, they are very conscious of how they look (started to make me wonder) and I guessed they'd realize in the ACA (my dad is a UN after that swift-boat crap, he can vouch) so had to uphold. Maybe indicates a lesson learned, I hope.

        But still I agree I don't want a Scalia, Scalito, Thomas. Except in Lujan Scalia was kind of funny in how much of a prick he was being.

        •  Judicial review is "made up?" (0+ / 0-)

          And "Scotus has 12 bailiffs?"

          Um, are you sure you're an actual attorney, or do you just play one on the internet?

          Judicial review is no more or less "made up" than any other principle of jurisprudence. And last time I counted, there were 9, not 12 justices.

          •  So Jefferson and Hand, eh nobodies, Marshall (0+ / 0-)

            Didn't decide something totally to enable a power not enumerated? Causing a debate still raging?

            Why don't you dust off your Con Law book, and re-read Marbury then the comments of the Hand-Weschler debate and say that again?

             Or See L. HAND, THE BILL OF RIGHTS 1-30 (1962), in which Hand professed an inability to justify the antidemocratic nature of judicial review. (We made it up so we must use sparingly is the essence of his argument).

            That debate still rages on between "interpretivist" and "noninterpretivist" theorists.

            No? Compare Brest, The Misconceived Questfor the Original Understanding, 60 B.U.L. REv. 204 (1980),
            with Monaghan, Our Perfect Constitution, 56 N.Y.U. L. REV. 353 (1981).

            Which yes began with Marbury, as Jefferson/Madison would not Obey. So Marshall made an extremely slick decision where rather than say first "we don't have jurisdiction and dispose" he said everything he wanted, but then but you don't have to obey (knowing they wouldn't so he boxed them in by letting them "win" only in a very shallow way) here we don't have jurisdiction (most importantly co-ordinate branches are subject to judicial review, and the POTUS has to obey us- something that horrified Jefferson as until then the belief was each interpreted the Constitution for themselves).

            So . . . it is a balancing act, just as I see the SCOTUS trying now. Sorry if I assumed there were three more guys with guns  at the metal detector who have no chance to convince a POTUS to obey if he doesn't want, Marshall realized and hence this decision, and hence the debate still today.

            And what I see as the SCOTUS getting close Pre-ACA to the question "why do we listen" which isn't so much about judicial review but about their inability to make someone like the President Obey if the public is on his side and or he simply doesn't want to, it threatens their power, they are always walking this tight-rope.

            I think that influenced their thought as yes it is made up, and yes they are highly aware of being viewed in a certain way to the extent it alters thinking.

            And as a sidenote Roberts did exactly what Marshall did. Why not just decide the ACA decision on taxation? Then say we won't reach the Commerce issues as Moot. It was calculated.

  •  ...he's going to ignore it. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Thomas Twinnings

    Romney's best strategy is to always ignore what he previously said. Now, if he could just get everyone else to do the same.

    Even the smallest dog can lift its leg on the tallest building. Jim Hightower

    by shoeless on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:51:05 AM PDT

  •  Keep running that base strategy there, Mitt. (0+ / 0-)

    You can't win with 40%, but just keep misunderstanding what turns the independents on and you'll be all set. Trust me.

    You can call it "class warfare" -- we call it "common sense"

    by kenlac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:51:14 AM PDT

  •  We'll see how young this crowd is . . . (0+ / 0-)

    his five points are that he "spits hot fire" so that he would leave historians believing that the five greatest presidents of all time are

    1.) Mitt-Rom

    2.) Mitt-Rom

    3.) Mitt-Rom

    4.) Mitt-Rom

    5.) Mitt-Rom

    Again, because he spits hot fire.

  •  What's worse than failure? "Flailure" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ClevelandAttorney, The Nose

    You can't make this stuff up.

    by David54 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:52:25 AM PDT

  •  oh the background music-sounds like somebody saw (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    live1, beltane

    the iceberg!!

    Warning: That light at the end of the tunnel just might be an oncoming train.

    by history first on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:52:54 AM PDT

  •  speaking of redistribution to the poor . . . (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    live1, softserve, coppercelt, The Nose

    Have you seen this video in which Mitt's mother mentions that her husband was on welfare as a child? (Apologies if it's been posted here already.)

    Interview with Mitt Romney's Mother

  •  It is such a bullshit charge (4+ / 0-)

    Romney believes in redistribution,  he supports the use of public resources, oil on public lands for example, to the benefit of private individuals/corporations.  Massive redistribution of wealth right there.  If the US government were taking a share of the profits at a commercially reasonable rate, we'd have a huge source of federal income to use for everybody instead of a small number of people.

     Banking deregulation that allowed billions to be stolen from the public treasury to cover the gambling losses of the too big to fail banks.  Redistribution of wealth.

    Romneys own tax havens, redistribution of wealth.

    The steady erosion of wages while productivity and corporate profits soar, redistribution of wealth.

    When the media decides to stop lying to cover Romney's lies, we might have a useful discussion about use of common resources and fair distribution of the benefits.  Right now, we're off in cloud cockoo land.

  •  Rachel kindly pointed out last night (5+ / 0-)

    that Republicans have preferred a policy of earned income tax credits and other tax policies, like child deductions, that lead to low- and some middle-income wage earners paying no income taxes. It was Republican policy because then they could say that they cut taxes and wouldn't have to say they supported a new social entitlement. So once again Republicans are having fits and blaming Democrats for a policy they supported.

    Thanks, Rachel, I hadn't thought of this in this way before.

    Romney fires people and then complains they don't pay taxes.

    by Red Bean on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:54:13 AM PDT

    •  tax credits (0+ / 0-)

      Definitely some have received Republican support, and were even Republican ideas to begin with--particularly the "child" and "education" credits.

      But I think most Republicans hate EITC and always have.  Because it works.

      Barack Obama is not a secret socialist class warrior who wants to redistribute wealth in America. But I'll still vote for him, anyway.

      by looty on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:20:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hate it now, loved it before (0+ / 0-)
        The federal EITC was first enacted in 1975 under President Gerald Ford. The EITC has received long standing bi-partisan support as a means to provide relief through the tax code to the working poor. The federal EITC was expanded under presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Sr., and Bill Clinton. Barak Obama also expanded the EITC as part of the 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act

        Romney fires people and then complains they don't pay taxes.

        by Red Bean on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:14:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Reagan rhapsodized over it (0+ / 0-)
          Conservative hero President Ronald Reagan was a champion of an Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) during his 1986 efforts to simplify the tax code. Mr. Reagan called it, “the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.”

          Romney fires people and then complains they don't pay taxes.

          by Red Bean on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:43:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  It was a trade-off for going after welfare (0+ / 0-)

      The Reaganauts theory was: Reward people for working, plus provide tax credits for day care, plus provide funding for beefed-up child support, and we can eliminate poverty without making welfare payments to people that would encourage laziness. And the incentives to work would also interrupt the "culture of poverty" that they believed was keeping children from having good role models of responsible working parents, and therefore learning responsible working themselves.

      So the very things Romney is considering as entitlements, mooching, etc. etc. were put in place by the GOP to prevent entitlements and mooching.

  •  Opposite of redistribution (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Hoarding $$$

    Mitt makes the perfect spokesperson for the Republicans.  Their greed can't sustain now that the money's all gone.  As their instinct to hoard money endures, the source of that money will disappear and so will their party.  Greed is driving the Republicans into extinction.

    In these times, we need to come together, share resources and support one another as a community.  

    History is turning for us.

    The leaked videos will impact the race like Watergate.

  •  Romney doesn't want to redistribute wealth. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aquarius40, The Nose

    He wants to redistribute poverty, so that nearly everybody's got a shot at it.

    Even the smallest dog can lift its leg on the tallest building. Jim Hightower

    by shoeless on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:54:58 AM PDT

  •  Like a job interview w an unqualified applicant (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ClevelandAttorney, The Nose

    His article is a laugh. He's trying to twist his wording into something more palatable, but the damage is done. From most people's perspectives it doesn't matter -- he says things more directly to his 50k donors than those voting for him. That's all you need to know.

    I like his plan, though...

    It's kind of like a job interview, where the applicant says "Oh man, I'll help you guys make money, I have a great step by step plan!". Then the interviewer asks, "Well, can you tell us about it?". And the applicant responds, "I don't want to give my stuff away if you're not going to hire me!"

    Somehow in interviews people pick up that the applicant is a lying sack of shit. When running for President? Apparently not.

  •  Obama said 14 yrs ago he wants a fair shot for (4+ / 0-)

    everyone!  OMFGZ! He wants our gunz!

    Seriously, this is the same message Obama's saying today.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right. I'm riding for MS in September. Please donate here if you can.

    by darthstar on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:56:40 AM PDT

  •  Don't forget to tweet the RNC (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Supavash, Vote4Obamain2012

    @Reince #Reinhard_Flailing [your comment here]

    Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

    by dadadata on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:57:08 AM PDT

  •  So Mitt has an imaginary 5 point plan (0+ / 0-)

    I wonder how many imaginary playmates he had as a child.

    Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. John Leland

    by J Edward on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:57:12 AM PDT

  •  Romney believes in Upward Redistribution... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vote4Obamain2012, The Nose

    ...hasn't this been the intrinsic nature of our economy? That's why we need trickle up economics, sooner or later some fat cat's going to make a profit servicing a real demand, so why not  help those who are hurting and at the same time separate the job creators from the merely wealthy?

    (-9,-9) pragmatic incrementalist :-P

    by Enterik on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:57:43 AM PDT

  •  First, haven't we dredged up decades old (3+ / 1-)

    comments to throw at Rs? That fact that it is 14 years old is negated by the image they've been building during this election: Obama gives your money to people who don't deserve it.

    Second: the quote in the diary:

    "Of course, as I pointed out yesterday, what Obama said (again, 14 years ago) is something that almost all Americans agree with. It's the reason we have public schools and Medicaid. In fact, when Romney went on Fox yesterday to hype this audio clip, he said virtually the same thing:"

    Do you really think that when people hear the word redistributing that they think of schools and roads, etc. No, they think of taking money out of my pocket to give to someone who doesn't want to work. Not that they can't work, not that they're retired, not that they are elderly...they immediately think of the "non-deserving."

    Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by auapplemac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:57:50 AM PDT

    •  that comment was a load of crap. and fail. (0+ / 0-)

      First, be specific - especially if you are trying to defend republicans here.
      Second, people know who the President is and what he stands for. Therefore, a 14 year old video won't be any more effective now than it was for McCain't. And it was not effective for him at all.
      Third, whatever people think of specifically when they hear the word redistribution, they, in general, like it. And that can be buttressed by making the point that federal income taxes by definition redistribute wealth.

      The only people who think along the lines you indicated are rich, white, elderly males.

      hr for right wing talking points.

      •  I Do not see how it deserved an HR so tipped (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        auapplemac, splintersawry
        •  right wing talking points. but you are also (0+ / 0-)

          a conservative. so, I am not surprised.

          •  Is that right? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            auapplemac, splintersawry

            What have I ever said conservative?  

            Why don't you look before posting?

            And I believe the commenter's point was "redistribution" is a buzz-word to some groups, but generally agreed as to what it should mean.

            But, I am a a Conservative. Right.

            I volunteer at Hospice and Legal Aide, the horror.

          •  Nice Ad Hominem Attack (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            auapplemac, splintersawry

            rather than getting to the point btw. I don't believe i have ever been HR'd.

            Or said anything remotely conservative. I have never voted nor ever will vote for a Republican.

            See the diary about my first political memories.

            And I would not say "you're a conservative" as a pejorative epecially when not true. As say I am an independent. Am I inclined to listen to you?

            Your comments are actually much more HR' able.

            •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

              First, he tried to support the idea that this video would gain traction. He tried to support the thesis that most voters buy the "socialist" charge when they hear the word redistribution and are appalled. They are not.
              Making arguments for right wing memes on this site merits hr.

              Second, it was hardly an attack or the use of a pejorative. If I had said to someone that he or she was a tea party jihadist, then this could be construed as an ad hominem attack.
              There were no harsh adjectives modifying conservative in my post. Simply describing someone as a conservative (which is an opinion - and depends upon the point of view - Hell some people may find me a conservative ) does not seem to me be an ad hominem attack.

              I have read your posts before and I found them conservative. That is my perspective. Others may disagree. That was my opinion.

              I do appreciate your volunteer work. That makes a difference in the lives of others, people who are in need. Thank you !

              •  Ahem, V4O. "He said?" Sexist maybe? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

                by auapplemac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:54:01 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Really? I would LOVE to see one (0+ / 0-)

                Was it when I gave advice to ppl whose diaries had to do with legal issues? Using Non-Profits, gov't watch-dogs, on my own time? (Prob 60% of my posts)

                When I tried to analyze what was BS about Romney's tax returns?

                When I tried to say why the ACA should be easily upheld?

                When i quoted a poem my mother (a well known poet) did in response to Alan Grayson's post about the Second Civil War and union-clashes? Where her constant was "When they . . . . it was time to strike"?

                When I actually engage with people and find common ground who are actual conservatives on here, in the hopes of making them think rather than most people telling them basically to pound salt?

                When i offered to spend my money to create a Romney Etch a Sketch website if someone had the ability? I just truly wonder.

                My guess you have no clue.

                The only possible would be in a diary dismissing Hydro-fracking, I admitted I work for people who do are in the natural gas business (but not those companies), so know some more than most, and don't think that it intellectually honest YET to say that hydrofracking bans are politically feasible, especially given the marcellus shale?

                I would love to see.

                And you know damn well on a Liberal Blog, which if anything I am extremely Liberal I would not identify myself as I see it on a sliding scale- it is clearly pejorative to say "I don't care what you think of the Propriety of my interpretation, you're a conservative anyways" ie if you are a conservative you're brainwashed. Either own what you said, or do not. But my suggestion was you don't dismiss ppl as conservative esp who are not, as they are less inclined to listen (see my diary/"conservative" comments where I asked for help in convincing someone to vote for Obama).

                You should remove your HR, the common-sense realities of your comments, and that it has now totally deviated from discussion and discouraged the poster are far more HR worthy.

        •  Thanks, CA. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by auapplemac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:49:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  My pleasure (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            90% of the time I enjoy discussing. Why I enjoy this blog But have no problem in understanding then discussing as your point is not at all conservative, and even if it was, there is no reason to HR (depending).

            I don't like when this site jumps all over someone for having an opinion. It's what I like to think lets us carry-on a bit more intellectually honestly, when we have different ideas, as well that is the idea of government/participation.

      •  Can you do nuance, V4O. Being a Progressive (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        splintersawry, ClevelandAttorney

        and based in reality, I try to see both sides of a a story and how the general public might react. Sometimes I'm right and sometime not so.

        I know there are a lot of people out there do not live and die by each twist and turn of the political world. They just have other things to fill their time. Or, they just don't care that much, but they do vote.

        They do hear snippets. They know "what they know." They may react instinctively to different bits of information. They  may not be that analytical.

        Those are the people I was referring to. My comments did not express my way of thinking or voting.

        I have never voted for a Republican. Ever!

        Now, do I still deserve that X?

        Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

        by auapplemac on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:49:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  In re reading you failed and should remove the HR (0+ / 0-)

        The commenter clearly is looking at it from those people smart enough to see through the bs, just like their sig. Not through the connotations everyone readily accepts. And actually ADDS to the diary, by challenging the idea that this is laughable.

        That is far more interesting to discuss (and making people realize they should think roads as clearly implied, as well as making them realize they are not center-right)

        Totally inappropriate HR. You should remove.

        And the Commenter's sig should explain:

        Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!  

        Something I think many completely agree with as the reality is this Country consistently votes against their interests because of crap like "gays are getting married". When we have blue dogs when most of us want Alan Graysons.

        "Of course, as I pointed out yesterday, what Obama said (again, 14 years ago) is something that almost all Americans agree with. It's the reason we have public schools and Medicaid. In fact, when Romney went on Fox yesterday to hype this audio clip, he said virtually the same thing:"

        Do you really think that when people hear the word redistributing that they think of schools and roads, etc. No, they think of taking money out of my pocket to give to someone who doesn't want to work. Not that they can't work, not that they're retired, not that they are elderly...they immediately think of the "non-deserving."

    •  Redistribution is a code word for socialism. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      That's why Obama hasn't repeated it and they had to go back 14 years to find him doing so.

      Uprated for bogus HR.

      Also, no need to get upset over it.  Very few people are paying attention.  That's why the national poll numbers don't shift very much.

      Unless Obama is caught on tape molesting children or some other MASSIVE mistake, he'll win.

      •  Amen (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I was talking with my father last night, and said you know it does not at all feel (esp in Ohio being used to a half year of Robo-calls) like it is six weeks away.

        And that I cannot see any situation that is not created by the plentitude of $ that suddenly makes people unsure at the last minute. But I have faith team Obama realizes that and can and will handle.

        •  I can't wait till it's over. I know the Mission (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Statement, but the FP and Rec List is 99% Mitt, 99% of the time.

          You don't see much movement in the polls because most people are sick to death of 2 year long campaigns and just tune out all of the fodder after awhile.

          Besides, electoral votes, not polls, determine the winner, and Rmoney isn't even close where it really counts.

          I wish Kos would shift to at least a 70/30 split on Mitt/Progressive Issues.

  •  I'll raise your redistribution (0+ / 0-)

    to a national guaranteed minimal income.

  •  listen america (0+ / 0-)

    lets tell it like it is, we don't need a different pres or senate, we need a dem house so the govt will be in control of the party that actually believes govt can and will help its citizens which helps the nation as a whole.

    change the house from gop to dem control and you will be amazed how so many of our problems will begin to be solved, and the animosity in congress although not eliminated will not cause the problems it has with the gop obstruction, let the gop howl at the moon and the rest of america go on with their lives.

  •  Mitt's got problems with the Obama comments (4+ / 0-)

    1.  The Right's been screaming about Obama wanting to "redistribute wealth" for four years.  It's nothing new so people will file it in the "old news" category.

    2.  The Obama comment is from 14 years ago.  Mitt's, on the other hand, were just a few months ago, to donor's to his current Presidential campaign.  So Mitt's comments are very fresh, current, and relevent to this campaign.

    3.  People who already dislike Obama aren't going to be swayed by the "redistribution" comment, but they might be swayed to stay home from the polls if Mitt's comments turn them off sufficiently.

  •  Super-Pac donors bail on Romney....? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose

    I think that's the case if the tailspin continues through the weekend.  Also, don't be surprised if Crossroads and the Kochs concede the Presidential election and focus their resources on Congress.

    Trust-Fund Kids of America Unite... save the Bush tax cuts!

    by JCPOK on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:00:15 AM PDT

  •  No, here is his 5-point plan: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose

    1.  Make a plan
    2.  Name it "5-point Plan"
    3.  Announce the plan to the American People
    4.  Take credit for the growth in the economy that was going to happen anyway
    5.  Make a 5 point-plan

  •  The biggest tool the Republican (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose

    have used to successfully redistribute wealth upwards has been limiting the scope and power of unions. The middle class had money when unions were strong. Middle class wealth shrinks because unions have been limited in the private sector and now they're under attack in the public sector.

    Henry Ford recognized he would sell more cars if he paid his workers well. They'd pay more taxes too. If Romney really wanted working people to pay more taxes he'd advocate higher wages. And stronger unions.

    Romney fires people and then complains they don't pay taxes.

    by Red Bean on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:02:07 AM PDT

  •  "...and there will be unicorns" (0+ / 0-)

    Voodoo economics wrested from the shriveled paws of zombie Reagan will NOT win an nationwide election in 2012.
    Journos are putting on a big show of carefully balancing all factors in this race, and ruling nothing out, etc. - but, jesus--there is no hope for this rather LAZY candidate Romney. He will not elevate to his A-game, because he HAS no damned A-game: he's got a personal history, personal preferences, and above all the prevailing interests of his personal financial portfolio. He's so plainly in this game to serve himself, his family, his social circle and his cult, that it's staggering how many fools have bought into his fake crusade.

  •  sorry guys...... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Supavash, splintersawry

    ...but you're all slow this morning. Just listen for the dog whistle. It's just different when a black guy says it. Duh.

  •  as a political Ad it isnt all that bad except... (0+ / 0-)

    what was that blip clip of Paul Ryan for?   that shot broke the momentum of the ad message.

    also, I think it is to late for an ad like this one...  it loses most of its impact due to the juxtaposition of the 'secret funder tape'  

    the Obama team can put out a 15 sec rebuttal ad that would destroy this line of attack on OBAMA...  all they need to do is cut that part of the funder tape where mitt says he doesnt care about 47% of America with the great line from warren Buffet "if there is class warfare, the rich are winning"

    "You've got to be an optimist to be a Democrat, and a humorist to stay one" - Will Rogers

    by KnotIookin on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:15:39 AM PDT

  •  I hope someone is keeping an eye on (0+ / 0-)

    the Watergate Hotel.  Looks like Mitt Romney is reaching that kind of desperation with that ad.

    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

    by politicalceci on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:15:41 AM PDT

  •  There is some evidence in polling that (3+ / 0-)

    the 47% video might already be taking a bite out of Mitt.  The new Q/NYT poll in WI has Obama +6, an increase from the prior poll.  The pollsters asked questions about the video.

    PPP's latest tweet states that Obama is polling well in WI on their first night as compared to the 2 most recent PPP surveys of the state.  They have been asking questions about the 47% comment and it seems that most think it was inappropriate.

    My guess is that PPP will also show Obama up +4 to +6 which would be an increase from the last 2 polls which showed Obama +1 and Obama -1 respectively.

    To determine whether an event is a game changer you have to ask the question of whether a fence sitter or weak leaner would factor the event into their evaluation of the 2 candidates.  Based on the wide coverage in and outside political media, my answer is yes.  It seems that the 47% video has gone national and most people gravitate to the comment and have an opinion about it.  It will be among the top 5 or 6 things people associate Romney with before making an evaluation.  

    If you had 10 fence sitters/weak leaners/undecideds in the room, my guess is the Obama weak leaners become stronger Obama voters, the Romney leaners wobble with some deciding not to vote and the true undecideds split between supporting Romney, Obama and not voting.

    Let's say there were 3 Obama weak leaners, 3 Romney weak leaners and 4 undecideds.  My guess is that Obama wins 4 votes, Romney wins 3 votes and 3 decide not to vote.  Edge Obama as he would have captured 57% of the actual voters in the group.  That would probably have the effect of pushing Obama's lead in the NBC/WSJ poll to abut 6-7 points with no undecided.

    An added bonus is if a previously comitted Romney voter switched to the pool of undecideds, non-voters or Obama voters.  I don't expect a big movement here, but any movement would be a net plus for the President and a net minus for Romney.

    Alternative rock with something to say:

    by khyber900 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:16:24 AM PDT

  •  What did Romney believe again back in 1998? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vote4Obamain2012, The Nose

    What exactly were his (14) positions on gun control, abortion, taxes, etc.?  This guy's such an idiot.

    The pleasure of hating...eats into the heart of religion...[and] makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands. - W. Hazlitt

    by rfahey22 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:21:42 AM PDT

  •  President Obama was talking about... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pamelabrown, Vote4Obamain2012, bwren

    ...the redistribution of gov't. resources!  It's right there in the quotation!

    wtf!  and jhc!

    I hate stupidity.

    "The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." ~ Steven Biko

    by Marjmar on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:26:59 AM PDT

  •  Wait a minute.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Vote4Obamain2012

    A fair shot at success?
    Equal opportunities?
    Through hard work and a bit of help?
    I'm sorry, but basically, what's wrong with that?

    (If having wealth, obscene wealth, turns someone into an unfeeling, ignorant POS like Rmoney, then, by all means redistribute the wealth.)

    I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

    by Lilyvt on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:27:31 AM PDT

  •  The eventual fallout from this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chloris creator, JML9999

    In 2016, any idiot Republican with a camera and $50k will be recording every closed door candidate fundraiser.  I can already hear O'Keefe hitting up donors so he can do this too.  Democrats will have to be extra wary next election cycle.  I can assure you we will see this kind of tape again in the future...and probably extremely edited like all of O'Keefe's projects.

    "It looks like how music sounds." --My four year old nephew upon looking through a kaleidoscope for the first time

    by Mote Dai on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:27:53 AM PDT

    •  That already happened to Obama in 2008 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JML9999, Mote Dai

      You know, the "clings" comment.  Which just goes to show how stupid Romney is that he didn't learn from Obama's mistake.

      The pleasure of hating...eats into the heart of religion...[and] makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands. - W. Hazlitt

      by rfahey22 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:30:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think the GOP needs to worry more (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mote Dai

      they are the one that pander to the extremists in their party.  Their campaigns focus on diverting attention from their party policies (etch-a-sketch) but in order to raise money from their most intense supporters, they make outlandish claims to them in private.

  •  They were forced to use this early (0+ / 0-)

    I bet they had it in mind as a secret weapon a week or two before the election. They had to lob it now to try to swerve the discussion a bit.  


    I don't think anyone except the hard right cares about any comment made by Obama in ancient history.

    Same thing with the old nonsense Ricketts is going to start slinging around with millions.  People are over it.

  •  On a slightly related note: (2+ / 0-)

    I am annoyed at the pejorative "Carter" references that keep popping up. Obama's record is solid, regardless of the rights attempt at meme-building. The Republicans did not have a viable candidate who could take him on and win. The Republican obstructionism, coupled with their stated goal of making him a one-term President, was quite obvious. The disappointing aspect is that, for the past two years, legislative steps could have been taken, using compromise, to get America moving. Relegating people to unemployment lines out of ideological pique is shallow and, hopefully, punishable at the ballot box. When the President wins re-election, then the Republican efforts will have been for nothing, except causing more unncessary misery for countless citizens. We shall see.

    Apologies for the side rant.

  •  Based on the video-Do nothing is step 1 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    MITT ROMNEY:  They'll-- they'll probably be looking at what the polls are saying, but if it looks like I'm gonna win the market-- markets will be happy.  If it looks like the president's gonna win, the markets should not be terribly happy.  It depends on, of course, which markets you're talking about.  Which types of commodities and so forth.

    But my own view is that if we-- if-- if-- if we win on November 6th there will be-- a great deal of optimism about the future of this country.  And we'll see capital come back and we'll see-- without-- without actually doing anything, we'll (CHUCKLES) actually get a boost in the economy.

    The 1st Amendment gives you the right to say stupid things, the 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee a paycheck to say stupid things.

    by JML9999 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:57:17 AM PDT

  •  Legalizing organized crime (0+ / 0-)

    It seems to me that that's what Mr. Romney and Republicans mean by "economic freedom," "fostering growth" and "government helping people to get back to good jobs."

    Look at this quote from Joe Scarborough yesterday:

    "I believe conservative policies help 100% of Americans, I don't believe it helps the 1%. I really do believe that you don't help the waiters and waitresses that want to get a better job by raising taxes on ... job creators, I just believe it. ... I believe in my heart of hearts that the way you help those waiters go to college, go to tech school, and create a better life for themselves is to get the Federal Government off the backs of business owners, cutting taxes, cutting regulations..."
    I'm sure Mr. Romney, like a lot of GOP fans, believes this in his "heart of hearts" as well.

    The way to help the poor, the unemployed, low/middle-wage employees, etc. is to help those above them on the income scale by reducing or eliminating not only their tax burden, but their other legal, social and moral obligations as well.

    The way to help those who are struggling is to help those who are not struggling.

    The way to create more opportunities for those at the bottom is to make life easier for those at the top, and then expect/hope/wish that the latter will take it upon themselves to offer their newfound largesse to the former.

    How exactly this is supposed to happen, let alone how we are to make sure it happens, is unclear. How greasing the skids and attenuating moral hazards for those already in positions of wealth and power is supposed to "create opportunities" for those not already in such positions is never explained. How reducing or eliminating the legal, social and moral obligations of a factory owner in Texas helps a waiter in Connecticut go to tech school, viz., the precise sequence of events and causation between the former and the latter, is never explained. I doubt there are many waiters in Connecticut, or anywhere else for that matter, who believe it, let alone would be persuaded to vote for Mr. Romney by it.

    Seriously, does anyone not marinated in conservative dogma still believe this?

    What could the Romney campaign's pablum on this issue possibly mean, in terms of actual policy and actual things that actual laws and an actual government and an actual president can actually do, besides essentially legalizing organized crime? What can it mean besides seeing to it that "job creators" (whoever they may be) have little or no legal, social or moral obligations to their nation, their employees, their customers, or their neighbors?

  •  Social security is re-distribution. Billionaries p (0+ / 0-)

    aying more taxes than middle-class families is redistribution.  Public education of and aid to children, who don't pay squat by definition, is redistribution.  Public highways and the Interstate are redistribution.  

    National frakking defense is redistribution.

    And Christ demandedre-distribution (remember that whole camel and needle thing?)

    So, yeah, I'm in favor of redistribution when its necessary too.

    So are most Americans.

  •  I just read more of the clip on CNN... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and it sounds like he was more or less talking about redistribution of some government resources and actually is critical of parts of the government which he feels are not efficient.  I'm obvious bias, but I'm sure to the average American who doesn't live in the Faux News bubble, this video sound like a thoughtful person thinking through the challenges of creating a level playing field where everyone has a fair shot.  My goodness, I guess if you crop one line it plays into the right wing narrative about socialism.  If you listen to the whole thing, it sounds like a guy trying to make government more efficient. If this is all Matt Drudge and Mitt Romney have then it's going to be a really long 7 weeks for the GOP.  

    I'm not sure how much play this will even get in the media but the test is to make sure to play the entire context ad not just the one line that Dridge, Romney and Faux would only want you to hear.  

    •  I've been waiting for someone to understand this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      we are playing into the GOP meme by talking about "wealth" redistribution.  Obama's statement in question is talking about resdistributing existing government resource to utilize them more effectively.  He is talking about cutting government waste and achieving economy of scale savings by redistributing overlapping funding for various sections within government. It is the kind of statement every politician makes when they say they will take care when budgeting.

      The GOP ad is again utterly taking it out of context to make Obama sound like some kind of Marxist.  This diary does nothing to refute that.  "Redistribution" is one of those "red meat" words that as soon as anyone says it, the GOP loses what is left of their mind and begins drooling bullshit.  It makes no difference to them what the intent is.

  •  I watched the video (0+ / 0-)

    boy, that jerky Obama body language must really rile some people up. otherwise I have no idea what about this video gets a response other than, get these nasty lies out of  my face!

  •  Willard, do you REALLY want to play the (0+ / 0-)

    decades-old-quote card?

    Because David Axelrod can use your own words to make you a liberal, a progressive, an idiot, and a liar.

    You ought not go there, sayin'....

    skipping over damaged area

    by Says Who on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:20:42 AM PDT

  •  That's just painful to watch. (0+ / 0-)

    It's so badly put together. Loud, fuzzy sound. Ugly pictures. It's not going to influence anyone who isn't already  on their side because no one else has the need or wish to watch it.

    Twenty years from now, you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. Throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. --Mark Twain

    by Debby on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 08:28:40 AM PDT

  •  Digging deeper (0+ / 0-)

    what is in order is an apology at least a few words to let those 47% of Americans know that he regrets his vile remarks .. Changing the subject to something that has only caught the fire of his base and has been a tired talking point for four yrs hardly seems the route to go, but whatever, it's his deal.

  •  Think of all the video tape (0+ / 0-)

    that can be available to the Democratic side? One Mitt Romney calling himself a "progressive?" oh and all the Romney care and all the PRO choice vids..

    Better becareful Mittens, TWO can play that game.

  •  Well, of course, OUR government issues the (0+ / 0-)

    money, so we expect it to be responsible for how and to whom it is distributed. If some people try to accumulate more than their fair share and hoard it, to boot, then some redistribution is necessary.

    If Republicans want more people to pay tax, then they should support giving everyone more money to give back.  Most people know that money is only good for spending.  The people who hoard money or play with it for their own gratification are a small minority.  However, their drain on the money supply is disruptive and makes it necessary for our government to issue more money than we need.

    We organize governments to provide benefits and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:03:16 AM PDT

  •  Premature release (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You have to know that the Romney campaign has had the tape of Obama's "redistribution" comment for some time and was just waiting for the right moment to use it to bury Obama.

    Unfortunately, they had to rush it out now in order to create a firewall around Romney's own, much worse, tape disaster.

  •  More desperation: EE on morning edition (0+ / 0-)

    Heard Erick Erickson on NPR this morning saying that the "47%" doesn't refer to those who don't pay federal income tax... no, not at all. It's 47% of people who are hard-core Obama supporters. That's all Romney meant by 47%.

    This from the guy who started the whole 47% thing in the first place.

    This is what the right wing will convince itself of... just watch. Even in the face of a straighforward video, they'll deny it. It's just pathetic.

    Freedom isn't free. So quit whining and pay your taxes.

    by walk2live on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:16:09 AM PDT

  •  More fucking distortions and lies (0+ / 0-)

    from the bishop of greed.   After hearing Obama's 14 year old statement, even a child would know that he was talking about "redistributing' resources of the Chicago Housing Authority and the Chicago Schools.  But bishop Romney's benighted congregation will immediately believe that Obama wants to take their white money and 'redistribute' it to the blacks.  

  •  Conservatives having been grinding this ax (0+ / 0-)

    about Obama for over 3 1/2 years now.  

    He's a Socialist.  No, wait.  He's a Marxist.  No, wait.  He's an uppity Kenyan born food stamp President who wants to give all your money to his mooching constituents.


    It's like they've already jumped the shark on this one long ago, so coming back with some modest quote Obama made back in the day (in fact it was only the one word which is why they kept repeating it because if you blinked ya' would've missed it) just makes the whole thing comes off as laughably underwhelming.

    That they equate the tone, substance, and political context of Senator Obama's remarks as a comparable response to the ones Romney made, is much more telling.

    Live with intention. Walk to the edge. Listen hard. Practice wellness. Laugh. Appreciate your friends. Do what you love. ~MARadmacher

    by zoebear on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:31:16 AM PDT

  •  Mitt's performance at that dinner (0+ / 0-)

    kinda reminded me of this moment from the film Caddyshack:

    Bishop: I really enjoy working with young people such as yourself down at our new Lutheran Center... Why don't you drop by sometime, eh?
    Danny Noonan: I've often thought of entering the Priesthood.
    Bishop: Oh, are you a Roman Catholic?
    [Danny nods]
    Bishop: Oh, then I'm sorry, but I'm afraid you can't come.

    "I don’t wear no Stetson, but I’m willin’ to bet, son, that I’m a bigger Texan than you are".- Robert Earl Keen

    by Kellybee on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:54:08 AM PDT

  •  What grows the country? (0+ / 0-)
    Mitt Romney has a very different idea. He knows that we need to foster growth and create wealth, not redistribute wealth, if our economy is to grow the way it has in the past.
    That's fine.
    But what really leads the country into growth?
    Not republican policies.

    Follow my tag line to the record. NO Republican administration since 1948 has seen as much growth as the average Democratic administration.

  •  Redistribution (0+ / 0-)

    One wishes that the President believes in redistribution, instead of merely mouthing the words.
    I know that my comments have been often not favorable, but I really wish that I have more of a choice.

  •  "Redistribution" of what? (0+ / 0-)

    Did anybody hear the word "wealth" in the Obama clip?

    No, because he was talking about the redistribution of power and justice.

  •  So with all his Big Bux campaign consultants (0+ / 0-)

    THIS is Romney's counterpunch?   That's their best shot?

    It's more like a feeble grope in the wrong direction.

    Every day brings more evidence that WMR as a politician, is incompetent.  The thought of him as president of anything larger than a small-town PTA makes me ill.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site