Romney Sincerely Feels His Presidency Would Be Just Like Obama’s, Except It Would Taste Great and Be Less Filling

High Speed Train II  wallpaper


Mitt’s entire debate strategy: What he just said, but from a white guy
— Bill Maher (@billmaher)

Essentially, Romney would do no different but thinks the President’s doing a terrible job. #debate — Joshua Lyman (@joshualyman)

That awkward moment when both presidential candidates realize they don’t disagree on foreign policy enough to debate it. — Aaron Levie (@levie)

Is it sad or a welcome relief amid all the hateful and distorted rhetoric that the comedians had the best take on the last of the presidential debates. With just about every question it was Romney saying yea I agree, but I would put more icing on the cupcakes. Yea, President Obama is doing a good job, but I could outsource our national security to China and get everything done cheaper. These are some of the things Romney, not a comedian actually said,

Romney: We have in — in Egypt, a Muslim Brotherhood president. And so what we’re seeing is a pretty dramatic reversal in the kind of hopes we had for that region. Of course the greatest threat of all is Iran, four years closer to a nuclear weapon. And — and we’re going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda.

But we can’t kill our way out of this mess. We’re going to have to put in place a very comprehensive and robust strategy to help the — the world of Islam and other parts of the world, reject this radical violent extremism, which is — it’s certainly not on the run.

Up until a year ago that not quite robust enough effort was partly led  by some Republican holdovers from the Bush-era, including SecDef Gates. Funny how better executive leadership from Obama, instead of the inept micromanaging of the George Stooge and Dick Stooge made all the difference. Romney wants to bring back the same brain-trust that brought us the Iraq quagmire. “But we can’t kill our way out of this mess” ” sounds like something Senator Obama said to John McCain in 2008. The Muslim brotherhood in Egypt? The Brotherhood is not a monolithic organization – it has some extremists and some moderates. As Donald Rumsfeld once said democracy is messy and when you let a people who had been ruled for years by an authoritarian military, it is going to vote for some people who might have some extreme views. So welcome to Donny Rumsfeld world. Conservatives, and Romney seems to have a particular talent it, like to switch positions depending on shifts in the wind, and then hope that no one in the media acts like a real journalists and calls them out on it. During the Bush administration the Right was constantly blabbing on about how Bush and neoconservatism was spreading democracy and planting the seeds of democracy. The reality based community pointed out that on the contrary the Bush administration was supporting authoritarian regimes that would not allow democratic elections. The very reason was that is was to conservatives, and some Democrats as well, better the authoritarians you know than those you don’t. Well the tides of change went and shifted despite seeds being spread and all. Now that some nascent democracies have started they are going to have some growing pains. Unless Romney and company plans on putting boots on the ground and shoving his idea of democracy down millions of people’s throats, he’ll have to face the same frustrations any president has to face when trying to control events in other countries. At the end of the day President Obama has done a great job. That some of the people we have helped cannot – for now  – get their act together faster is not his fault as much as the conservative blame shifters would like it to be. As I remember there was once a new struggling democracy that took a hundred years to free the slaves, a few more years than that to recognize women as full citizens who should have the right to vote and  used Jim Crow laws to have a de facto separate nation based on race up until 1964 – now what was the name of that country?

ROMNEY: Well, my strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys, to make sure we do our very best to interrupt them, to — to kill them, to take them out of the picture.

But my strategy is broader than that. That’s — that’s important, of course. But the key that we’re going to have to pursue is a –– is a pathway to get the Muslim world to be able to reject extremism on its own.

In future videos demonstrating what it is like to swim in gelatin, they’re be playing that clip. Romney has to some degree been able to outrun his idiocy until this debate. He has been running on economic lies and empty feel good slogans – all the hollow crap that has made much of the American public so cynical about politics. Suddenly in the middle of a presidential debate he decides to recite to the public the rough draft of the children’s book he is writing for the United Nations. Jerry Jihadist was walking  home from school one day and saw the outline of a man bathed in luminous golden light – The Mittens – and on that day he and his fellow radicals decided that having seen the vision of The One, The Mittens, they would all start a new life as leveraged buyout specialists, export their neighbor’s jobs to China and live happily ever after. This is Romney doing his 2008 impression of Senator Obama,

We don’t want another Iraq, we don’t want another Afghanistan. That’s not the right course for us. The right course for us is to make sure that we go after the — the people who are leaders of these various anti-American groups and these — these jihadists, but also help the Muslim world.

And how do we do that? A group of Arab scholars came together, organized by the U.N., to look at how we can help the — the world reject these — these terrorists. And the answer they came up with was this:

One, more economic development. We should key our foreign aid, our direct foreign investment, and that of our friends, we should coordinate it to make sure that we — we push back and give them more economic development.

Number two, better education.

Number three, gender equality.

So Romney is going to let the sovereign USA be guided in its national security policy by the UN. Why haven’t I seen a single crazed conservative blogger (CCB) start with some paranoid delusions about Romney promoting one world government, answering terrorism with intellectual flower power and showing weakness to our enemies. Romney lost the debate. That is clear enough. Romney has also managed to twist multiple versions of Mitt into so many knots that the maze of his opinions has turned Romney’s brain into an out of control bumper car ride.

ROMNEY: No. I believe, as the president indicated, and said at the time that I supported his — his action there. I felt that — I wish we’d have had a better vision of the future.

In other words if a white conservative had done exactly the same thing we could call it a VISION. That would make it wholesome and good. So vote for Mitt so we can continue the white conservative version of Obama’s policies.

But for us to be able to promote those principles of peace requires us to be strong. And that begins with a strong economy here at home. Unfortunately, the economy is not stronger. When the — when the president of Iraq — excuse me, of Iran, Ahmadinejad, says that our debt makes us not a great country, that’s a frightening thing.

Vote for Romney because it will make America into a country that Ahmadinejad will like. Why is Mitt apologizing for the USA. Why do conservatives always care so much about what radical Shiite Muslims think. When will Mitt end his constant apologies for America.

One consistent tactic Romney used in every debate was to drag out at least one, frequently more, of the kind of freaky urban myths that is perpetuated by wacky conservative bloggers, Matt Drudge and Glenn Beck. The one that he used last night was the so-called Obama apology tour. Back during the Republican primaries I admit that I gave Romney some credit for not drinking all the kool-aid. As far as wingnuttery goes, the only candidate that outclassed Romney in that regard was John Huntsman. I thought, well maybe, just maybe Romney would be above repeating this cheap trash talk. Nope last night was Romney’s final nail in any doubt that remained, Mitt Romney is a sleazy morally corrupt dipstick just like any other Republican pol.

On the facts. On acting like a gentleman, Obama won the first debate. Since we live in a political climate that rewards flash over substance, the powers that be, including some contrarian liberals gave the win to Romney. Like a good tactician Obama adjusted. He was forceful enough to make Romney overplay the plastic commando act, Obama as Commander-in-Chief, Romney as Banal Bully

I thought the third and last presidential debate was a clear win for the President. He displayed the authority of the nation’s Commander-in-Chief – calm, dignified, and confident. He was assertive without being shrill, clear without being condescending. He explained to a clueless Mitt Romney the way the world actually works.

Romney seemed out of his depth. His arguments were more a series of bromides than positions – “we have to make sure arms don’t get into the wrong hands,” “we want a peaceful planet,” “we need to stand by our principles,” “we need strong allies,” “we need a comprehensive strategy to move the world away from terrorism,” and other banalities.

This has been Romney’s problem all along, of course, but in the first debate he managed to disguise his vacuousness with a surprisingly combative, well-rehearsed performance. By the second debate, the disguise was wearing thin.

In tonight’s debate, Romney seemed to wither — and wander. He often had difficulty distinguishing his approach from the President’s…

Among other things one could chalk the conservative movement up to simple bad melodrama. Though considering their policies actually become injected into real life, with generally disastrous real world consequences, the real believers like Romney always end up champions of banality. It seems that anyone not wearing a tin foil helmet saw much of the same thing, Elitist Airhead For President, Vote Romney

Mitt Romney has nothing really coherent or substantive to say about domestic policy, but at least he can sound energetic and confident about it. On foreign policy, the subject of Monday night’s final presidential debate, he had little coherent to say and often sounded completely lost. That’s because he has no original ideas of substance on most world issues, including Syria, Iran and Afghanistan.

During the debate, on issue after issue, Mr. Romney sounded as if he had read the boldfaced headings in a briefing book — or a freshman global history textbook — and had not gone much further than that. Twice during the first half-hour, he mentioned that Al Qaeda-affiliated groups were active in northern Mali. Was that in the morning’s briefing book?

At other times, he announced that he had a “strategy” for the Middle East, particularly Iran and Syria, and really for the whole world, but gave no clue what it would be — much like his claim that he has a plan to create 12 million jobs and balance the budget while also cutting taxes, but will not say what it is. At his worst, Mr. Romney sounded like a beauty pageant contestant groping for an answer to the final question. “We want a peaceful planet,” he said. “We want people to be able to enjoy their lives and know they’re going to have a bright and prosperous future and not be at war.”

Romney is by most accounts pretty good with a spreadsheet and understanding the dense language of business transactions. Like many conservatives he ha a skill set. One skill set. Unlike most people who understand that being good at one particular skill – buying companies, gutting them and sending jobs to Asia – that does not translate into governing skills. When Mittens left the governorship of Massachusetts he had a 38% approval rating. Looking back over these three debates it is easy to see why.

Why The Charge That Obama Is ‘Anti-Business’ Is Ridiculous, In Three Charts

Republicans, during the current campaign, have continuously labeled the Obama administration as “anti-business.” “The president and his people just don’t understand how the private sector works,” said Mitt Romney. “Too often, you find yourself facing a government that looks at you like you’re the bad guys.” “This is certainly the most anti-business administration since the Carter years,” added Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY). “I think he borders on being hostile to the private sector,” said former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR).

First, as the New York Times noted, since Obama came into office, “the Dow Jones industrial average has gained 67.9 percent. That’s an extremely strong performance — the fifth best for an equivalent period among all American presidents since 1900?:
Next, the S&P 500, measuring the 500 largest publicly traded companies, is up 80 percent
Finally, corporate profits have soared back beyond their pre-recession heights:
Corporations made a record $824 billion last year. The Obama administration has also cut taxes for small businesses several times, and, of course, presided over a rescue of the auto industry that was almost universally opposed by Republicans. If this is anti-business, it seems that the business world could use more of it.







Bowling wallpaper – Shameless Republicans and Whining Greedy Billionaires

Bowling wallpaper


This editorial from the NYT pretty much sums up Republican behavior in general and especially this election cycle, No Shame

There are many unanswered questions about the vicious assault in Benghazi last month that killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. And Congress has a responsibility to raise them. But Republican lawmakers leading the charge on Capitol Hill seem more interested in attacking President Obama than in formulating an effective response.

It doesn’t take a partisan to draw that conclusion. The ugly truth is that the same people who are accusing the administration of not providing sufficient security for the American consulate in Benghazi have voted to cut the State Department budget, which includes financing for diplomatic security. The most self-righteous critics don’t seem to get the hypocrisy, or maybe they do and figure that if they hurl enough doubts and complaints at the administration, they will deflect attention from their own poor judgments on the State Department’s needs.

At a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last Wednesday, Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California and the committee’s chairman, talked of “examining security failures that led to the Benghazi tragedy.” He said lawmakers had an obligation to protect federal workers overseas. On Sunday, he said more should be spent on diplomatic security.
But as part of the Republican majority that has controlled the House the last two years, Mr. Issa joined in cutting nearly a half-billion dollars from the State Department’s two main security accounts.

Imagine if after 9-11 Democrats had called for Bush’s impeachment – as conservatives are doing now for the alleged security failures at the White House. Instead the nation, including the vast majority of Democrats put aside ideological differences to support Bush. Though a few months after the 9-11 attacks, many Democrats, the families of the 9-11 victims and a hand full of Republicans asked for a commission to look into the structural security issues that may have failed in the lead up to 9-11. The Sept 11 attacks occurred in 2001. When did we finally get a commission – after much lobbying and subsequent bad press for Bush and conservatives? Nov. 27, 2002. Bush and Cheney had to be threatened with subpoenas and after Mr. 4th Branch Dick Cheney said they had no constitutional obligation to testify, they finally decided they would testify, but only behind closed doors and not under oath. Top Romney Surrogate Says Romney ‘Should Be Exploiting’ Libya Incident For Political Gain

Top Mitt Romney surrogate Rudy Giuliani admitted that the GOP is accusing President Obama of covering up the violence that led to the death of an American ambassador in Libya for political gain.

During an appearance on CNN’s Starting Point on Monday, the former New York City mayor argued that the administration is purposely delaying investigations into the incident until after the election to “cover up” its own failures. But asked to substantiate the claim, Giuliani became agitated. He announced that he did not have to give Obama the benefit of the doubt or withhold judgment about the incident until a full investigation is complete because the president is a Democrat…

….Republicans have a long history of politicizing acts of terrorism for political advantage: from using the 9/11 terrorist attacks to push the country into a war in Iraq, to portraying Democrats as terrorist sympathizers to score political victories in 2002 and 2004. Giuliani himself ran his presidential campaign on a “noun, verb and 9/11” and Romney’s first political instinct upon learning of violence in Libya was to accuse President Obama of apologizing for terrorism

If and when all else fails the Republican political tool box is full of unsubstantiated claims and attrition errors. The sheer volume and repetition of the accusations magically makes them true. It’s like a middle school brat who just keeps saying they know, they just know. An investigation into Libya might be a good idea, but who is going to head that investigation, Darrell Issa (R-CA) who has already built the piles of straw to carry out the witch burnings once the “trial” is over.

Part of the mindset of conservative billionaires – not necessarily everyone with wealth certainly – is to see themselves as poor victims, Another CEO Threatens To Fire Employees If Obama Wins

And Siegel is not alone in pushing his employees to cast their vote a certain way. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes reported today on another CEO — Arthur Allen of ASG Software Solutions — who said in an email to his employees that they’d only have themselves to blame if they lose their jobs if Obama wins. The email reads, in part:

Many of you have been with ASG for over 5, 10, 15, and even 20 years. As you know, together, we have been able to keep ASG an independent company while still growing our revenues and customers. But I can tell you, if the US re-elects President Obama, our chances of staying independent are slim to none. I am already heavily involved in considering options that make our independence go away, and with that all of our lives would change forever. I believe that a new President and administration would give US citizens and the world the renewed confidence and optimism we all need to get the global economies started again, and give ASG a chance to stay independent. If we fail as a nation to make the right choice on November 6th, and we lose our independence as a company, I don’t want to hear any complaints regarding the fallout that will most likely come. […]

The part about losing their independence as a company seems like pearl clutching at best. The only two things that would threaten their independence are bad management and competition. Which all conservatives fear and one of the reasons that industry backed lobbying and PACS are now an actual career field. If you can’t afford tires for the car, braces for your kid’s teeth, if the neighbor is keeping a dozen pigs in a suburban area not zoned for agriculture you have something to complain about. According to this report from 2010 ASG is making millions,

ASX-listed IT services provider ASG Group has announced a record  full year net profit increase of 9 percent to $12.3 million for the year ending 30 June 2010.

Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amoritisation was up 6 percent to $21.6 million, while revenue dipped 5 percent to $120.8 million.

Despite the revenue slump, ASG Group managing director Geoff Lewis was “pleased” and said the integrator has “invested heavily in areas that will lead to strong revenue contribution in future reporting periods”.

The ASG website contains this statement,

Strategic acquisitions are central to ASG’s ability to provide the most diversified range of robust product offerings. In fact, ASG has completed more than 30 acquisitions that have dramatically enhanced distribution synergies, customer diversity, and profitability. ASG also offers its solutions at a rate that averages 30% lower than the list prices of any competitor.

They also mention that they recently bought a Chinese company to increase their cloud storage and back-up capacity. The press release from 2010 also mentions what seems to be an inevitable shoe drop when it comes to conservatives complaining about government, ASG gets some of its millions in profits from, that’s right, gov’mint contracts,

  March 31 ASG signs $41m government contract

Jan 19 ASG scoops $23m WA Dept Education win


ASG are just more garden variety conservative pigs at the trough.

The Koch brothers are mentioned in the same article from TPro for the letter they sent to employees that was just an extortion letter. The Kochs acknowledged in a recent interview that they also benefit from large government subsidies, tax breaks and probably government contracts as well. How is it that any segment of the voting public can read the complaints of billionaires not making enough money and keep a straight face. How any one seriously listen to the Kochs talk about Barack Obama’s reelection being the “end” of civilization as we know it and say to themselves, oh yea these guys are rational people. The economy and this country has not been generous to the Kochs, ASG and CEO David Siegel, it has opened up the vault and said here, take the piggish share of the capital produced by America’s labor force.

Why aren’t the greedy pigs happy?


Here Are The Charts That Should Get Obama Reelected…

There are more at the link. If America was a socialist country and we had a choice between a real socialist and any Democrat running for office, Democrats would be trampled. Democrats are obviously, to anyone who is not a right-wing sycophant, not even in the park of being socialists or burdening business profits with taxes or regulations. Now is it that the conservative movement, with its utterly delusional version of reality not been relegated to the dust bin of history with every other radical group of weirdos and freaks. I might not live long enough to see the end result, but the Romney-Koch-Conservative mentality is sewing the seeds of its own destruction, The Self-Destruction of the 1 Percent

The reigning elites were acting in their immediate self-interest, but in the longer term, La Serrata was the beginning of the end for them, and for Venetian prosperity more generally. By 1500, Venice’s population was smaller than it had been in 1330. In the 17th and 18th centuries, as the rest of Europe grew, the city continued to shrink.

Quite a few commenters across the intetubes have wondered why president Obama did not call Romney a liar in the first debate. It told plenty of lies certainly. As still other commenters and bloggers have also noted you cannot do that because Romney will just say, am’ not. Paul Waldman has a good if imperfect suggestion for the next debate, Time to Try the “Romney Is Lying” Debate Strategy

What Obama needs is a set of responses that cover the topic at hand, but that all follow a single theme. He needs, to put it bluntly, a single phrase that he will repeat every time he’s refuting a Romney falsehood. It could be something slogan-y, like “That’s another Romney Reinvention,” or could be something simple, like “Once again, Governor Romney thinks he can fool you and get away with it.” It almost doesn’t matter what it is, so long as he repeats it every time. The repetition acts as a signal to the viewers, linking that particular part of the debate to what they’ve already heard. This would not only make Romney’s deceptions the headline of post-debate analyses, it would also probably freak Romney out a bit during the debate.

[  ]…Let’s take an example. During their last debate, one of the lies Romney told was that “pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan.”

He should have turned to Romney and said, “I’m sorry, did you just say pre-existing conditions are covered under your plan? With all due respect, I’m a little shocked that you would try to deceive people like that. You and I both know that your plan doesn’t cover people with pre-existing conditions. It only does what current law does, which still lets insurance companies deny coverage to millions of Americans. Folks, this is one of the key differences between us on health care, maybe the most important difference of all. The law we passed, Obamacare, starting a year from January will make it illegal for insurance companies to deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition. Governor Romney believes insurance companies ought to be able to deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition. It’s as simple as that. Now a minute ago, he tried to fool you into thinking he has the same position as I do. But he doesn’t.

Facts are on Obama’s side, but they are not enough. They never are with zealots who are determined to literally create their own reality. You’re lying, here is the details in brief, cut it out. On a national stage that should resonate with swing voters. It might even move them to do some fact checking on their own if they have doubts.

Black and White Little City Harbor wallpaper – Conservatives Do Care About The Environment, Debates Were Recycled Garbage

bay lights, harbor at night

Black and White Little City Harbor wallpaper

The NYT, Politico and every other news outlet is describing the conservative debates in Iowa as some kind of clash of gladiators. All I saw as some people with no ideas, corrupt values, neck-deep in hypocrisy throw powder puffs at each other. if anyone forces you to listen to this crop of wretches, thieves, self-righteous miscreants, government subsidy queens, gay hating bigots and hoodlums in designer clothes, you would have a good case for filing a compliant based on mental torture. Want to know what economic plans they stand for? Look up the history of Europe’s most despotic monarchs. We must keep America’s kings, queens, princes, dukes and duchesses in their hollowed halls other wise they will stop throwing crumbs to the masses. Some of the coded language is interesting – 8 From G.O.P. Trade Attacks at Iowa Debate

The simmering animosity that has been building among some contenders broke into full view during the two-hour debate, with Representative Michele Bachmann defending her legislative accomplishments, her economic ideas and her experience to serve as president. She batted away the criticism, smiling at times and swinging at others, trying to prove she could take the heat.

The Reality: “A Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Huffington Post with three separate federal agencies reveals that on at least 16 separate occasions, Bachmann petitioned the federal government for direct financial help or aid.”

At one point, Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, raised his hand for attention and asked moderators to be included. When he finally was given his turn, he went after nearly all of his rivals, accusing Mrs. Bachmann of “showmanship, not leadership” by opposing raising the nation’s debt ceiling.

Strange times when an off the wall nutter like Rick is the voice of fiscal sanity.

A couple more items from this report by ABC News – Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty Take Gloves Off At Iowa Debate

“I’m not going to eat Barack Obama’s dog food,” Romney said, referring to the debt agreement, which raises the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling. “What he served up is not what I would have as president of the United States.”

Actually that would be John Boehner’s (R-OH) “dog food” – whatever that means, since Boehner the Speaker of the House claimed he got 98% of what he wanted.  Everyone knows there would have been no debt ceiling issue at all if there was a Republican president dealing with a Republican House. That whole cooked up crisis was all about spite and malice, not what was good for the country. It certainly wasn’t about ideological consistency as Reagan and Bush both had the debt ceiling raised multiple times with very little debate. What would Romney have done if challenged, let the economy take a bigger nose dive. He has never shown a tendency to political suicide so that means he’s just tossing peanuts from the grandstands.

It wasn’t just Bachmann and Pawlenty who clashed. Rep. Ron Paul and former Senator Rick Santorum got into a lengthy back and forth regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions, with Paul arguing that Iran doesn’t pose a threat to America’s safety.

“Iran is not Iceland, Ron” Santorum chided. “Anyone who suggests Iran is not a threat to the Middle East is not seeing the world very clearly.”

Ron Paul has a very tenuous grasp on sanity. Though I have to give him credit for not wetting himself over the trumped-up national security threats of his fellow conservatives.

And the last word goes to Romney,

“If you spend your life in the private sector and you understand how jobs come and how they go,” Romney said, “you understand that what President Obama has done is the exact opposite of what needs to be done.”

If there was a national contest for the poster child of clueless corporate handmaiden Romney would easily make the finals. Stephen Colbert explains: Corporations and context

“You see, Romney made a Mittload of cash using what’s known as a leveraged buyout. He’d buy a company with ‘money borrowed against their assets, groomed them to be sold off and in the interim collect huge management fees.’ Once Mitt had control of the company, he’d cut frivolous spending like ‘jobs,’ ‘workers,’ ‘employees,’ and ‘jobs.’ […]

“Because Mitt Romney knows just how to trim the fat. He rescued businesses like Dade Behring, Stage Stories, American Pad and Paper, and GS Industries, then his company sold them for a profit of $578 million after which all of those firms declared bankruptcy. Which sounds bad, but don’t worry, almost no one worked there anymore.

“Besides, a businessman can’t be weighed down with a bleeding heart. As one former Bain employee put it, ‘It was very clinical…. Like a doctor. When the patient is dead, you just move on to the next patient.’”

[   ]…Romney slashed American jobs as if his career depended on it — and it did. Frank Rich recently explained, “In [his 1994 Senate] campaign, Romney was stalked by a ‘Truth Squad’ of striking workers from a Marion, Indiana, paper plant who had lost jobs, wages, health care, and pensions after Ampad, a Bain subsidiary, took control. Ampad eventually went bankrupt, but Bain walked away with $100 million for its $5 million investment. It was an all-too-typical Romney story.”

Romney made a classic gaffe about corporations and persondom. I understood what he meant, but he and his handlers might want to make sure he expresses those thoughts in a way that is more digestible in the future. He was giving the crowd the same tired old conservative bromide that corporations are entities that create jobs. David Dayen at Firedoglake makes a good case that the most dangerous part of Romney’s speech was his take on Social Security – Romney’s Social Security Views More Dangerous Than His “Corporations Are People” Quip. I agree but that is still only part of a monumental problem with conservatism and with many centrist Democrats. Worse in terms of overcoming a false and dangerous political message is that a good portion of the public buys into the notion that we better stand back, let corporations do whatever they like and give them whatever they want because they create jobs. Corporations are generally a few people and a small stack of paper. Those people are be brilliant or devious or both, but they are not going to make a single dollar without the labor to make the product or provide the service. Once labor is in place they must have demand. Unless they only make $80k sports cars they are going to need a working public to buy what they provide. In short corporations are a three-way partnership between the person or persons who created them, labor and their customers. Labor can create and sell things without the Romneys or Trumps. The elitists, on the other hand can do very little without labor and customers. The most essential part of the partnership is labor and other laborers (labor is anyone who is non-management and usually anyone up to middle-management, and professionals like dentists) who are customers. Romney and millions of other Americans really feel that no sacrifice is too great to prop up the corporate part of the triangle. The least valuable part. It’s a myth that looms as one of the American economy’s biggest zombies. Shift the priorities to labor and consumers, and corporations will make reasonable profits and we’ll have an economy that does not have too big to fail corporations, and is much more stable in the long haul. Obama started out with a somewhat Keynesian plan that put an emphasis on creating jobs. Now Republicans who are playing at working class populism have taken away all the Keynesian tolls to create jobs. Bachmann and Palin have both said, incredulously, that taxes and regulations are stopping job creation. Taxes are the lowest they have been in sixty years. Regulations are certainly no more onerous than the same regulations were during the Bush or Clinton era. So non-kool-aid drinkers know those prescriptions are worthless.

This is not posted as an excuse for British rioters ( there is no excuse for hurting innocents the way rioters have), but some long-term issues are in play. The elite do not terrorize a society by taking to the street. They are much more devious than that – The moral decay of our society is as bad at the top as the bottom

I cannot accept that this is the case. Indeed, I believe that the criminality in our streets cannot be dissociated from the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society. The last two decades have seen a terrifying decline in standards among the British governing elite. It has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat. An almost universal culture of selfishness and greed has grown up.

[  ]…Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low-paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.

A great deal has been made over the past few days of the greed of the rioters for consumer goods, not least by Rotherham MP Denis MacShane who accurately remarked, “What the looters wanted was for a few minutes to enter the world of Sloane Street consumption.” This from a man who notoriously claimed £5,900 for eight laptops. Of course, as an MP he obtained these laptops legally through his expenses.

Yesterday, the veteran Labour MP Gerald Kaufman asked the Prime Minister to consider how these rioters can be “reclaimed” by society. Yes, this is indeed the same Gerald Kaufman who submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen television.

Or take the Salford MP Hazel Blears, who has been loudly calling for draconian action against the looters. I find it very hard to make any kind of ethical distinction between Blears’s expense cheating and tax avoidance, and the straight robbery carried out by the looters.

The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor: “We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.” He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.

He leaves out Tony Blair who lied Britain into Bush’s Iraq quagmire. Blair left office, wrote a book, got a huge advance, did the talk show circuit and now lives a comfortable life most of Great Britain could only dream of. Lie your fellow citizens to their deaths and be rewarded. Spend your country’s treasures on foreign policy debacles and retire in leisure. The rioters should stop their abhorrent behavior immediately. That stills leaves Britain’s elite to explain why their immoral behavior and corruption is making the U.K. a better culture.

Rick Perry Says Social Security And Medicare Are Unconstitutional – Perry did not use the gun in the photo to shoot himself in the foot. He did that with his mouth.

Fact checking the GOP debate in Iowa. Facts and conservatives remains strangers that pass in the night.