Steve

Romney made a decision to choose a VP running mate that was gonna get the conservatives who doubt him out as well as get the white male vote out. He's giving up on women and had to risk losing a chunk of the middle. The part core may not like Obama, in fact hate him, but it didn't seem they were gonna come out in numbers to vote against Obama and for Romney, a person they don't trust as one of their own. Dicey call and suspect their internal numbers said they needed to. Florida may be gone if Obama runs ads there scaring the retirees about Ryan wanting to gut their programs. As for West, he's right on two thigs. First, the ads were meant to have racia undertones and second there is hypocracy on the part of the NAACP, Sharpton and Jackson had it been a Democrat. My question is this. He doesn't like any of the aforementioned and sees them as partisan (which I agree) and took it as an opportunity to blame them for not helping. If they had supported him would he have accepted it? Can't see him standing next to Sharpton denouncing it. I have no respect for West. There are some black conservatives that try to 'out conservative' conservatives in order to prove they are true. His statement about his being glad his forefathers were brought to America as slaves is asanine. Knowing the unthinkable cruelty they had to go through and his making that kind of statement smacks of frankly an Uncle Tom. I hate using that term. I've been accused of being one on many occasions because of my stance on issues. You'd never hear Colin Powell utter such idiocy because he has integrity. Its the same West who tried to ignite bigotry a few years ago by constantly using Obama's middle name Hussein when discussing him. Knowing by doing that many people would not only believe he was a moslem but it also surreptitiously promotes anti arab bigotry. It was reckless and immoral in my view. Ask a Jew if they were glad their grandparents went through the holocaust because it meant that they were able to come to the U.S. instead of staying in Poland if they hadn't otherwise. They would label you an insane anti-semite. Its tantamount to the same thing saying blacks should be glad for slavery. You'll rarely hear black conservatives be proud of being Black. I am, they will always say I'm proud to be American. Its okay for a Jew, Italian, born again or Irish conservative to say they are proud of their ethnic or religious heritage as well as being as proud to be American but if you're black its seen as militant to some extent. I've heard Romney say he's proud to be Mormon. Nothing wrong with it and he should be. My prediction is that there will be an internal revolution in the Republican party just as there were with the Dems. After the landslide losses in the '80s they Dems gave up fielding Presidential candidates who were seen as true Liberals. As I said, they've selected moderates and centrists since the '90s...Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Obama are centrists. With the demographics working against them and if they continue to lose Presidential elections by alienating the middle as they do they will have to or risk only being able to win in congressional districts and statewide elections which senate races basically are. For me the future is Cory Booker, the best person of either party. I hope he runs for Governor soon and then President in the next 8 to 12 years.

Catch 22 for Romney, the base isn't excited about him. That's obvious. The question does the base hate Obama enough to come out in numbers to vote against him despite not liking him? They may if it was the idea of an Obama but they've had almost 4 years to get used to him. And as much as they don't like Obama, deep down they know he isn't as bad as Fox News or Hugh Hoy (hehe)makes him out to be. The big question as well as will he get a good enough bump in the polls to challenge in Penna., Florida and Ohio. The polling suggests that people aren't crazy about Obama but he's not as bad as how the far right are making him out to be.

I saw this on the list: Endowed Professor The holder of an Endowed Chair. A slight abuse of terminology, since it is not the professor who is endowed, but the Professorship. "The title of 'Endowed Chair' or 'Endowed Professor' may be given to a distinguished scholar whose position is supported by endowment funds." (Nicholls St. U.) They forgot one: "Well Endowed Professor' for those who have big dicks.

HH! Been too long, we missed ya and your fringe right ideology! haha...messing with ya (although its true...haha). You're genuinely missed. Now, time to educate you. You know very well, the Democratic party became Centrists in the early '90s. They haven't fielded a 'liberal' candidate since Mondale maybe. Dukakis for some, but not me. Clinton, Gore, Kerry and your friend and mine, Obama all centrists. As for Wayne Root, you can't get laid these days saying you're a Republican so many have started saying they're Libertarians. Wayne Root couldn't spell Libertarian. My brother is perplexed. He thinks I must be banging some come far left chick and the pussy is so good, I'm willing to sell out my ideals according to him. He knows I love the ladies but good pussy can't sway me from the eternal truth even if some cutie gave me that ultimatum. C'mon HH, you're too nice of a guy to keep believing the bull they're feeding you in that party. It will feel a little awkward at first being liberal but in the end you'll enjoy it. Its kinda like the first time a girl rims you. You feel a little dirty, you think you shouldn't be doing it but you realize there is not only nothing wrong with it, but its natural.

I think what will happen is eventually they are so far right that the pendulum will swing the other way and ultimately hurt any very conservative candidate. You'll have your niches where they welcome that kind of person but statewide in a fairly diverse state, well, it will end up hurting that ideology. Wisconsin, Arizona are going realize how they are looking to everyone.

These scandals require the complicity of large institutions (Hawaii, Columbia University, Harvard University), they required complicity before he was 'anyone'. He was an associate professor at the Univ. of Chicago. You can't get a job anywhere in America without the employer verifying your degree with the school. The Republicans and conservatives involved in all this come out looking sillier and hard to take the party serious when some of its members are doing this. The senior members of the party have not put a stop to it which means they don't have a problem with the rumors. They obviously believe it helps. The party is being dragged farther right and the demographics are against them. The base is shrinking. America's demographics will hurt them more and more and they better start taking notice. As for the election its still Obama by a good distance. Not nearly as much as 2008 but right now, its over. I was having a discussion with someone about how hardcore the right is (although it could be argued the Dems...who are centrist these days can be said as well) that if you ran Obama against Cheney, Cheney would win a few states like Texas, Mississippi, South Carolina, probably Arizona, and more states than you think he should. Same if Bush ran again. Its scary thinking that but its true.

While i think in the political season its fair to be cyoical about any statement obama did what aoy president would do and frankly should do. You comfort the community and the nation. What was he supposed to do? Not comment? As far as religion, we have been down this road before. Man will always kill each other. Its our nature. china, ussr, the khmer rouge and nazi germany did a pretty good job discounting whether nn religion would stop people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenna_Jameson Jameson was a political liberal and during an interview with Allison Kugel on May 17, 2007, revealed that she supported New York Senator Hillary Clinton's bid for presidency.[109][110] Jameson endorsed Mitt Romney to CBS News on August 2, 2012, stating, "I'm very looking forward to a Republican being back in office. When you're rich, you want a Republican in office."

Long time republican and conservative eastwood likes roymney...shocking!lol

Rubio will help but I don't think he's enough to turn the election around. Palin actually gave McCain a nice bump initially but it didn't take long to see she wasn't close to being vice presidential. External events (bad economy, an Obama scandal, etc.) are the only things that can turn it around for Romney.

Forgot to put the link but USA Today and other outlets have an article saying Obama is leading in Ohio, Florida and Penna., and its outside the margin for error. Something like 7 or 8 points or more. This race is over unless something changes. National polls mean jack squat. The ONLY thing that matters are the swing states and the 5 biggest which includes these 3. I was suprised to see him leading in Florida. He was behind slightly a few months ago. The negative ads must be working. I hate to see the negative ads but he's just playing the same game as the Republicans. I hope my candidate, Gary Johnson, can get into the debates at least. I have a prediction about the future of certain hot button issues these days. They are not necessariy what I favor but what I see happening. Gay Marriage: It will happen nationally in my lifetime. Its a matter of when not if. Pot (and other drugs): That will happen as well. The generation that was born during the 70s and later have a totally different view of pot and drugs. Most college kids have tried it. It will become legal and taxed. Possibly a way to get the harder drugs legally as well. Guns: It will stay legal but it will become harder to get one and you will only be able to own a very few types. The government will control it nefariously. They'll hit the gun makers. They'll deny people the right for the most mundane of reasons. They will require more. If a more liberal or moderate court happens it will happen sooner. Abortion: Will become easier. Demographics will determine this. Gen Y and Gen X women, even the ones that wouldn't get an abortion, won't stand in someone's way to get one. Men and women will see it as a war on women as its being promoted now.

Bush and cheney are toast with regards to history. Carter was demonized. Iran killed him off. The economy was bad almost that whole decade under ford and nixon. Republicans were better back then at character assassination and now the dems and left of center media have caught on. Obama is a canny politician with smart people around him. He can play the game and thinks like a lawyer. Probes for weakness. Reagan is deified by conservatives. They have been able to co opt his legacy as a top 10 presidant in the group after tthe mt. Rushmore crowd.

Bush and cheney are toast with regards to history. Carter was demonized. Iran killed him off. The economy was bad almost that whole decade under ford and nixon. Republicans were better back then at character assassination and now the dems and left of center media have caught on. Obama is a canny politician with smart people around him. He can play the game and thinks like a lawyer. Probes for weakness. Reagan is deified by conservatives. They have been able to co opt his legacy as a top 10 presidant in the group after tthe mt. Rushmore crowd.

Why the f*ck does any media outlet think this guy is relevant or his opinion means jack schitt? Must be a sick joke. In fact his not liking Obama is an endorsement in my book. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/dick-cheney-on-his-heart-pump-and-obama-s-record-20120730.html Dick Cheney on his heart pump and Obama's record

Okay, while in my present mood, I'll comment about Syria. I'll admit I'm not well versed in the particulars of that struggle so I could be completely off and will have a welcome ear for any information contrary to my view. I heard some Republicans responding to Obama's foreign policy wins by noting Syria. They want a more 'active' role and active means military. They also talked about Russia and China vetoing security council actions. I'll take the 2nd point first. What the f*ck is any Republican gonna do to get the Russians and Chinese on board? Those two countries ALWAYS veto actions against anyone. Romney has no special strategy for getting them on board short of paying them off via trade deals, etc. We've gone into too many messes guns blazing. From what I can tell militarily its similar to Iraq, multiple ethnic and reigious groups who all don't trust each other. It would be a mess. We seem to be doing the right thing with mounting pressure from every corner. Assad has to know its a matter of when not if he has to go. I gotta think if I were him, he knows the world is against him and an exit strategy where he can keep his head....and some of his money is all he can come up with. If I were him I'd eye Iran as a place to live out the rest of my days. I don't see what else Obama can be doing other than covert action getting aid, in all forms to the rebels and I have to assume the CIA is doing that now very quietly. Directly or via a 3rd country.

Mississippi just seems to be stuck in the past. Ultimately its own citizens are to be blamed for putting up with bullshyt. My guess is they play the divisive politics very well there and play one group against the other in the old but time tested, divide and conquer game. I'm gonna premise this next statement by saying I'm a zionist and believe in the state of Israel. That said, I don't like one bit that part of being president is having to basically go kiss ass to Israel. Our relationship with ANY nation should NOT be part of the election process. Foreign policy, fine, discuss views but our candiates basically go kissing ass to a foreign country as part of the process. I don't give a f*ck what foreign country, it should NOT be part of the process. Its weak and demeaning. Of course we all know why: Florlida. In order to get the Jewish vote in Florida we have to show them that...get this...we are loyal to a FOREIGN country?! What the f*ck?! What is wrong with this picture? You have to show Americans that you are loyal to another country in order to get them to vote for you? I don't give a damn what th country is. Even our closest allies. Going to England, Israel, etc. to kiss ass is NOT cool. Time to tell any American that you're an American first. No problem in loving your ancestral home, yadda, yadda, but if you're basing your loyalty as an American on what happens in another country, you need to find another country. If Africa is f*cking up against America, I'm an American first and foremost. We gotta stop this shyt. Its pathetic.

I'm not convinced the problem is mainly bad teachers. I don't know if there are many people who go into the profession thinking its an easy paycheck for doing nothing. The profession has a reputation for being a tough one. Its known as a thankless job with students are far more violent and rude and far less prepared than previous generations. Kids are woefully unprepared and parents of all income levels think their kids shyt don't stink. I and others have posted numerous articles of parents who will back their child when they're obviously wrong. I gaurantee you that grandmother who was teased on the bus would not have been believed by any of the parents were it her word. Most of us on here grew up in a generation where adults were believed instead of the kid. If my teacher said I did that was that unless I had overwhelming evidence to the contrary. With regards to Mississippi, they seem to be ignoring a method (pre kindergarten preperation) that has proven results. Also, no matter how good a teacher is, if you get a bunch of unprepared kids there is notihng you can do about it. Especially in poor areas where you not only have kids who are behind their age level but parents who coddle their children and blame the teacher for any thing and don't believe their child is bad when they are told he or she is. Today's parents aren't as good as before. I think that's the main problem. My guess is the overwhelming majority of people who go into teaching these days have a genuine love for children and teaching. Every indication is that its a profession to be avoided with the stress meter for it being fairly high. There is a whole generation of poor and working class and even some middle class parents who see preparing their child for school is sitting them down in front of the cartoon network. Also, throw in the fact that a great number of them are raised in single parent homes where that parent simply has no time to prepare them as much as they would like. There are so many things that could be tied to getting American kids prepared and educated: drug use, crime, teen age pregnancy, etc. Poor girls who are educated tend to go to college and avoid pregnancy. Poor boys who have hope and a good education tend not to join gangs, commit gun crimes or smoke crack.

http://news.yahoo.com/mississippi-learning-why-states-students-start-behind-often-064000563.html Mississippi Learning: Why the State's Students Start Behind -- and Stay Behind

Although I wouldn't be voting for Romney, I did minimize his tax return issues. I still do to some extent but this article has given me pause. Not on a legal issue. If it is true as (off shore accounts, etc.) they say and its legal, then nothing wrong with that. What I would find disconcerting is that his platform calls for tax cuts to the rich both individual and corporate and it appears highly self serviing as well as favoring his social/income class while appearing insensitive to the poor, working and middle classes. It simply doesn't look good. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/opinion/krugman-mitts-gray-areas.html?_r=3&ref=opinion First, however, let’s talk about what it meant to get rich in George Romney’s America, and how it compares with the situation today. What did George Romney do for a living? The answer was straightforward: he ran an auto company, American Motors. And he ran it very well indeed: at a time when the Big Three were still fixated on big cars and ignoring the rising tide of imports, Romney shifted to a highly successful focus on compacts that restored the company’s fortunes, not to mention that it saved the jobs of many American workers. It also made him personally rich. We know this because during his run for president, he released not one, not two, but 12 years’ worth of tax returns, explaining that any one year might just be a fluke. From those returns we learn that in his best year, 1960, he made more than $660,000 — the equivalent, adjusted for inflation, of around $5 million today. Those returns also reveal that he paid a lot of taxes — 36 percent of his income in 1960, 37 percent over the whole period. This was in part because, as one report at the time put it, he “seldom took advantage of loopholes to escape his tax obligations.†But it was also because taxes on the rich were much higher in the ’50s and ’60s than they are now. In fact, once you include the indirect effects of taxes on corporate profits, taxes on the very rich were about twice current levels. Now fast-forward to Romney the Younger, who made even more money during his business career at Bain Capital. Unlike his father, however, Mr. Romney didn’t get rich by producing things people wanted to buy; he made his fortune through financial engineering that seems in many cases to have left workers worse off, and in some cases driven companies into bankruptcy. Has there ever before been a major presidential candidate who had a multimillion-dollar Swiss bank account, plus tens of millions invested in the Cayman Islands, famed as a tax haven? And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 million. There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments. And that is precisely why voters have a right to know that truth

In my opinion he's unfit for office right now. I don't want to sound unsympathetic. I honestly hope he gets better. I like him actually. I've read that he's a centrist politically and no where near the type of person his father is. If you recall he was one of the few black pols who supported Obama from the start and ran counter to pretty much every black politician. It was brave and showed he didn't just go along with the crowd. A crowd he had an 'in' with. However, if he's as bad off health wise as suspected and taking into consideration privacy, the leadership at least needs to know the details. He has a responsibility not only to Illinois but also nationally on important matters that needs voting on. http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/27/12997279-jesse-jackson-jr-being-evaluated-for-depression-at-mayo-clinic?lite Jesse Jackson Jr. being evaluated for depression at Mayo Clinic

Romney's comments aside, its not a big deal. In this election season any little gaffe is overblown and maginified ad nauseum. Its certainly not a reason not to vote for him. Obama is in full political mode and he is bringing his A game. He signed a new pact with Israel just as Obama is planning a trip to Israel. His being Mormon will hurt him a lot with the Jewish vote. They either don't know anything about them or they don't like or trust them. Its still Obama's election to lose. I don't see him losing. I'm seeing anywhere from 320 to 350 electoral votes for Obama when only 270 is needed. He's leading in Virginia and Obama is right. He wins Virginia its over. It negates one of the top swing states and he's leading in most of them anyway, at least the top 5 or 6. North Carolina is in play and a lot is made of it but Dems don't usually win that state anyway. Its usually a Republican state.

Romney's taxes are red herrings. Unless he broke the law and evaded taxes, it doesn't matter what his returns say. They could say he paid no taxes and made a 100 million dollars and I wouldn't see that as a reason not to vote fcr him. If anything, I'd see it as a plus. Any man smart enough to do that knows how things work. I won't be voting for him under just about any circumstances but his taxes and how much he made and paid isn't in the equation. The only significance is what he'll do. The Kennedy's made a lot of money as well but were staunch liberals who often voted to raise taxes. ALL that matters is what Romney will do if he's President. His taxes, Bain career, etc. means jack squat.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/former-coach-charged-harrassment-falsely-accusing-two-others-102721267.html Former coach charged with harrassment after falsely accusing two others at school of sexual contact with their athletes There are some things in the 'Bro Code' you simply don't do. One of them is falsely accuse another guy of molesting. In this day and age there are some stigmas that even if proven 100% false, you still are looked at wtih a 'hmmmm' in a few people's minds forever. Messing with underage kids is one of them. Its one of those things that everyone still in the small crevices of their mind still have a wee bit suspicion about no matter what. I would make this guy pay for the investigation at the very least. I hope this follows him to ANY job he gets after this. He'd need a 'Road to Damascas' change in his life for me to forgive him were i accused. The irony is he was doing that shit.

For me it doesn't matter what some 50 or 60 year old Presidential candidate wrote in college. We've all written some crazy shit. Its part of growing up. The vast majority of people are totally different persons than they were in college. Heck, you change your ideology, character, views on a wide variety of things a couple times before you're 30. Was Malcolm X and Mohammed Ali the same as when they were young moslems? Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a champion of equal rights was a known racist when he was younger. Its all more smoke and mirrors and gothcha politics. What are the persons current and recent views? The last 10 years would be a good indicator. Past that and too many life events happen to put much stock in it. I read the auto biography of Malcolm X in 11th grade and wanted to be called Rashad Ahmad Saheed for 4 months. (funny thing is I wouldn't convert to Islam, just wanted the name...lol). Bachman and these pols below are batshit crazy. Its McCarthy era stuff. The scary thing was she was a legitimate candidate for President. One of the reasons I won't go near the Republican party is because these crazies have a voice. The Dems to their credit got rid of their equivalent for the most part. They have no prominance. The Dems have moved toward the center, the Repubs have moved away from it. http://news.yahoo.com/top-republicans-denounce-attack-clinton-aide-180205853.html Accusing Clinton's aide of ties to Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood?! WTF?! With no proof? The 'accused' is noted is married and guess to whom? Abedin is married to former U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner of New York, a Jew.

I don't like Obama's campaign strategy one bit. However, I'm chukling at Republians upest over his using a strategy they perfected. I'm seeing news reports on this but nary a word when Bush used the same exact strategy in '04. Romney doesn't have a clue. He's got no ideas other than the standard Republican mantra that they don't even follow once they are in office. Reagan and both Bushes added to the national debt. They had excuses of course. Obama doesn't seem to be much better but I do think he's on the right track with massive infrastruture spending. I will also say it would have been impossible to fix the economy in 4 years. We were near financial collapse and have deep, systemic issues. Impossible to fix in 4 years and every economist and arm chair economist knows this. However, signs of recovery should be expected.