The AP flop-checks Obama's speech.
And some of us didn't quite feel the rhythm when Obama threatened us with the news that "we've come too far to turn back now"; in fact, I believe I believe I believe he's falling asleep.
I CAN'T TURN BACK EITHER: I can't quit Obama's exhortation that we should all be like the military, especially now that he is C-in-C. But let me highlight this from his Big Finish:
No one built this country on their own. This nation is great because we built it together. This nation is great because we worked as a team. This nation is great because we get each other’s backs.
Grr - the Elizabeth Warren shout-out, the Civil War denialism, and the notion that this nation is founded on collective rather than local or individual effort. There is an alternative view, that freedom and individual effort and responsibility have been the foundation of our country's success. Riddle me this - is Apple great because Steve Jobs had Bill Gates back, or because Jobs had Gates back in sight and a knife in his hand? Just asking.
Then there's this:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 25, 2012 at 11:35 AM
--"we've come too far to turn back now"--
Isn't that what Robert Falcon Scott told his chaps on their way to the South Pole?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 25, 2012 at 11:42 AM
AP confirms that he's a liar and Smart Politics confirms that he just isn't very bright.
I know I've read that before somewhere.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 25, 2012 at 11:43 AM
So, it's better than the 2011 speech, I don't get that at all, 'winning the future' one step at a time, that was a Cortez reference, right TM.
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Where in Obama's speech was anything that would make a single private sector employer more likely to hire a new worker? Or to expand their business? Was there anything that would encourage someone who isn't already spending all of their income to spend more of what they make?
If I wanted to get the economy going, those are the people I'd appeal to. I would tell them to stop worrying (or at least, worry less). I would want to make them feel good about what they did and had done.
The last thing I would do is to demonize them and make them even more worried than they already are... and by pledging to raise their taxes and celebrating the job-killing regulations recently passed, that is what Obama did.
Yes, the lousy economy is his fault. Corporations aren't sitting on tons of cash because of the GOP. People aren't stockpiling cash and reducing debt to prepare for higher taxes and health care costs because of the GOP House. They're doing it because of Obama and his policies.
Posted by: steve | January 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM
You are spot on, Steve. Let's hope the muddle catches on.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Via Instapundit:
Mitt Romney's True Tax Rate: 44.75%
This is ironically the embodiment of the "corporate personhood" legal doctrine otherwise so decried by the left. The law taxes corporations as if they were separate beings from the shareholders who own them and then levies a separate tax on shareholder payouts and gains. This double taxation brings the effective tax rate on investment income to as much as 44.75%.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Ok, so why doesn't it like links today?
Mitt Romney's True Tax Rate: 44.75%
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM
Why is the darling of National Review, that genius businessman unable to open his mouth and say that, Ranger.
We already had 8 years of a nice gentleman who couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. And we should elect another?
(And like GW, he seems to have a penchant for staff that can't come up with something fast on their feet either.)
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Next up, rumors that Nancy Pelosi is going to appear with Gloria Allred and accuse Newt of sexually abusing her in the House cloackroom.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM
"Nancy Pelosi is going to ... accuse Newt of sexually abusing her"
Ewww. Get that image out of my brain!
ps Typo. Did you mean to type "House cloacaRoom"?
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | January 25, 2012 at 12:23 PM
Good question Clarice. On one hand, I have no doubt that Mitt is a deeply decent person of strong personal character. But, right now I am hoping that Gingrich is every bit the bitter, angry, and vengeful man people think he is, and that he focuses his ire as president on both party estblishments and their enablers.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM
The 8.4 grade level does not mean Zero is stupid. It means his speech writers are targeting the knuckle-draggers amongst the muddle who can get riled up about "rich fat cats" but who cannot think. Zero is indeed somewhat dull, but his speechwriters are smart.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM
By the way, is anyone surprised that Clarice got A's in school and wielded pistolas perhaps a tad too much for the teachers' taste? Anybody?
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM
...the darling of National Review...
No kidding, Clarice. Jim Geraghty on Twitter is no longer a horse race watcher, reporter, but instead he has bet on HIS horse and wants to tell you all about it (oh, yeah, and those other lousy horses who can't win so don't bet on them!)
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Narc-- Bingo: love the Cortez reference; 'Bam wasn't using rhetoric, that was a DIRECT THREAT:
"When they landed in the New World, Cortez burned all his ships...that way his men were well motivated." (Adm. Ramius --Hunt for Red October).
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 12:37 PM
From last night:
Heh. Heh-heh-heh-heh.Posted by: Extraneus | January 25, 2012 at 12:41 PM
We will know we are in a collectivist nation when muggers proclaim ...
"Give me OUR money !
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 12:43 PM
Clarice,
I find Governor Romney's squad of attack Yorkies to be very complimentary when viewed with his Languid Response Team. Tastefully understated to the point where they are virtually unnoticeable.
I hope National Review negotiated a substantial damage deposit in their lease to Governor Romney.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Yeesh. I read the speech. Couldn't help editing a little. Kept the sentences intact, just reordered:
On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. It's time to apply the same rules from top to bottom: No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts. That's why I'm sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low interest rates.
Companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes.
Join me in a national commitment to train two million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job. Now you need to give more community colleges the resources they need to become community career centers. Give more young people the chance to earn their way through college by doubling the number of work-study jobs in the next five years. We should support everyone who's willing to work. Government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground. Double-down on a clean energy industry. Help manufacturers eliminate energy waste in their factories and give businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings. Government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more. I'm confident a farmer can contain a milk spill without a federal agency looking over his shoulder.
We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That's long enough. If you're an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you're a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making products here. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions.
Posted by: bgates | January 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM
This is too good not to post on both threads.
LUN shows the prevalence of the belief that regulations increase employment.
Posted by: rse | January 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Like I say, no one thinks like bgates.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Sheesh. That clip of Romney blasting Gingrich for treating the moderators and MSM mean...
Was that the last straw or what? I think it was for me.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM
continuing:
Before I took office, we lost nearly four million jobs. And we lost another four million before our policies were in full effect. I've approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his. America's Armed Forces are not consumed with personal ambition. They don't obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
In three years, our partnership with the private sector has already positioned America to be the world's leading manufacturer of high-tech batteries. Because of federal investments, renewable energy use has nearly doubled. I'm proud to announce that the Department of Defense, the world's largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history - with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized.
I'm prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors. Pass the payroll tax cut without delay.
Posted by: bgates | January 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM
"Longer sentences and sentences utilizing words with more syllables produce higher scores. Shorter sentences and sentences incorporating more monosyllabic words yield lower scores."
While I don't appreciate being treated like an 8th grader, polysyallabicism is generally a vice, not a virtue in political rhetoric. Too bad there's no test for syntax.
This does seem like an appropriate juncture for a Mitch Daniels Wordle, though, the first evah for a GOP response:
Did Smart Politics point out that Republican has more syllables than Democrat?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM
--Ewww. Get that image out of my brain!
ps Typo. Did you mean to type "House cloacaRoom"?--
LOL.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM
And the last of it I could stand:
When it comes to the deficit, we've already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. But we need to do more, and that means making choices. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy. I call on every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen. We can't just keep subsidizing skyrocketing tuition; we'll run out of money. Extend the tuition tax credit.
We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. Even my Republican friends who complain the most about Government spending have supported federally-financed roads, and clean energy projects, and federal offices for the folks back home. We need to end the notion that the two parties must be locked in a perpetual campaign of mutual destruction.
We will stand against violence and intimidation. We will stand for the rights and dignity of all human beings - men and women; Christians, Muslims, and Jews. If Iran changes course and meets its obligations, it can rejoin the community of nations.
No one built this country on their own. This Nation is great because we built it together. This Nation is great because we worked as a team. So far, you haven't acted. Well tonight, I will.
Posted by: bgates | January 25, 2012 at 12:54 PM
TomM with another astute post about 'Bam's alternative history of the USA. Let's do a very very brief summary of the unified collective nation called America: Tory Loyalists V. Revolutionaries: Monarchists V. Republicans: Slavers v. Abolitionists; Farmers v. Bankers; Territorial Expansionists v. Limited borders; The Civil War; reconstruction; the Jim Crow appeasement; Railroads v. ranchers and cattlemen; Industrialists v. Trust Busters; Internationalists v. Isolationists; Anti-Fascists v. fascist sympathizers; Anti- Communists v. communist sympathizers; Federal Civil Rights v. States' Rights; Pro-Aborion v. Anti - Abortion and on and on. American Freedom means freedom to disagree and the resulting political and social conflicts. America is an idea -- not EIN VOLK!!! Sorry-- We don't all stand and shout Sieg Heil to ze BarryI when he calls out for 'UNITY'-- especially when the collectivism he calls unity is in fact tyranny.
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 01:00 PM
Beautiful as usual,bgates.
JMH, nice to have you back and I love your word pics.
Via Mel, here's Jeff Goldstein's short take on the SOTU:
January 24, 2012
Preview of the State of the Union Address 2012, as delivered by Obama RATHER than an honest President with a modicum of shame
“Welcome, all. Comfy? Good. Now, stick ‘em up.”
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 01:02 PM
Drudge apparently doesn't like Gingrich much. Check out the top of his page right now.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 25, 2012 at 01:04 PM
This nation is great because we worked as a team.
Perhaps, we should be President by tag-team
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 01:10 PM
Obama's speach can easily be summed up: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Sound familar?
Posted by: Ritter | January 25, 2012 at 01:10 PM
It's NOT too late for Romney to hire someone other than stupid frat boys to handle his media stuff.
From LI:
Update: Just as the Romney campaign was seeking to use Pelosi’s threat, Pelosi was backing off Pelosi’s office says she has no new dirt on ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich (h/t Weasel Zippers):
”The ‘something’ Leader Pelosi knows is that Newt Gingrich will not be President of the United States. She made that clear last night,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said in a statement….
But on Wednesday, Hammill repeated that all of the information from the investigation is in the public realm.
(But, of course, he won't. He has terrible instincts on these things.)
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 02:17 PM
”The ‘something’ Leader Pelosi knows is that Newt Gingrich will not be President of the United States.
That's how I read it. Then again who knows with this evil broad.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 25, 2012 at 02:25 PM
”The ‘something’ Leader Pelosi knows is that Newt Gingrich will not be President of the United States.
Twas Newt not Webb Hubbell
Posted by: geezer | January 25, 2012 at 02:34 PM
Pelosi's bluffing. She's angry and lonesome for the camera.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 25, 2012 at 02:36 PM
Ford Motor Company has withdrawn its membership in the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), a liberal corporate-environmental movement lobby organization that lobbies for federal laws limiting greenhouse gas emissions.
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 02:42 PM
Pelosi also said the Democrats would retain the House in 2010. Then there was the small matter of the 100 year flood.
Newt is exactly right, President Newt is a nightmare liberal lefty Democrat.
But given her track record, I think it a contraindicator.
Posted by: GMAX | January 25, 2012 at 02:50 PM
Under the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, the President is to submit his budget request on the first Monday in February - a deadline Presidents have consistently met - except this year. This week the White House said it will be a week late.
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 02:50 PM
insert "for a" right in front of liberal lefty Democrat and the meaning becomes evident!
Posted by: GMAX | January 25, 2012 at 02:52 PM
Just as we had to pass OCare to know what was in it, we have to nominate Newt to know what is in Pelosi's head.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 25, 2012 at 02:54 PM
Why use only 3,500 words when you can use 7,000 words to say the same thing? If you're pressed for time between fundraisers, you can just double down in succeeding paragraphs:
Doubling down on your bullet points, however, is pure rhetorical genius:Posted by: JM Hanes | January 25, 2012 at 02:54 PM
JMH:
As a technical matter, a deduction for paying wages for overseas employees, and a new surtax on foreign profits are two different things. So Obama's bullet points do indicate different policies. Whether he really knows that is a different matter.
Posted by: Appalled | January 25, 2012 at 03:03 PM
Thanks JMH; you've just doubled my pleasure in knowing what I completely avoided last night.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 25, 2012 at 03:04 PM
Heads up, Iggy.
LUN
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 25, 2012 at 03:06 PM
Coming on the heels of the resignation of Gabby Giffords ...
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 03:09 PM
Hmm, Neo. Reminds me of that noose on the Columbia prof's door.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 25, 2012 at 03:10 PM
Senators widely condemned the orange, round stickers displaying crosshairs as an affront to their safety
We mourn the passing of Senator Slappy McDouchetard who, when approaching his office, saw a sticker on his door and choked to death on the mouthful of pork rinds that weren't entirely masticated. CSI Bumfuck is on the case.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 25, 2012 at 03:16 PM
Great list at 1:00 NK. Could probably be expanded at the beginning to pick up some of the Federalist fights, some more of the fights pre WWI, and for sure some of the great unions vs Pinkerton dustups (coalfields and steel mills). And where would NASCAR be without moonshine and revenooers?
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 25, 2012 at 03:18 PM
Thank OL-- I should have put in Dry V Wets -- that was a huge regional, religious and social fight for 60+ years, in fact in US history second only to Slavery as a devisive social/political issue
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 03:27 PM
--Heads up, Iggy.--
Thanks OL.
That's been an objective of the tree hugging creeps for some time.
I'd like to reserve a couple of Hellfires for the 9th circuit as well.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 25, 2012 at 03:27 PM
"I don’t want a nice man,” said Kenny The Nail Guy, “I want someone to beat Obama. I choose Newt.”
This was a very interesting statement from a Vietnamese immigrant who
despises communism and knows a socialist when he sees one. He sees one
in Obama.
Posted by: Neo | January 25, 2012 at 03:29 PM
ARG Florida poll out today, Jan 23 and 24. Romney beating Gingrich by 7 points. Chamber of Commerce Florida poll out today. Romney and Gingrich essentially tied (Romney about 0.3 or so up). We Ask AMerica poll out yesterday, Tied. Romney endorsed by the Orlando Sentinel.
Don't be anointing "President Gingrich" just yet.
Posted by: bio mom | January 25, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Spengler at Pajamas Media on Zero chances:
Posted by: GMAX | January 25, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Arrrghhh? Perhaps the worst pollster not just making stuff up ( where is that Ali character who spoofed Kos anyway?).
I would discount anything those clowns said.
Posted by: GMAX | January 25, 2012 at 03:42 PM
Did you say that when ARG was predicting Gingrich winning in South Carolina?
Posted by: bio mom | January 25, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Here is a poll I am sure Henry will like:
The poll, conducted between January 19 and January 22, surveyed 701 Wisconsinites. Of the respondents, 51 percent approved of the way Scott Walker was handling his job as governor, as opposed to 46 percent disapproval. This exceeds President Obama’s job-approval rating, which is split at 47 percent.
Wisconsinites are also beginning to move in favor of Walker’s union policies. Not surprisingly, 74 percent of respondents support requiring public employees to pay into their own pension accounts and pay a greater share of their health-insurance premiums. But 48 percent of respondents support Walker’s plan to limit collective bargaining on benefit and non-wage issues, while 47 percent oppose Walker’s plan. While the public is still evenly split, this marks a sizeable shift in Walker’s direction from polls taken late in 2011.
The news gets even better for Walker when he is pitted against several rumored recall-election challengers. As I mentioned back in November, while the state may be split on Walker’s union plan, they now have to run a flesh-and-blood candidate against him — a Democrat who is likely to be beset with problematic policy positions of their own.
Consequently, Walker leads all rumored potential opponents by between six and ten percentage points. The poll finds Walker ahead of Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett 50 percent to 44 percent. Walker leads the only announced Democratic candidate, former Dane County executive Kathleen Falk, 49 percent to 42 percent. He leads former congressman David Obey 49 percent to 43 percent and Janesville Democratic state senator Tim Cullen 50 percent to 40 percent.
Posted by: GMAX | January 25, 2012 at 03:47 PM
40% of the electorate voted in Florida before Newt had his surge, so Romney may very well take it.
Posted by: Jane | January 25, 2012 at 03:48 PM
Heavens to Betsy. Now even R. Emmett Tyrell has gone over to The Fnork:
"Newt and Bill, as 1960s generation self-promoters, share the same duplicity, ostentatious braininess, a propensity for endless scrapes with propriety and the law. They are tireless hustlers. Now Newt is hustling my fellow conservatives in this election. The last time around he successfully hustled conservatives in the House of Representatives and then the conservatives on the House impeachment committee.
"He blew the impeachment and in fact his role as Speaker. He backed out in disgrace. He now says Republicans in the House were exhausted with his great projects. Nonsense, I knew many of them, and they were exhausted with his atrocious leadership. He is not a leader. He is a huckster. Today Mitt Romney has 72 Congressional endorsements. Newt has 11. Possibly the 11 have yet to meet him.
"Now he has found his key for hustling conservative electorate. He is playing the liberal media card and saying he embodies conservative values. Like Bill with his credulous fans, Newt is hoping conservatives suffer amnesia. Possibly some do. Perhaps they cannot recall mere months ago when this insufferable whiz kid was lambasting the great Congressman Paul Ryan for 'right-wing social engineering' — more evidence of Newt’s not-so-hidden longing for the approval of the liberal media."
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 25, 2012 at 03:50 PM
CBS:
January 25, 2012 Gingrich, Romney in Dead Heat in New Florida Poll By Stephanie Condon Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich has erased the double-digit lead his GOP rival Mitt Romney once held in Florida, leaving the two candidates in a dead heat in the latest poll out of the Sunshine state. Romney leads with 36 percent among likely Republican primary voters in the new Quinnipiac poll, while Gingrich earns 34 percent. The poll, conducted January 19-23, has a margin of error of four points. Former Sen. Rick Santorum garnered 13 percent support while Rep. Ron Paul won 10 percent
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 03:52 PM
"President Obama thinks that the improving economy will win him a second term"
Today's Fed non-upwardly revised GDP projections, which, when applied to the Ray Fair Model produce a predicted share of 48.77%. (The Fair Model predicted a Democrat vote share of 49.9% for the 2010 election, the actual share was 44.8%).
The President is burned toast.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 25, 2012 at 03:55 PM
Thanks GMAX. I heard some of that on the radio at lunch. Felt pretty good until the forecast that the unions would spend $70 million against Walker as the loss of mandatory dues for government workers ends their scam. Note: if the unions spend $70 million and lose (likely), that is good for everybody including ABO.
Posted by: henry | January 25, 2012 at 03:57 PM
RickB-- I'm sticking with my now 7 month old 'Bam gets 46+% projection.
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 03:58 PM
Henry-- Unions spend $70M in the Walker election? that can't be accurate.
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 04:01 PM
"...even R. Emmett Tyrell has gone over to The Fnork"
Newt's weakness is that all the things people like Tyrell are saying about him are, well, true. Or at least, true enough.
Newt's strength is that he is willing to fight.
I _think_ it is that simple.
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | January 25, 2012 at 04:03 PM
henry, I have no sense for numbers... Is $70 million "all in" or is it chicken feed? If they spend the $70 million and lose, are they essentially out of business, since they have no source of funding with the health insurance skim done away with? Or are they keeping a considerable amount in reserve to come back and fight another day?
Posted by: cathyf | January 25, 2012 at 04:04 PM
Ah, Bob Irony, has a crunchy taste, like a soft taco;
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/01/24/gop-on-the-brink-but-of-what/
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 04:25 PM
Drudge has a link to a story saying Timmy Turbo doesn't expect to be retained by Zero for Hopenchange II.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 25, 2012 at 04:31 PM
Dave (in MA): Bloomberg tweeted the same thing - Geithner saying he will not be asked to stay on if there is a 2nd term.
cathyf: The Hill had an article (in the past day or two) that big labor is worried that the heavy spending in Wisconsin leaves them cash vulnerable in other states they need to battle in.
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 04:34 PM
But, right now I am hoping that Gingrich is every bit the bitter, angry, and vengeful man people think he is, and that he focuses his ire as president on both party estblishments and their enablers.
You haven't had enough of bitter, angry and vengeful from the Oval Office, you want more and from a so-called Republican?
It means his speech writers are targeting the knuckle-draggers amongst the muddle who can get riled up about "rich fat cats" but who cannot think.
But, right above this comment your fellow commenter says he doesn't want a thinking president, but one who operates on appealing to the most base instincts and childish emotions of the electorate.
Snark, sarcasm, and backstabbing might play well for high school and getting kudos from the "cool kids," but they don't get things done, they do not solve problems. Natural leaders do not have to put someone else down in order to make themselves feel or look good.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 04:36 PM
Michael Medved, while talking about Pelosi's latest, reminded us that Patty "no rocket scientist" Murray once said that Strom Thurmond molested her in a Senate elevator.
(Given Thurmond's record, that doesn't seem entirely implausible to me, even with Patty Murray, even at his advanced age when this supposedly happened.)
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 25, 2012 at 04:39 PM
Turbo Timmie gone? no surprise there. Timmie is a leech on the banking system, he needs profitable banks to make dough in the future. 'Bam considers the banks only necessary for campaign cash, It's all Left Wing all the time for 'Bam now, so no photo ops with Timmmie-- the OWSs wouldn't like that.
Posted by: NK | January 25, 2012 at 04:42 PM
I believe that one. My first home in DC was in a complex where he had a condo and I was warned by the seller NEVER to get in an elevator with him.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 04:42 PM
Sara, Mitt the White Knight has been dishing out childish shit himself. Today he peddled the Pelosi nonsense just as she was back tracking on it.
Then he has ads attacking Newt's work for F & F when he has a number of top staffers who came from the same place.
And who can forget the anniversary cake to New?
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Newt's strength is that he is willing to fight.
Oh? All I've seen him do is put Romney down and audition to be Obama's speechwriter and campaign strategist for the General.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 04:46 PM
I want to see Buffet's secretary's tax return. She should have to release it if we are going to compare what she pays to what Romney pays. If she is going to let herself be used as a prop, she should have to at least tell us how much she makes every year and what she paid in taxes.
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 04:46 PM
Natural leaders do not have to put someone else down in order to make themselves feel or look good.
Oh my. Don't look now, but Romney is putting Gingrich down.
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 04:48 PM
By the way, if you to drive liberals crazy, tell them that Strom Thurmond was a liberal -- which he was, for his time and place, early in his career.
(I had great fun writing that post, as you may have guessed.)
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 25, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Sue, Forbes has a piece up reverse engineering her return and concludes she makes between $200 - 500,000 per year in salary.
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 25, 2012 at 04:52 PM
I hope Buffet's secretary got comped for attending that donk and pony show last night.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 25, 2012 at 04:53 PM
OL,
Oh. My. I didn't expect that amount.
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 04:56 PM
So she is also one of those millionaire
1%ers.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 25, 2012 at 04:57 PM
Along those lines, Clarice, Greta Van Susteren had a poll on her blog (yesterday, I think) asking who had done the nastiest attacks during the Republican primary. Romney was winning at 56% or 59% when I last looked.
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 04:57 PM
President Obama thinks that the improving economy will win him a second term
The unemployment rate may drift down, but the real state of the economy is indicated by employment, as in this:
Posted by: jimmyk | January 25, 2012 at 05:01 PM
If 0dumbo's policies are working so well, why is Turbo Timmie a goner?
Posted by: mockmook | January 25, 2012 at 05:01 PM
I went to Forbes and
let me just say...yeah...
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 05:02 PM
The problem is that the rumors about Gingrich are waist deep and have been around quite a while.Some of them are bound to be true, especially in light of the way he scurried out of Washington.
He is even more narcissistic than Obama, which is very hard to do and while a great lecturer I really don't think we need a lecturer any more.
Geithner wanted out months ago if you recall and is working in a house of mirrors trying to keep the global financial system from imploding. I don't envy the man.
Posted by: matt | January 25, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Hey Sara, hope you are feeling better.
Now, I'm sure I can count on you to defend Mitt getting his panties in a wad because Gingrich is being mean to the media.
Don't let me down.
Posted by: mockmook | January 25, 2012 at 05:04 PM
Nothing new about vigorous attacks in a closely contested nomination race. See LUN for the transcript of a 1976 Reagan speech about Gerald Ford. Among other criticisms of the incumbent Prez, Reagan stated that:
So much for not speaking ill of fellow Republicans. Interestingly enough, this Reagan criticism is echoed by those who attack Newt on the ground that he was a Congresscritter, not a Governor.
As that band barenakedladies sang, it's all been done before.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 25, 2012 at 05:05 PM
The pic of those two at the SOTU on Drudge looks as though there is real animus between the men, matt.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 05:05 PM
Maybe Newt and Mitt will take each other out and Santorum will come galloping up the middle.
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 05:09 PM
Apparently, there was a time when Newt was not Reagan's loyal man. I don't really recall, but the quotes are real:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289159/gingrich-and-reagan-elliott-abrams
Posted by: MarkO | January 25, 2012 at 05:13 PM
Welcome back, Sara. For a while this was a "Romney Free Zone" but not anymore.
Newt is within 2 pts. of Romney in Florida. Making up double digits in less than a week.
But, Rubio is turning out to be a modern day Kingmaker much like Sarah has been with the Tea Party. He won't endorse but if he did, that person would win hands down.
This is my first post since sometime early last evening. No SOTU. No thread review here at JOM. No Rush or Boortz today. I feel like Robert Downey, Jr. leaving Betty Ford Clinic - Clean but not for long:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 25, 2012 at 05:14 PM
LUN for the song to keep in mind when someone is trying to convince you that something new is happening.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 25, 2012 at 05:14 PM
Clarice et al:
Can you not evaluate Newt and his many weaknesses without putting Romney down as a Newt defense? He does it too doesn't absolve Newt.
Not to mention that comparing an opponent staffer's behavior as justification for the bad behavior of the other candidate makes no sense.
Newt had a chance to come out this morning after the SOTU and rip Obama and his policies a new one, but instead, he chose to pick up on Obama's themes and trash Romney for having a $20 mil income and being out of touch. And he doesn't just say it, he sneers it.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 05:15 PM
Mitt Romney's True Tax Rate: 44.75%
I actually think this an incorrect argument, but the answer is probably right anyway. It's true that if you own shares in a corporation, it pays a 35% rate before it can distribute earnings. But if it didn't pay that rate, you'd end up paying more per share so your rate of return wouldn't be any different. (Someone does pay that tax, but it's not the outside investor. More likely the employees of the corporation.)
The better argument is that people only get to invest what's left over after income taxes, but that's a trickier argument to understand, so I'm ok with the incorrect one if it gives more or less the right answer and gets the point across.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 25, 2012 at 05:15 PM
On Buffett's secretary's salary: It is likely that Buffett is talking about top marginal rates for her salary -- and his capital gains.
Of course, those are very different from the effective rates for each, but Buffett wouldn't necessarily explain that to his audiences.
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 25, 2012 at 05:17 PM
This from The Reagan Dairies, the only mention of Newt:
"Newt Gingrich has a proposal for freezing the budget at the 1983 level. It's a tempting idea except that it would cripple our defense programs. And if we make an exception on that every special interest group will be asking for the same."
Newt has his virtues, but we should not accept claims that he and Reagan were even friendly, apparently.
Posted by: MarkO | January 25, 2012 at 05:17 PM
Romney and his staff, it appears to me, have spent more time and effort attacking Newt than Obama, Sara. YMMV
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 05:18 PM
Oops, I think I accidentally erased the image in my 5:01. Let's try again:
Posted by: jimmyk | January 25, 2012 at 05:20 PM