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.
You haven't had enough of bitter, angry and vengeful from the Oval Office, you want more and from a so-called Republican?
The question if bitter, angry and vengeful towards whom?
What we have now is someone who is like that towards the only truely productive part of our society, the middle class.
What I want is someone who feels that way towards the ruling class (and their champions & representatives in both parties).
I want someone who will look at the Federal agencies as their enemy, knowing that an entire generation "profesional" government workers will work relentlessly to defeat any real effort at reeform and budget cutting. Any president who truely tries to reform and reign in spending is going to be essentially an insurgent in his own capital, so I want someone there who will look at thsoe around him with unfriendly eyes.
And that is just one group that I wouldn't mind Newt being bitter, angry and vengeful towards.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 05:22 PM
"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
So, Newt was more fiscally conservative than Reagan. A shocking indictment.
Posted by: mockmook | January 25, 2012 at 05:25 PM
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.
Well, I have a feeling Turbo Timmy knows there is no way out of this mess, and doesn't want to be there when the house of cards falls appart. He knows that he will be blamed for at least of couple of generations for failing to stop it if he is there when it happens.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 05:31 PM
MarkO, I am at work and haven't read the Abrams piece you have linked, but I am curious if you have read the piece written by Jeffrey Lord at American Spectator:
Reagan's Young Lieutenant: Gingrich a Star on Reagan Team
I haven't had time to read it thoroughly, either - quickly scanned it - but thought you might find it of interest.
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 05:32 PM
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.
Prepare to be let down. I will defend Romney when I think incorrect or outright false information is being spread about him, but I will not defend him or Newt when they reduce themselves to ripping on each other instead of on the true enemy of this country.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 05:32 PM
Doubling down? Or just rearranging SOTU magnets on the fridge?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 25, 2012 at 05:39 PM
Now Elliot, that's being a little disingenous, does it show he was opposed to the Contras, which were not direct military
interventions, yet the DEms and squishy Reps
and even military men, like then Captain Bacevich, was willing to throw them to wolves,
As for the Mujahadeen, it wasn't automatically
assumed they were succeeded till around the stingers came on line,
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 05:40 PM
I swear, I didn't listen to Rush today...he also wants to see the secretary's tax return.
Posted by: Sue | January 25, 2012 at 05:42 PM
NK & CathyF, the $70 million number for unions was mentioned by a guy Vikki McKenna was interviewing on her radio show. This was in the middle of talking about the survey GMAX quoted. How real is it? The unions (local + national) spent $25-30 million last year on the senate recalls. Walker is a much bigger, much more powerful figure. The importance of the million petition signatures (even if 45% are invalid) is that is the target for national unions to spend here. It is an insane amount of money to spend on a losing cause-- but the unions must stop Walker or face rollbacks at governments everywhere. The recall is their Waterloo or Battle of the Bulge.
Posted by: henry | January 25, 2012 at 05:44 PM
I have this funny image of Tim and Roemer starting a consulting company together...
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 25, 2012 at 05:44 PM
Romney and his staff, it appears to me, have spent more time and effort attacking Newt than Obama, Sara. YMMV
I would say then that you aren't paying attention.
However, I accept that the "wisdom" here is that Newt is a moral, upstanding, honest man whose accomplishments and leadership would fill volumes and that Romney is a dishonest "prick" with no talents, skills, intelligence, or abilities and whose very touch is toxic.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 05:45 PM
Oh, and BTW, the last time I checked people wanting to organize society on a model of military discipline were thought of as Fascists (well, at least until last night). I seem to recall that one of the favorite names of Fascist paries back in the day was what ever the local translation of Phalanx was, as the Phalanx type military formation evoked the idea unity of effort and interdependency toward victory.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 05:48 PM
Could you point to someplace anyone here said that, Sara? I seem to have missed it.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 05:48 PM
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 25, 2012 at 05:49 PM
Sara, I don't think anyone here is saying that, they are wishing that Romney would do a better job of campaigning so he doesn't come off that way. Lots of specific examples have been provided of direct attacks on Newt, even for his response to King at the debate. How misguided is it to attack Newt for doing something that got him a standing O and propelled him to victory in SC?
Posted by: jimmyk | January 25, 2012 at 05:50 PM
Yes, the Falange under Primo De Rivera, whose organization Franco coopted, also the Arrow
Cross, Iron Guard, the Ustashe, whatever Salazar's merry band were called;
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 05:51 PM
well I have an apoplectic ed reporter who wrote a duplicitous story on Finland. I asked on what basis it could be characterized as a strong free market society.
She says the State Dept says it is and I linked the World Bank 2005 report proudly trumpeting its interventionism, corporatism, incomes policy etc.
Now she is citing Sweden as another free market.
I reminded her Columbia was not a good place to learn about free markets.
Posted by: rse | January 25, 2012 at 05:59 PM
The see-saw standings continue to test the thigh muscles.
If Mitt previals, what are the odds he will fig-leaf his own failings with TPers and put Gingorich in the Veep seat?
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Clarice: Scroll back three or four threads. Fairly late at night.
Jimmyk: Getting a standing O from Paulbots for going after the media is fun to watch, but it doesn't advance his qualifications for president.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 06:00 PM
Paulbots? I believe the SC audience was full of supporters for ALL FOUR candidates and I am pretty certain Ron Paul supporters (Paulbots) would not be giving Newt a standing ovation for anything.
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 06:06 PM
What a prick we have as POTUS and CINC to even invoke politics in his remarks about the SEAL flag and their possible affiliation. Only someone who has no understanding of the military or service would even consider making such a statement. For me, it is unbelieavable. This guy is such an amatuer that he makes Code Pink look patriotic.
Cecil, want to chime in?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 25, 2012 at 06:06 PM
The clean toga crowd goes back a ways, as we see;
http://articles.latimes.com/1991-07-21/news/mn-425_1_central-intelligence-agency/2
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 06:20 PM
Occupy the PGA
Finally, an Occupy movement that I can appreciate.
I am a member of golf's 99%. I play golf, but have not yet made it to the professional level!! I have played the game for over 40 years, but have not really put in the practice time and study to be the best. I also probably do not have the skills to really get there either.
However, I now feel that the successful professionals should share their winnings with me for trying. It isn't fair that those players who have worked harder, have studied the game, have better equipment and are stronger and more skilled should make all that money.
Oh sure, they have their charities that they give millions of dollars to, but I am sure that they write all that off on their tax returns to reduce paying their fair share. Is that fair?
They should pay for my golf, buy new equipment for me and share some of their winnings with me.
The whole system should be changed to help people like me!!
Let's occupy a golf course and demand that those who are better at what they do pay for us who aren't as good.
Whining should get us something, like media attention and maybe some sympathy!!
Posted by: Bill Murray | January 25, 2012 at 06:22 PM
Just in case this piece of news from the F & F front last week didn't come up in my absence:
Words fail.Posted by: JM Hanes | January 25, 2012 at 06:27 PM
Presidents who served like HST, Ike, JFK, LBJ, RN, RR, GHWB and W never made statements like those, JIB. The good news is that most current military and veterans will not be fooled. To them it brings back memories of the man who reported for doody.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | January 25, 2012 at 06:28 PM
One can only imagine the flood of prosecutions once Obama leaves office.
Posted by: Ranger | January 25, 2012 at 06:30 PM
"One can only imagine the flood of prosecutions once Obama leaves office."
I haz a feeling you guys better get out the vote. A 2nd Termer can get frisky.
http://online.wsj.com/article/AP365fad522aa3425ca1d37a1f87812074.html
"ALBANY, N.Y. — New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is expected to chair President Barack Obama's new committee investigating the mortgage-backed securities that contributed to the national economic collapse.
In is State of the Union speech Tuesday night, Obama said the new special unit of federal prosecutors and attorneys general will expand investigations "into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis."
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 06:39 PM
That will never happen, Ranger.
Not how we roll...
Posted by: Old Lurker | January 25, 2012 at 06:40 PM
For anyone interested, Walker's State of the State address will be live on Wisconsin Eye at 7:00 local / 8:00 JOM.
Posted by: henry | January 25, 2012 at 06:41 PM
"Scroll back three or four threads. Fairly late at night."
That's a joke, right?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 25, 2012 at 06:47 PM
"covey of quails"--I like that.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 25, 2012 at 06:48 PM
This fellow, was outed by Wright around 1987;
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-07-18/news/9103200671_1_iran-contra-alan-fiers-robert-gates
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 06:48 PM
One can only imagine the flood of prosecutions once Obama leaves office.
It may never happen, but it made my heart soar like the hawk anyway.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 25, 2012 at 06:51 PM
Man-Child versus Arizona Governor. No contest. What a petulant little prick this guy is. A true narcissitic charlatan who is better off sitting on a couch smoking crack and getting head.
Posted by: Bill Murray | January 25, 2012 at 06:58 PM
"He has an excellent point. It won’t really hurt him if the payroll tax cap is removed for earned income. But how about Cap Gains? No payroll taxes there.
Include both with no cap, then Romney can whine about double-taxation.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/01/warren-buffett-and-his-secretary-talk-taxes/
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 06:58 PM
"That will never happen, Ranger.
Not how we roll..."
I guess Clinton was before your time, Old Timer...
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 06:59 PM
They do seem very cavalier with handling of covert information
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/18/us/senator-s-slip-costs-cloak-and-dagger-agent-the-rest-of-his-cloak.html
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 07:05 PM
Drugs wore off and melodrama returns.
Posted by: Gmax | January 25, 2012 at 07:19 PM
"Geithner wanted out months ago ..."
matt, did he say he needed more time to spend with his tax return?
Posted by: Frau Steuramt | January 25, 2012 at 07:23 PM
We're Bearded Spock universe up here.
Lisa loved the speech. Begich, not so much:
Lisa Murkowski "had good things to say about the speech. "(President Obama) spoke to the issue of trust," she said. "And I think that we have lost some of that trust. We need to regain that trust member to member, house to house and with the people that we represent."
"I had assumed there would be more of a campaign tone and campaign pitch, but I think he took a pointed effort to make sure that he was spelling out what he hoped to see in this next year. Somewhat aggressive proposals, some unrealistic proposals, but I think it was important he laid forth a vision."
Murkowski was "pleased" that Obama spent so much time on energy. "Last year, if you'll recall, there was just a very small reference to energy," she said.
Dem Senator Begich: "His reaction was lukewarm..."I am eager to hear more details about oil and gas production but frankly, I don't know how you can talk about American energy potential and not include the tens of thousands of jobs that would be created by development of oil and gas in the off-shore waters of Alaska's Arctic."
Posted by: daddy | January 25, 2012 at 07:23 PM
I just wish Newt would stop bashing capitalism. His attacks on Romney's wealth really bum me out. And it's not like Newt hasn't gotten very rich himself. Who knew historians were in such demand?
JMH I'm watching that story like a hawk. I think F&F is my #1 story that I'm interested in. And it is getting really ugly.
JIB, how's your back?
Posted by: Jane | January 25, 2012 at 07:24 PM
Like you see in the earlier links it runs in the family, daddy, as for Begich, he is almost coming around, the brain slugs are finding it a little harder, then again he might see tougher long term prospects, to keeping the seat.
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 07:26 PM
For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. (Applause.)
More like 20 years. He forgot about the poor sods who enforced the no fly zone for 12 years and were regularly shot at.
Posted by: Ralph L | January 25, 2012 at 07:30 PM
Cross posting from the newer thread this good news:
Obama's SOTU ratings continue to decline. Down 12% from 2011; down 21% from 2010.
Posted by: centralcal | January 25, 2012 at 07:32 PM
Most Americans at this point dont want to hear anything he has to say and just want him to go away. And they will vote like that too come November.
Posted by: Gmax | January 25, 2012 at 07:35 PM
"attorneys general will expand investigations "
I thought that was what AG Miller was supposed to be leading. Did Miller get enough out of state contributions and they decided to spread the wealth?
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/09/02/reminder-in-2010-iowa-ag-miller-was-major-recipient-of-vew-out-of-state-bank-finance-money/
"And the Obama administration has sided squarely with Miller & the banks against Schneiderman, perhaps because banks are where the money is, and Obama’s got a brand new $1 billion ad campaign to finance."
Posted by: pagar | January 25, 2012 at 07:37 PM
""And the Obama administration has sided squarely with Miller & the banks against Schneiderman, perhaps because banks are where the money is, and Obama’s got a brand new $1 billion ad campaign to finance."
That's sum bullshit, pagar.
Schneiderman fought the settlement with the banks and was removed from his post in that capacity. But Obama has appointed him to this new position for good reason. I will let you muse...........
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 07:40 PM
Just heard Obama attach Romney as a rich guy, Swiss accounts, out of touch with America, and a guy who hates undocumented immigrants. Wait. That wasn't Obama? It was Newt?
I'll take a pass on that tactic. How does that attack promote any conservative principle?
Posted by: MarkO | January 25, 2012 at 07:48 PM
Well seeing as Holder and Breuer, came up in the foreclosure mess, of course he had to point 'look squirrel'
That official, in the earlier links was burned by Agee back in 1975, btw, and suchdecision were blessed by Mort Halperin, back when he headed the Washington office of the ACLU. Yes the same Halperin who is a VP at Soros's think tank, CAP.
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 07:51 PM
That's a joke, right?
Romney being called the P-word or a weasel is not a joke to me. Why am I not surprised that it would be to you. It is like calling a woman the C-word.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 07:52 PM
" How does that attack promote any conservative principle?"
"Speak no evil of any Republican" RWR.
It's the 21st century, MarkObsequious
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 07:52 PM
"But Obama has appointed him to this new position for good reason."
What good reason?
Posted by: pagar | January 25, 2012 at 08:05 PM
--Romney being called the P-word or a weasel is not a joke to me. Why am I not surprised that it would be to you. It is like calling a woman the C-word.--
Wasn't he indicating the joke would be expecting someone to scroll back three or four threads in the hope of finding some particular comment amongst the many hundreds made?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 25, 2012 at 08:07 PM
"What good reason?"
Taking the Lead on kicking Bankster Ass.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 08:10 PM
Hell he could start with the subcabinet and the executive branch, pagar, but 'shirley he's not serious,'
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 08:16 PM
Newt is employing a bizarre sort of scorched Earth campaign. As he seeks to destroy his adversary, he's providing the enemy with ammunition to defeat Romney should he win the nomination.
Frankly, I think the man is insane.
Posted by: Barbara | January 25, 2012 at 08:22 PM
Wasn't he indicating the joke would be expecting someone to scroll back three or four threads in the hope of finding some particular comment amongst the many hundreds made?
I have no idea. If that rationalization works for you, fine.
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2012 at 08:24 PM
"I think the man is insane."
Your first clue?
I've seen that look in his eyes for some time, now.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 08:33 PM
Of course, he is not serious. Just a few days ago on JOM several links were posted tying high level JOM employees to the law firm that gave the legal opinion that MERS could be used. That and a bunch of other BS that contributed to the real estate market breakdown. Obama has had 3 years to do something about the mortgage mess and has done less than nothing IMO. Within the past few days, there have been links at JOM that a settlement with 50 State AGs and the banks was near and it was really going to do something. Now we're told that a new investigation will be started and it is really, really, really going to do something.
Posted by: pagar | January 25, 2012 at 08:45 PM
And trust me, I *know* that insane look in the eyes very well. I have mirrors in every room in my home.
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | January 25, 2012 at 09:13 PM
Newt Gingrich has a proposal for freezing the budget at the 1983 level.
Best idea I've heard from him yet. We'd eliminate the national debt within ten years.
Posted by: bgates | January 25, 2012 at 09:35 PM
bgates, could be true. My point is that Reagan disagreed. They were not peas in any pod.
Posted by: MarkO | January 25, 2012 at 09:39 PM
True, it was more important to challenge the Soviets, then the relatively small deficit,
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2012 at 09:42 PM
Campaigning in Florida today, Newt Gingrich said, per BuzzFeed, “When they have 13,000 Americans living on the moon, they can petition to become a state.”
President Moonbeam. Must the be space industry in Florida that causes this. Romney likely will call on us to make Mars a territory.
Posted by: MarkO | January 25, 2012 at 09:43 PM
However, I accept that the "wisdom" here is that Newt is a moral, upstanding, honest man whose accomplishments and leadership would fill volumes and that Romney is a dishonest "prick" with no talents, skills, intelligence, or abilities and whose very touch is toxic.
This must top the list for strawman of the year thus far on JOM.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 26, 2012 at 10:31 AM
Drugs wore off and melodrama returns.
And all while typing one-handed or something. Really quite remarkable.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 26, 2012 at 10:34 AM