rolling 2007-2008 list thread for shit to keep romney from becoming president

http://graphics.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Graphic/2007/02/27/1172575970_1209.gif

Unpromising anagrams:

Memory Tint (he's a flip-flopper, rewriting his record?)
Metro Minty (swish!)
Mime Not Try ("Phony" "lacks strength of character, toughness")
Mi, My, Rotten ("Rapacious Republican businessman")

With his full name the possibilities get really good but are too numerous to deal with. A preponderance of "Twirly" names spells doom. "Twirly Torn Dilemma" and "Wormy Tin Treadmill" are two early unpromising prophecies for his chances.

http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=willard+mitt+romney&t=1000

so far my best bets are

* the dog thing
* 'my sons are serving by campaigning for me'
* 94 debate youtube

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0509.sullivan1.html

Unfair to have your religion weed you out, but any port in a storm, right?

fuck it i'll even take jon voights shitty movie if it fucks this dudes game up

What problem could the electorate possibly have with politicians from Massachusetts?

(Or New York City?)

the "brylcreem candidate"

just like his hair-helmet this guy is slick - he'll say anything to get elected

this last bit has the advantage of being true

"I was taking a wide stance. The chalupa made me gay." Wrong thread.

the fact that Romney doesn't believe it makes me feel better about him, actually

his persuasiveness disturbs me, but I don't think it's that significant - he's too Northeastern/analytical, which may prevent him from getting the nom or the win

I think he's likely to get the nomination. Who else will?

and what, the problem i have with using one of romney's only previously sane positions as a stick to beat him with is that it was the RIGHT position

also: it's not a crime to change your mind - if he really has come to believe that abortion is murder, then he should say so. but the heartfelt nature of that 1994 statement does raise the question: is there any position this guy WON'T change to get elected?

i think he's been pretty straightforward about his changing his mind

i do too - still, the question is there - is there any heartfelt position he wouldn't change his mind about? is it just coincidence that his change of heart is so politically expedient? it's a seed of doubt, that's all it takes sometimes. if it takes root, future policies will seem to fall into line. unfortunately, as the daily howler has been pointing out lately, "character problems" (i.e. "flip flopping"; "too ambitious"; "serial exaggerator" etc.) seem reserved only for democrats - it's hard pundit law

democrats and progressives need to decide NOW if this law is too inflexible to break this time around, and instead of attempting to define narratives about character that will never gain any traction (since they're aimed at republicans) speak simply to the issues that affect people's lives and draw contrasts with the republicans' usually hapless attempts to do the same

is fred thompson really less scary?

If you change your mind on that large an issue, you really need some time to think deeply about where you're at. This does not entail running for president one year later. Romney also changed his stance on gun ownership, so this is a radical shift. After 50-odd years, I expect people to not be so flighty. And if they're going to be, I expect them not to run for president.

I mean what does gun ownership have to do with abortion? Well, both are conservative hot-button issues. Do you still think that's sincere? And, if I were to vote for him, I have zero confidence that he won't revert.

Dems just need to chant "Flip Flop" at their convention while holding up giant pairs of flip flops--that seemed effective for the GOP in 2004.

mulla, read the last sentence of my first graf again and tell me how i'm wrong (i would LOVE to be!)

also: it's not a crime to change your mind - if he really has come to believe that abortion is murder, then he should say so. but the heartfelt nature of that 1994 statement does raise the question: is there any position this guy WON'T change to get elected?

-- Tracer Hand, Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:51 PM

Clinton’s 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill expanded the application of the federal death penalty, including to crimes not resulting in death such as running a large-scale drug enterprise. Clinton remarked enthusiastically during his reelection campaign, "My 1994 crime bill expanded the death penalty for drug kingpins, murderers of federal law enforcement officers, and nearly 60 additional categories of violent felons."[128].

While campaigning for US President, Clinton returned to Arkansas to see that Ricky Ray Rector would be executed. Though Rector's IQ was not known, he was said to be profoundly retarded due to a lobotomy.

Thee Mormons Poll

gershy is that a reply to me? i think the death penalty is horrible, but clinton has been pro death penalty since before his first (failed) congressional campaign

i remember reading that he was not pro-death penalty during his first term as ark. governor, and that he "learned" his lesson after his defeat for re-election. this citation i found seems to back me up

"Ever since he lost the Governor's race in Arkansas after serving only one term, Clinton has made clear his support for the death penalty. Clinton returned to office as Governor in 1983, granted no commutations to anyone on death row, and presided over all four of the state's executions in the modern era."

but even if that's incorrect, you don't see the rector case as being practically the same thing wrt to "i'll do anything to get elected"? or coming from a slightly different angle, his "i will end discrimination against gays in the military" campaign promise as a token offer to mollify to the progressive wing of the party that was dropped almost the second he was sworn in.

the main point being, if you think this is mostly a republican thing, you're not really paying attention (see also jesse jackson's and kucinich's and a ton of other dems position on abortion, or g.h.w. bush for that matter)

and none of this is in support of romney or any other republican, never voted for one and never will, but i don't see the value of only seeing faults in your enemy while ignoring the bs on your own side.

maybe so, but this thread isn't for discussion, it is for making sure mitt romney isn't president

oh, in that case
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYk0AmhfEsQ&mode=related&search=

yeah gershy, mitt romney is hardly the only politician who i believe changes his position in order to get elected! i never meant to imply otherwise

i think what this thread is after is something like this:

http://www.nyobserver.com/2007/five-easy-arguments-against-fred-thompson

mulla, read the last sentence of my first graf again and tell me how i'm wrong (i would LOVE to be!)

-- Tracer Hand, Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:43 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

I wasn't responding to your post. I was pointing out that it would be cool if the Dems got a chance to wave giant flip flops for once.

ok mulla - my point was that the media seems to pick up on "character issues" like "flip flopping" ONLY when these issues are aimed at democrats - they pick up on them and run with them, hard. when the character of republicans comes up, it's like a mirror image - john mccain is the most honest human alive, giuliani is america's mayor, fred thompson smells like aqua velva and cigars - THESE are the peeks inside their characters that the media sees. with democrats the media always seems to find some small statement from some 10-year-old speech to prove that hillary is "too ambitious" or that gore is a "serial exaggerator" or that bill clinton is "too slick" or that kerry is a "flip flopper". bringing props to the convention only works if the theme has already been pimped hard by the media.

Default Romney, Mormon high priest
A variation of this was entered in Political Thread, but violated rules and was removed. After reflecting on this throughout the day, I believe it is something the voting public should be made aware of. Particularly born again believers. God sets up all rulers, as Nebuchadnezzar found out while eating grass on his belly, but it seems to me we should educate ourselves about the man prior to casting our vote for any candidate.

SAINTS Alive In Jesus
Eric Barger, July-Aug
www.saintsalive.com or
email e✧@saintsal✧✧✧.c✧✧

It drives me into a state of severe disbelief and utter frustration to see all the Christian Leaders leaping into the Mitt Romney Camp Pat Robertson had him as main speaker at Regent U graduation this year, Jay Sekulow, head of the ACLJ, endorsed Romney and said that Romney would appointconstructionist judges, and that he had the opportunity to observe Romney and know that he is for real. Last October Jerry Falwell and Franklin Graham hosted an introductory meeting for Romney. Last month, Romney was put in front of the National Religious Broadcasters convention in Orlando by Mark DeMoss, president of the DeMoss Group, an Atlanta PR firm that works primarily with evangelical organizations.

My friends, we are entering the most critical period in the history of the US.

Our nation is in dire straits. A spiritual battle is raging right now over America's destiny. If you read the daily newspaper, watch tv news, or even network or cable tv, it is obvious that America and her leaders have stepped over the line in so many ways that our nation has without a doubt entered into the post-Christian era.

There is no question in my mind that the Hate Crimes Bill in Congress which is now being expanded to protect just about everyone and everything except Christians will ultimately close down churches and ministries. Why?For daring to speak the Biblical truth about the sin of homosexuality and other deviant sexual perversions.

With high profile Mormons like Senator Orrin Hatch and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid involved in the Hate Crimes Bill debacle, you can be sure that speaking anything negative about the Mormons will soon be a hate crime.

The fact is time is short and a real spiritual menace is awaiting us in this next election. With all sorts of issues clouding the picture, there is one that is so spiritually dangerous I have to tell you about it before you fall prey to its subtle deceit.

I'm talking about the "Secret Mormon Plan for America and the Rise of Mitt Romney, the Man who Would be God." You see, Mitt Romney has a few secrets he really doesn't want you to know. And the truth is Mitt isn't simply a member of the Mormon Church. Mitt Romney is a Temple Mormon - a High Priest - and as such he has sworn blood oaths of sacrifice, obedience, and consecration to his church and the soon coming, long prophesied "Kingdom of God". Romney's church oaths supercede any civil oaths he will take. It even trumps the United State's Constitution and his pledge to honor and defend it should he be elected President.

That's right. And he believes his obedience to these laws will allow him to become a polygamous god in the next life, the literal father of the people of a new different earth.

And there's more. Mitt Romney wears secret underwear with sacred talismanic symbols that he believes will keep him protected as he works his way to godhood. These are the very same markings that Lucifer claims in the LDS Temple ritual are the emblems of his power and priesthoods.

Romney is truly a presidential candidate with an actual, definable god complex, and submitted to an "other world" spiritual power. Mitt Romney should never be seated in the Oval Office.

In fact, Romney's perverted belief that humans can ascend to godhood mimics Satan's tempting of Eve in the Garden of Eden.

One of the major problems for this next election is that the Church has been lulled into a dangerous complacency, a warm and fuzzy feeling for the Mormons, brought on by years of high level, costly Mormon PR programs, the thousands of Free Public Service announcements, LDS PR representatives in every city that has radio, tv or newspapers, joining with a few short sighted evangelicals to make the average Pastor think the Mormons are a model people and Mitt would be a great president.

Pastors and all Christians need to be armed with spiritual facts rather than liking people who are nice and political platforms that sound good to the ear. We need to look at the battle for Christianity that is being waged and lost throughout the country. We need to take strong and effective action...NOW.

Mr. Barger goes on to list a few of the bizarre happenings going on in Washington of which we are all familiar: the removal of Ten Commandments & Crosses from public view that are replaced with false gods and false doctrines; Muslim prayer now in public schools (Christians are not given the same liberty, even though we fund them!); the making of "A Mormon President" produced/directed by Adam Christing, a member of the Mormon History Assoc.; Pope reasserting 7/10/07 that RCC is the only true church and the rest are defective; Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison (D) Min comparing Bush with Hitler.

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," Mr. Ellison said. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and put the leader (Hitler) of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted." by Toby Harnden in Washington (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...4/wbush114.xml)

Familiar Spirits??? The "God" of This Age
Lucifer

But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them. 2 Cor 4:1-4

"Now is the great day of my power. I reign from the rivers to the ends of the earth. There is none who dares to molest, or make afraid." Lucifer, bragging in the LDS Temple Endowment Ritual

"I have a word to say concerning these people. If they do not walk up to every convenant they make at these altars in this temple this day, they will be in my power." Lucifer's parting admonition: the LDS Temple Endowment Ritual

Mr. Barger, his wife, and their children left the LDS when their children were very young. God has used this ministry to spread the message about this being a cult around the world. Christ has worked through Mr. Barger so effectively, that leaders of the LDS have threatened him numerous times demanding he be silent. He won't, of course, because He loves Christ too much! He has a deep love for those lost in this lie, and has dedicated his life to sharing his testimony, despite the threats against him. If anyone has a family member in LDS, his website is a resource of many free resources, and some for nominal fees, that are an excellent means of opening the doors of discussion. Also, he will email back and forth to help guide you in the discussion as well as offer prayer for you. People tend to lend a bit more credence to one who has walked the road before.

Shalom in Christ

Quote:
...vote for our next President .... if there is a next one.

http://www.rr-bb.com/images/smilies/smile.gifFor some reason this made my heart LEAP with excitement, celticmist!

We may not be here to endure the '08 election if the Lord comes for His bride soon! http://www.rr-bb.com/images/smilies/yeah.gif

Mormonism is basically a newer, Americanized version of Islam. Here are some of the many similarities:

1. "Holy" Cities - Muslims venerate Medina where Mohammed was born, and Mormons venerate Palymyra where Joseph Smith grew up. Also, Salt Lake City is to the Mormons what Mecca is to Muslims - the "promised" land.

2. Founded by a "prophet" - mohammed for islam, Joseph Smith for Mormonism. Both of these men were born poor and were uneducated when they invented their religions.

3. Additional "Scripture" that overrides God's Word - Koran for muslims, Book of Mormon, D&C, and other "revelation" handed down through "prophets".

4. Both require the wearing of all-white, special religious clothing for certain religious rituals.

5. Both have believed in the concept of "religious war" and have raised religious armies to fight these wars.

6. Strange Dietary laws for both religions, including forbidding of alcohol for either religion (and this rule is routinely broken by both religion's practitioners, as well).

7. Both of them attempt to establish Theocracy wherever they are by taking over the government, which they do by flooding a town with residents of their religion - this goes for both Muslims and Mormons. Examples - Muslims in Lebanon do this, and Mormons in California and Arizona and Idaho do this. Also, both religions have already established huge theocracies (i.e. Saudi Arabia for muslims, Utah for Mormons).

8. Both are based on paganism.

9. Both consider Jesus as "important", but they both also lower Jesus to be lower than the One True God.

10. Polygamy is accepted in both.

11. The founding prophets of both not only had many wives, but they both married young girls as well.

12. Both religions believe that there will be sex in the afterlife and it will be a reward

13. Both religions have buildings and rituals which they exclude "outsiders" from.

There are more - if anyone wants to add, be my guest.

I think it's interesting how similar these two religions really are, although people don't realize it because people tend to look at "American vs. Arab" rather than "Christian vs. non-Christian" when comparing the two religions, and the fact is that while Mormonism is very "American", it is just as non-Christian as Islam.

hey whatever works

haha that list of comparisons is pathetic even by the standards of these forwards

was very mean to that nice man from idaho

August 23, 2007 – 11:54 am

http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070823iii.gif

Survey USA released a bunch more general election polling, commented on by the Hedgehog Report and DaveG at Race42008. Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, and Mitt Romney were matched up against Hillary in Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama. I have rearranged the data to show both margins and the %-undecided. SEveral things are worth noting.

First, the GOP is in bad shape in both Virginia and Kentucky due to reasons that have nothing to do with candidates. Kentucky has an election this year where a seemingly-corrupt Republican incumbent governor, Ernie Fletcher, is polling down 2-1. This election is probably framing people’s party identification strongly, and that election is in the papers on a daily basis. This poll illustrates the difficulties that Republicans have in that state. I suspect that once the catharsis of firing Fletcher happens, these numbers will adjust somewhat. Similarly, in Virginia, the state GOP has lost two governor’s races in a row with lousy candidates, and the state party has been rolled legislatively on taxes and transportation issues, the bread and butter. Virginia is now, again, a swing-state with popular Dem leaders.

In other words, Kentucky’s numbers are probably more result of the local environment, while Virginia’s actually represents something bad going on.

Second, these numbers show some important differences. Even in the South, Giuliani is performing in a tier above the other first-tier candidates, while Romney is polling a tier below the other first tier candidates. Romneybots will argue that this is due to name ID, but Gallup polling consistently indicates that Thompson’s name ID is lower than Romney’s but his performance in polling is (often substantially) higher. This is yet more evidence that Romney’s electability problem is real.

The inescapable conclusion is that people know things about Mitt Romney and don’t like him for it.

Third, these numbers are likely to move. People are going to learn things about Rudy Giuliani. (divorces, married first cousin, things about his record, etc.) that are going to move his numbers down. They are also going to learn things about Fred Thompson (thin record, blah blah) and Mitt Romney (flip-flopped on every issue in sight), but they both have the opportunity to frame that first impression. In other words, Giuliani’s numbers will fall — they are a ceiling — while Romney and Thompson’s can still go up. Some. The evidence suggests, however, that Thompson’s ceiling is higher than Romney’s.

On the other hand, there is probably nothing to learn about Hillary Clinton. After all, 3 books were written about her recently that were supposed to be interesting. They weren’t, and no one noticed.

In other words, these polls confirm our sense that things in some of these states are weird and that these will be tough elections. They don’t mean that much yet because so few people are paying attention. But we do know where some of the dragons aren’t.

I think it's a matter of drilling it in. The media wasn't all that interested in the John Kerry flip flop meme until he made that big stumble.
(Voted for it before I blah blah.) If you keep repeating "flip flopper" (something which the Dems usually think is beneath them) then the media will start playing along.

i think romney's dishonesty is the most useful charge against him but i dont think 'flip-flopper' is the best way to describe it

maybe we should just play up the indignity of having a president named Mitt

mulla can you think of any recent examples of the media playing along with negative character attacks on republicans w/national aspirations?

for instance: giuliani has straight-up LIED at least three times about the amount of time he spent at ground zero in 2001; these lies are easily proven and are vastly false (i.e. "i spent as much time at ground zero as most of the rescue workers, and maybe more") yet... where are the op-eds about this troubling "character issue" of giuliani's?

"Misrepresentative" Mitt Romney

The Miseducation of Mitt Romney

Marriott '08

"Bullshit Mitt"

I guess we've used bullshit enough lately though.

Even though Mitt Romney can't seem to dislodge Rudy Giuliani atop the national GOP polls, and can't even draw as much poll support as Fred Thompson, who isn't even running yet, there is an understandable anticipatory buzz about him.

He may well be the eventual choice of his party if the Thompson phenomenon fizzles or if Giuliani supporters simply grow weary of navigating the obstacles posed by his past and his politics.

In an appearance in Texas last week, I saw Romney energize a crowd with just the kind of speech a GOP nominee should give-- strong and unapologetic on the war, upbeat and resolute about the future. This is a typical Romney performance, and it earns him speculation that he has nowhere to go but up.

This is wholly deserved. But the issue of his religion, which some say has been overplayed, has in fact not been addressed with nearly the thoroughness and honesty that will be necessary to satisfy some in the Republican voting base.

It has not been addressed well by the candidate, and it has not been handled honestly by pundits. Until it is, it lurks as a torpedo that could spell the doom of his promising candidacy.

On radio and in print, I have made clear that Romney's membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is a non-issue to me. But this does not mean it is a non-issue for him, or to America.

I have known several Mormons in my life. They are all superb people, and I envision nothing in their faith that would peel me away from backing an LDS candidate.

But my conclusion has come only after a thorough examination of what Mormons believe. Some of it is vastly divergent from what I believe, and I have had to consider whether that is acceptable to me in a candidate.

It turns out that it is, just as I would not rule out a Jewish candidate, with whom I actually have a disagreement over whether Jesus is the Son of God.

But most Americans have not examined what Mormons believe, and when they do, some of them are going to recoil. It is a lot to swallow, from the prophet status afforded a young farmer named Joseph Smith to the scriptures he supposedly transcribed from golden plates whose location was revealed to him by an angel.

There are a number of beliefs in Mormonism which directly contradict mainstream Christianity, and which challenge objective history. The question is: how many people will learn of these things and run in the direction of other candidates?

If the answer is not many, Romney can survive. If it is more than a few, he is cooked. But one thing is for certain: he can not duck the nuts and bolts of his faith forever.

When the webcam kept rolling during commercials in the studios of WHO radio in Des Moines, Iowa a few weeks back, we learned that Gov. Romney is growing weary of defending his faith.

That is not good news, because he has scarcely begun that unavoidable task. And now I have experienced firsthand from this worthy, gifted candidate, just how tired he is of answering such questions.

When I addressed this subject in my Dallas Morning News column of August 16, his people called me within a day. We set up an interview time and a roughly 15-minute window. I didn't want to come right out of the box with questions I knew might antagonize him, so we talked immigration for a few minutes before I tiptoed into Mormonism and whether he needs to start talking more about it.

Since that was the culminating thrust of my column, I thought he might be willing to entertain a thoughtful examination of what Mormons believe and how those beliefs might strike those considering his candidacy.

I could not have been more mistaken. In a spirit of genuine admiration and even support, I ventured into my thesis that LDS beliefs are going to strike some voters as fairly peculiar, and that only he can make them comfortable.

Through a clenched smile that I could hear over the phone, I learned in no uncertain terms that he has no intention of following my suggestion. That gives me enormous doubt as to his viability.

"If anyone wants to know what I believe," he told me, "they can look at my family and me and our kids and make an assessment of that. But you know, if they want to learn more about doctrine, they can always contact the church."

That last point is true, but his ramp up to it is vapid. Examining Mormon families reveals only that the faith is capable of cranking out people with high behavioral standards, which is wonderful. But it in no way serves as a substitute for an understanding of what his faith actually teaches. And when it comes to that, the candidate reverts to that now officially tired line of "I'm not running for pastor-in-chief."

No one says he is. But if his successes continue beyond small gatherings of Iowans, critics are going to hit him from every side with details of LDS doctrine. Most are not going to be as accommodating as I am. And if he shrinks from it then, he's finished.

That's why he needs to gut up and face some questions now. Like the one I fashioned from an e-mail I received from a potential supporter who had done some homework.

"I really like Governor Romney," he had said, "but I need to hear him address some details of what I can only consider bizarre."

So I asked him : if an entire society existed in North America for centuries before and after the birth of Christ, planting crops, worshiping in a Judeo-Christian fashion, using an Egyptian-Hebrew hybrid language, riding chariots and smelting iron, wouldn't there be archeological evidence of it?

Let's just say he didn't accept my invitation down that path.

"I really don't think it's productive for me to say 'let me tell you about this doctrine or that doctrine,'" he explained. "I'm not a spokesman for my church."

This grows frustrating. No one is asking him to be the PR man for Mormons everywhere. But what Romney considers "unproductive," many voters will consider necessary if they are to even begin to weigh his many attributes.

Don't hold your breath. As I gingerly suggested these might be matters voters would crave some answers on, he imagined what he thought was a comparable scenario from nearly 50 years ago.

"'Senator Kennedy," he asked, posing as an imaginary questioner in JFK's tricky 1960 drama involving doubts about his Catholicism, "Do you really believe that that wafer turns into the body of Christ, do you really believe that? Has there been chemical analysis in the stomachs of people after they've taken communion?' These are not questions you ask someone who's running for President."

On this, Gov. Romney is 100 percent wrong. This is exactly what you ask someone who seeks to lead your country if he practices a faith so mysterious to so many. If someone truly were rendered uneasy about transubstantiation, there is nothing wrong with asking a Catholic candidate to explain it, just as a Jewish presidential candidate will someday have to answer why he has chosen not accept Jesus as a personal savior. Religion means a lot to people. Candidates who are comfortable in their own religious skin can attract voters who will find other things to like. Those ducking the issue tend to attract suspicion.

Yet that is, and apparently will be, the continuing Romney policy. I don't know if the Governor thought he had successfully turned the tables in this next remark, but when he asked: "Do you think it makes a lot of sense for a Methodist to get up and say 'Let me tell you the unusual beliefs of the Methodist religion that you all don't know,'" I nearly jumped through the phone.

"Yes! That's exactly my point!" I wondered what that strange buried Methodist dogma was that he had in mind, but I gave him benefit of the doubt for grasping at a religion purely for the sake of example.

"That's not the course I'm going to be following," he concluded as we reached the end of our allotted time. He certainly has that right.

But the fact is that millions of Americans are going to do exactly what he says. They will indeed study up on Mormonism. And when they find something that is genuinely off-putting, it's not lds.org or Wikipedia that needs to smooth it over. It's Mitt Romney.

I believe he can do it. What a shame that he doesn't want to.

Marriott '08

-- gabbneb, Thursday, August 30, 2007 2:53 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

gabbneb on point!! "marriott romney" begins NOW

http://www.citizenlink.org/fnif/A000004973.cfm

How can you be on the board of Marriott Corporations that’s dealing in hard core, prosecutable material that possibly violates federal law and could be a felony to sell, and have no knowledge of it?

For real?

yeah

what WON'T romney do to serve his own interest?

i don't have a problem with porn, but if a guy profits from it and then turns around and says "pornography and violence poison our music and movies and television and video games" (that's verbatim) you have to wonder

romney: hypocrite

guys i think we just won the election and passed single-payer healthcare

marriott romney information on mitt romney and marriott porn pornography "marriott romney" 2008 mormon porn mitt romney

Well, my surprise was mostly at the "possibly violates federal law" bit. Which, I guess if hotels aren't licensed as adult businesses, they might not be allowed to show porn or something?

Hypocrite Mitt

who cares, thats just a press release from some batshit fundie ex-gay ministry, the point is MARRIOTT ROMNEY

thing is, basically all this dude's got is his squeaky clean image, so any sex shit or drug use or anything like that will sink him in a way that would never for obama or giuliani or whatever

Yes. I now see this as the way.

can somebody go give this dude a blowjob already

tell us squibble! she said zrttz if ronly stoated
When astronomical observations began earlier that year,
frank instruments, gubbed mergers up 10%

that type of stuff always seems to fool my email into thinking it's real

Taking the most recent poll from each state in the country from sources like Polling Report, Rasmussen and Survey USA, I have been able to piece together maps showing the state by state general election between both Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, and also between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney.

clinton vs romney

http://www.openleft.com/upload/Clinton%20vs.%20Romney.gif

JUDI GUSHES AS RUDY RUSHES IN
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/resources/2007/02/rudijudi.jpg

http://fivebrothers.mittromney.com/assets/images/IMG_1877.jpg

holy shit i was gonna do a funny joke and put a picture of gushers fruit snacks up but then i GIS "gushers" with SafeSearch off

hahahaha http://www.myspace.com/craigromney

Music The White Stripes, Death Cab for Cutie, Gnarls Barkley, Whitest Boy Alive, The Postal Service, The Good The Bad and The Queen, M. Ward, Peter Bjorn and John, Teddybears, Jim Noir, The Shins, Hot Chip, Junior Boys

Craig Romney's Friend Space
Craig Romney has 566 friends.

Mitt Romney

Ann Romney

Tagg Romney

Matt Romney

Josh Romney

Ben Romney

Trunkster

Peter Bjorn And John

The Cinematic Orchestra

M. Ward

Loney, Dear

of Montreal

The National

Jim Noir

Andrew Bird

Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings

Sigur Ros

Dntel

The Bees

ELIOT LIPP

ELIOT LIPP

i know, right?? i have to stop listening to this shit now!!!

hes friends with PIL lol

are these the vice magazine conservatives i keep hearing so much about

oh how the camera does love eliot lipp

the only dem that could beat romney is edwards though I fear and the preemptive strikes on edwards along with his own fucking shocking media naivete have doomed that candidacy

edwards is not the only dem that could beat anybody

Romney vs Clinton: we get Romney
Romney vs Obama: we get Romeny
Romney vs Edwards: possible upset

hahaha I'll put "Romeny" up against "Marriott"

polling data courtesy imaginary bullshit from some dude

yeah what the hell

overestimating the racism/sexism of voters is the new racism and sexism

i think any of the top three dems, actually i'll throw in chris dodd too, could take romney apart

ONLY A WHITE MAN CAN BE PRESIDENT! DONT BLAME ME, BLAME THE VOTERS!

take yr chances with the jury man - I'm happy to vote for Obama or Hillary but I think they're doomed

hold up werent you a big anti-pragmatist naderite dude for the last 5 years or wahtever

no

voted for kerry, voted for gore, hated doing it but did my duty

been voting for dem presidential candidates longer than you've been alive

john i think you'll find you left off the ", son" at the end of that sentence

we now wait for my friend e to c/p stuff from other contexts about how I'm quite sympathetic with people who choose not to vote & share many of their reservations about participating in the whole deal

xpost get off my lawn

how is pretending everybody is fucked except the white man any form of realism or pragmatism?

"It isn't that GOP candidates never get in trouble for their statements. But when they do say something false or ridiculous or abominable, the controversy seems to be much slighter in intensity and shorter in duration. Heard much about Mitt Romney's varmint hunting lately? The former Massachusetts governor got a bit of well-deserved ridicule when, in his almost endearingly shameless attempts to pander to the Republican base, he claimed to be a "lifelong hunter," a history that turned out to have consisted of two outings to blast away at "varmints." Yet what could easily have become an oft-repeated symbol of pandering and phoniness simply disappeared from stories about Romney."

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=a_guide_to_media_manipulation_republican_style

"In recent years the GOP has turned the technique of making hay from their opponents' words into a reliable formula for success. Here's how it works: First, find something your opponent said that might be open to multiple interpretations. Next, take it out of context. After that, distort it beyond all recognition (and don't worry, the truth-seeking press will offer you no sanction for this deception). Express your consternation, your anger, your amazement that your opponent has revealed him/herself to be such a deplorable reprobate for whom no decent American could consider voting. Finally, repeat the offending statement over and over, from now until election day.

The technique will work against nearly any candidate. Imagine for a moment if a pack of reporters followed you around for a day, recording every word that came out of your mouth. No doubt there would be a few things you said that you didn't really mean in the way they came out, and that certainly would be misunderstood if taken out of context -- particularly if this was a day on which you did a lot of talking, as candidates do. Now imagine that that pack of reporters was following you around not for a day, but for a year.

...

There will be plenty of occasions between now and next November in which Republicans will insist that something a Democrat said is the distilled essence of that candidate's animating spirit, either darkly malevolent or weak and pathetic (depending on the message of the day). And reporters will be sure to drop repeated mentions of the offending words into their stories from that point forward, as though the paramount question in voters' minds ought to be whether they can find a president who has never made a statement he or she would have phrased a different way upon reflection."

@ e: how is pretending the people who plaster "power of pride" stickers all over their 4x4s are gonna fail to take down a guy whose name rhymes with osama anything but overly optimistic

I mean look dude, to talk about Clinton instead of Obama for a sec: nobody could be happier about the prospect of a woman running for president than I am. (OK that's an exaggeration but you know my politics & you see my point.) I think it's fucking embarassing that every other democracy in the world jumped that hurdle years ago while our discussion will actually countenance questions like "can a woman lead the military in wartime?" and shit like that. I just do not believe that Americans are going to elect a non-white, non-male president; I think when the rubber hits the road, you'll see some of the ugliest campaigning you've ever seen, and it won't "backfire" as a lot of pipedreaming liberals think it will: it'll work like a charm. I will quite cheerfully vote for any candidate attempting to break the 200-year stranglehold that white dudes have had on the presidency. I will play benefits for them if they think it'll help. But I don't think it's "pretending" to say that Americans aren't there yet. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

With Friends Like MittYou might want to get a dog.
By John Dickerson
Posted Wednesday, Aug. 29, 2007, at 5:50 PM

After hearing about Larry Craig's arrest, Mitt Romney ran from his former Idaho campaign chairman as if he'd been in the next stall. "Once again, we've found people in Washington have not lived up to the level of respect and dignity that we would expect for somebody that gets elected to a position of high influence," the former Massachusetts governor told Larry Kudlow on Tuesday. "He's no longer associated with my campaign, as you can imagine." When asked similar questions after the news broke, most of Craig's Senate colleagues demurred, saying they wanted to see all the facts before commenting. They might have been acting out of loyalty or might have wanted to avoid the topic of bathroom sex altogether. But Romney showed no such reticence, linking Craig—who denies he did anything improper—to Bill Clinton and Mark Foley, and the larger culture of corruption in Washington. (Though Romney said he wanted to wait for the facts before calling for Craig's resignation, he could only draw that parallel by assuming the worst).

As soon as the Craig story broke, the Romney campaign restricted access to Craig's video endorsement on YouTube, in which the Idaho Senator praises Romney for his "very strong family values." Candidates treat endorsers-gone-bad the way Soviet leaders handled purged rivals: erase them from photos and never speak of them again. John McCain did this when the Florida co-chairman of his campaign was also arrested for soliciting sex in a bathroom (if Democrats do this, too, they're better at hiding it). So did Rudy Giuliani when his South Carolina chairman was indicted for selling coke. Romney's spokesman said they yanked the video because they didn't want Craig's troubles to become a "distraction." But when Romney later sermonized against Craig to make a sweeping judgment about Washington, he was hardly avoiding the subject.

This may make sense politically. Romney has been working hard to court social conservatives, including running a television spot in Iowa promising to clean up the culture of "violence, indolence, sex, and perversion." His call for a stricter public morality shows members of the religious right—particularly any who might have qualms about his Mormon faith—that he shares their values.

By taking this wide stance, Romney continues to stake his position in the larger debate over the Republican Party's identity. Some Republicans argue that the party should stop stressing family values so much. Lawmakers are human, and ultimately they won't be able to live up to the standard that Romney has articulated. If the GOP candidates didn't go on at such length about morality, their colleagues' inevitable lapses would not look so glaringly hypocritical.

There's also a case that the party needs to worry more about its libertarian wing.

Nick Gillespie, the editor of Reason, seized on the Craig affair to make a version of this argument in the Los Angeles Times, where he said that the GOP should get back to its fundamental principles as articulated by Barry Goldwater. Republicans should stop trying to tell people what to do in their bedrooms and bathrooms, either by stinging a Singing Senator or passing an amendment banning gay marriage. This drew criticism from the National Review's John Hood, who argued that Gillespie had misappropriated the memory of Barry Goldwater. "I'm going to go out on a not-very-long limb here and suggest that if Sen. Goldwater was still around," wrote Hood, "he'd be urging Craig to take personal responsibility for the disrepute he has brought upon himself and the Senate."

We don't have to guess about what Goldwater would do. During the 1964 presidential campaign, he faced almost precisely the same issue. In October, the Goldwater campaign learned that Walter Jenkins, LBJ's closest aide, had been arrested on a "morals charge" in the YMCA bathroom. According to J. William Middendorf's account of that campaign, A Glorious Disaster, Goldwater's aides wanted to use the scandal against Johnson, who was well ahead in the polls. Jenkins was not only a security risk—open to blackmail— but long before he was arrested, there were allegations he'd used his influence with then-Vice President Johnson to get an Air Force general who had been busted on a morals charge reinstated. The Goldwater aides even tried out slogans: "Either way with LBJ." Goldwater insisted that they make no use of it. The story never came up during the campaign.

This may say more about Goldwater's personal decency than it does about his governing philosophy. Jenkins had served in Goldwater's Air Force Reserve Unit, and as Goldwater later wrote, "It was a sad time for Jenkins' wife and children, and I was not about to add to their private sorrow. Winning isn't everything. Some things, like loyalty to friends or lasting principle, are more important." Mitt, you're no Barry Goldwater.

my stepfather used to trot out the "either way with lbj" line all the time

mulla can you think of any recent examples of the media playing along with negative character attacks on republicans w/national aspirations?

Well, what I was saying is that the Democrats never feed the media this stuff. Who is out there on the Democratic side blasting away at Rudy and Mitt? But still there are mild examples-- Rudy is a crossdresser, his kids hate him/ McCain is a loser/ Romney's trying to buy the nomination/ Fred Thompson is lazy, has a bitchy wife. All of these things show up often in the media--not as often as John Edwards is a fairy, but still. Once the Democrats stop fighting each other and it becomes apparent that Mitt or whoever is the GOP nominee, they'll likely start a line of attack modeled on those the GOP used on Gore and Kerry, and it'll be more effective than whatever piffle those campaigns used against Bush.

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/07.08.28.Expose-X.gif

can somebody go give this dude a blowjob already

-- and what, Thursday, August 30, 2007

i think you know what you have to do

Has anyone mentioned that the people who don't want to vote for a non-white/female candidate probably wouldn't vote Democrat anyway? Or is the premise that these people (racists, misogynists) will actually go vote when they otherwise wouldn't have in order to prevent the horror of anyone other than a white male assuming the presidency? Is that likely? I thought, statistically, the conservative base are better voters than the liberal one (lol students) so the idea that there is some secret base of voters just waiting for the opportunity to go vote a non-white-male down seems kind of a stretch. Unless you assume people in those polls that put Hillary ahead of every republican candidate are skewed by people who don't want to admit to their prejudices.

"(Vada Sheid) made a mistake common to candidates who take a position supported by a disorganized majority but opposed by an organized and animated minority. The only way to survive the onslaught is to make the issue matter as much in the voting booth to those who agree with you as it does to those who disagree." - Bill Clinton, My Life, ch. 21

theyre skewed by darnielle living in a irrational hard-ass dreamworld

if I didn't believe in progressive ideals it'd be really amusing how the left always repeats this "see? the polls!"/"hey! what happened?" cycle over and over and over and over and over and over

but what do i know, i live in a irrational hard-ass dreamworld

You have a good point about the polls, I was just wondering if it's a possibility that in the case they're being skewed by people who don't want to admit their prejudices (in which case your concerns are pretty valid, honestly, I'm just an optimistic young person). As opposed to the usual problem with these polls--a lot of the liberal base who gets counted in the polls doesn't vote in the end. Which is why Obama won't get the nomination, incidentally.

ugh "if it's a possibility they're being skewed..."

What's up with Mormons and teeth?

If that's Mitt Romney's wife on that My Space page, she looks somewhat fuckable for an older lady. Do female Mormons have to wear burlap sack drawers too?

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57208

The many faces of Mitt Romney
Posted: August 18, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

I'm astounded.

I don't know how else to say it.

I just continue to be amazed at the number of Republicans who are so easily conned, duped and hoodwinked by Willard Mitt Romney.

I'm not sure there are any facts I could offer that would dissuade his minions from supporting their messiah. It's an emotional thing. They have found their political savior, and nothing he has ever said or done previously or in the future is likely to convince them they saddled the wrong pony.

Here's the latest bulletin that will fall on deaf ears: The born-again pro-lifer, who swears he had a Damascus Road experience on the issue of abortion, currently owns stock in two companies involved in embryonic stem cell research.

It was just two years ago that Romney explained his sudden and late transformation on the issue of life: "In considering the issue of embryo cloning and embryo farming, I saw where the harsh logic of abortion can lead to the view of innocent new life as nothing more than research material or commodity."

In other words, Romney claims to have awakened to the harsh realities of abortion by studying the issue of embryonic stem cell research.

First, from a logical standpoint, this makes no sense. If you can't see why stabbing an unborn baby in the head with a pair of scissors is an overtly evil act, I don't think any amount of study of embryonic stem cell research will awaken your sense of moral outrage. But that's what Romney would like us to believe. After all, he's got to explain why he discovered so late in his public life that people have an inherent right to life.

But now we're supposed to believe that this gazillionaire, worth about $250 million, didn't even bother to examine his own financial portfolio to see how he was actively supporting the killing of unborn babies with his own investments.

Or, are we supposed to believe this was just an oversight? If so – if this guy is so cavalier about his own investments – how are we supposed to trust him with the federal budget?

This list of flip-flops by Mitt Romney is legendary – enough to get him a regular role in Doonesbury. But let's review a few of the classics:

* Immigration: As late as last year, the candidate who now ridicules amnesty proposals said: "I don't believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country. With these 11 million people, let's have them registered, know who they are. Those who've been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn't be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship, as they would from their home country.'' Wasn't that pretty much the Bush party line?

* Gun control: He supported bans on so-called "assault weapons." He supported the Brady bill. He spurned the National Rifle Association. As late as 2002, he was still defending Massachusetts' confiscatory gun laws. But, last year, he joined the NRA and claimed to favor easing licensing requirements.

* Minimum wage: In 1994, he opposed an increase, but offered as a compromise tying a hike to the rate of inflation. By 2002, he supported an increase. In 2006, he vetoed an increase. Like some other notable politicians of the recent past, he was against it before he was for it, before he was against it.

* Same-sex marriage: In 1994, he opposed the federal marriage amendment and promised to help establish "full equality for America's gays and lesbians." In 2002, he provided legal recognition to same-sex couples in Massachusetts, even though he was not required to do so under a state Supreme Judicial Court ruling, as he has suggested. Yet, now, in 2007, he miraculously supports the federal marriage amendment.

* Homosexuals in the military: In 1994, he supported "don't ask, don't tell," saying it was a step toward "gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation's military." Today he claims he doesn't want to change the policy to permit homosexuals from serving openly in the military.

* Tax cutting: In 1994, he opposed a cut in the capital gains tax. In 2002, he refused to sign a "no new taxes" pledge. In 2007, he claims to support a cut in capital gains taxes. He has taken the "no new taxes" pledge. And he says he supports making President Bush's tax cuts permanent.

I could go on. This list is virtually never-ending with this charlatan. But it won't matter to the Romney faithful, who now accuse me of religious bigotry for pointing out the obvious flaws in this man's worldview, his character and his political record. They say I am only doing this because I hate Mormons.

Amazing.

But I'll keep sounding the alarm, just like John MacMillan, Republican town committee chairman in Billerica, Mass., who supported Romney when he first ran for office as the state's governor in 2003.

"He's as phony as a three-dollar bill," said MacMillan. "When I started to look at his positions – gun control, pro-gay – I found out that he's just as bad as (Teddy) Kennedy. I've been a Republican all my life, and leopards don't change their spots. He'll change his position, say anything, to get votes."

currently owns stock in two companies involved in embryonic stem cell research

This is the first thing I've heard about him that I liked!

I'd take a phony Romney over a genuine authoritarian (nicest word one can use there) like Adolph Giuliani

I WANT NONE OF THEM.

NONE!

That map of Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama going for Hillary Clinton is pretty funny.

stabbing a baby in the head with scissors? now why didn't i think of that?

from romney's myspace:

Mitt Romney's Details
Status: Married
Here for: Networking, Friends
Hometown: Detroit, Michigan
Body type: 0' 0"
Religion: Mormon
Zodiac Sign: Pisces
Children: Proud parent
Education: Grad / professional school

really, though. matt taibbi in the new rolling stone:

To wit: I checked in with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney outside Orlando, where he gave a speech to local Republicans before opening up the floor for his goofy-ass "Ask Mitt Anything" town-hall routine. Romney is an utter tool; he represents nothing so much as the very banality of our system of campaigning, a poll-chasing stuffed suit with a Max Headroom hairdo who will say (or won't say, for that matter) whatever the fuck it takes to get elected. The winner of the less-than-meaningless Iowa straw poll, he might end up the front-runner solely by virtue of the fact that he lacks the obvious hideous deformities of most of the rest of the field, in particular the human car wreck John McCain and the electoral incarnation of Tommy Lee Jones' acid-bath-surviving Two-Face character, Rudy Giuliani.

Romney's plan is clearly to wear a straight tie, call Hillary Clinton a commie (she's "out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx") and say almost nothing else. And it might work; that's what makes his stump shtick so interesting. In Orlando, he surfs through a nervous presentation that carefully avoids the Iraq thing, taking a shot at John Edwards' plan to create a $250 tax deduction for low-income Americans ("It wouldn't buy John Edwards a haircut," he cracks to pseudoapplause, trying not to touch his own perfectly sculpted hair helmet) and railing against those damned perverts the Democrats won't keep from raping our kids. "There are 29,000 convicted sex offenders on MySpace alone!" Romney cries. He's big on the whole protect-our-poor-innocent-children thing, blabbering about how we have to "clean up the water our kids are swimming in."

Not, of course, our kids in Iraq, who have some interesting water of their own to swim in lately, but our poor kids at home who have to brave the real dangers of the Internet, Hollywood movies and men holding hands. Nor, for that matter, Romney's own kids -- five sons who, rather than fighting in Iraq, he said recently, are "showing support for our nation" by working on their dad's campaign.

Of course, some of our kids are enemies themselves; one audience member picked by Romney's staff of breasty volunteer chicks to "Ask Mitt Anything" is a middle-aged white woman with a fine command of Rovian code words. Explaining that she is a teacher who works in a "socioeconomically low" area, she complains that her students are not motivated to get better test scores because, they tell her, "We don't have to work -- we'll get a check just like my mama does." Romney delivers a heartfelt solution to the lazy-Negro problem, saying you can predict which black kids will fail in school by seeing which ones have two parents come to parent-teacher night.

Romney is easy to make fun of, but he knows his business; in a world where bullshit rules the day, he does bullshit better than anyone. Hence, it is significant that this candidate -- who only a few months ago was gamely clutching his balls in a South Carolina debate and making macho pledges to "double Guantanamo" -- has suddenly abandoned his foreign-policy bluster. In Orlando, he doesn't touch Iraq until asked about it in Q&A -- and even then only mumbling something about how "the surge is, in my view, the right thing to be doing." Then it is quickly back to the usual stuff, commies and perverts and immigrants and lazy black people, the real sources of trouble in this country.

After the event, I actually find a few people who express muted enthusiasm for Romney's performance. Jim Broughton, an Orlando native who proudly describes himself as "to the right of Attila the Hun," is a Tancredo man who likes Romney as a second choice. He thinks we should "hurry up and end the war," but Iraq isn't his top concern. "Our culture and civilization, it's under . . . let's just say I don't want to learn Spanish," he says, frowning.

Another man at the event who appears to be mentally disturbed says he likes Romney because the candidate's slogan, "True Strength for America's Future," communicates to him that "the Space Center makes the United States a superpower." And a couple emerging after the speech say they now much prefer Romney to Giuliani; when I ask what they think the difference between the two is, they say they don't know, but that "Romney talks good."

Hahaha, Mormons think astrology is the DEBBIL! Did you miss that general conference speech, atom-sized Pisces?

xp

"Tonight on 360 with Anderson Cooper: Will America elect a President who doesn't physically exist? Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney says yes"

"Romney is an utter tool; he represents nothing so much as the very banality of our system of campaigning, a poll-chasing stuffed suit with a Max Headroom hairdo who will say (or won't say, for that matter) whatever the fuck it takes to get elected. The winner of the less-than-meaningless Iowa straw poll, he might end up the front-runner solely by virtue of the fact that he lacks the obvious hideous deformities of most of the rest of the field, in particular the human car wreck John McCain and the electoral incarnation of Tommy Lee Jones' acid-bath-surviving Two-Face character, Rudy Giuliani."

taibbi otm.

anyway i wasnt really up on this guy till recently but that "my sons are serving our country by campaigning for me" bullshit is hideously vile.

http://www.slate.com/id/2175786/entry/2175787/

"Those jokes you wrote for my Mitt Romney fundraiser, they were top notch." "Those weren't jokes, that was an appeal for a return to common sense and decency!"
"Well, it got big laughs."

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/RomneyPrideFlier.jpg
^^^this is real^^^

http://voteforbreakfast.com/images/mitt_willard.jpg

Mitt Romney's communist connection
Posted by Charles Cooper

Most Americans probably are not intimately familiar with Huawei (pronounced "Wa-way," as if Gilda Radner of Saturday Night Live fame were asked to pronounce the name). The company's founder, Ren Zhengfei is a former officer of the People's Liberation Army.

Tough to know what to make of that. When it comes to speaking with the press, Ren is a regular Greta Garbo. A mini-profile Forbes ran three years ago noted that many of Huawei's major customers are state-run businesses in China. And while Ren owns 1 percent of the company, the rest belongs to an unidentified "union."

Go figure.

Meanwhile, Ren has gone about building Huawei into a success story disregarding the usual corporate niceties. In 2000--three years before the WMD craze got us all nutso about taking out Saddam--the CIA accused Huawei of secretly selling a communications system to Iraq. In the final report of the Iraq Survey Group, Huawei and two other Chinese companies were singled out for carrying out "extensive work in and around Baghdad"--mainly telecommunication switches and the installation of fiber-optic cable.

Then in 2003, Cisco socked Huawei with a patent infringement lawsuit. Cisco claimed Huawei ripped off its intellectual property to make a lineup of routers and switches. Huawei denied the allegations though in the end caved.

But if at all possible, business doesn't let politics intrude. So it is that Friday we learned that Bain Capital is paying $2.2 billion to acquire 3Com. Part of the deal involves China's Huawei Technologies, which will acquire a minority stake in 3Com.

And, oh, by the way, Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor running for the Republican presidential nomination--he headed Bain Capital for 14 years.

Six degrees of separation. In this case only 2--but who's counting.

I wonder whether a future President Romney might have commented on Huawei figuring in a major U.S. tech acquisition. I'm darned sure candidate Romney has since turned off his cell phone for an early start to the weekend.

that's gotta be a freeper post, rite?

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid45262.aspx

Guaranteed profits
By DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
August 8, 2007 5:35:58 PM

Rewriting Staples history. By David S. Bernstein

Mitt's equity army: Romney’s war chest is overflowing with the contributions of his financial-world pals. But what is the price of their loyalty? By David S. Bernstein
Employees of Bain Capital are doing much to help their former boss’s presidential prospects. They have done very well by investing in the company’s funds, which have generally provided terrific returns. But Romney, who leaves little to chance, took additional measures to ensure that he and his colleagues made money off of their deals.

One way they did this was through aggressive stock-compensation plans for key executives and directors at Bain-owned companies — usually including several current and former Bain Capital employees, as is common in private-equity deals.

Another was by using certain companies they controlled to boost the value of others — a practice that Bain Capital helped pioneer. Often, this meant getting Bain’s large, well-known companies to give their business to Bain’s unknown start-ups — a crucial step to a new company’s success. For example, Jenzabar, a Bain-funded Internet start-up of the late ’90s, got several of its first contracts at Bain-owned companies. The portfolio of companies controlled by Bain Capital — as many as 200 during Romney’s years in charge, from 1984 through 2001 — provides plenty of cross-company synergistic opportunities. The firm frankly boasts of this in some of its marketing materials.

Not long after Bain Capital bought American Pad & Paper (AmPad) in 1992, AmPad landed a huge contract with Staples, where Romney was a director. By 1996, according to an industry analysis at the time, Staples accounted for more than 10 percent of AmPad’s entire annual sales.

Two years after buying mattress-maker Sealy in 1997, Bain Capital bought two of North America’s largest mattress-retail chains, Mattress Discounter and Sleep Country Canada, to help boost Sealy’s sales. Other examples abound.

This practice helps Bain, but not necessarily the investors or employees of the individual companies, which may be sacrificing their best interests for those of other Bain Capital companies. One Bain-owned company’s 1997 prospectus even warned that Bain Capital would maintain control of the board of directors after the initial public offering, and that “there can be no assurance that conflicts of interest will not arise with respect to such Directors or that such conflicts will be resolved in a manner favorable to the Company.” In other words: your investment will be in the hands of people who might sacrifice it for a gain in a company you don’t own.

In almost all of Bain Capital’s leveraged buyouts, something else always came above the best interests of the company: a substantial contract with Bain Capital for consulting services — a contract sometimes worth more than Bain was investing in the first place.

When Bain Capital put up about $6.5 million in cash (and another $41 million in borrowed funds) to buy contact-lens maker Wesley-Jessen in 1995, it inked an “Advisory Agreement” for Bain’s management-consulting services. That deal paid Bain Capital more than $4 million in the 15 months between that purchase and the initial public offering (IPO), plus a $10 million buy-out of the remaining years of the contract when the IPO went through — after which the Bain-controlled board immediately inked a new guaranteed 10-year contract, paying Bain a minimum of $2 million dollars a year.

This was hardly an unusual arrangement for Bain Capital. When it bought Domino’s Pizza in 1998, Bain earned a one-time “recapitalization” fee of $11.75 million; an annual fee of $2 million, plus expenses; and a termination fee of $10 million when Domino’s went public in 2004 — more than $30 million in total. Bain took $11 million in fees in just three years from another company it bought in 1998, Anthony Crane Rental. Bain Capital paid itself and its managers $121 million in fees and stock payments from KB Toys, before the chain filed for bankruptcy.

Some investors have brought lawsuits against Bain Capital alleging it pillaged their companies. But when you own the company, as Bain Capital did, you get to decide what to do with it. Romney and his colleagues chose to enrich themselves and their associates. Unsurprisingly, many of them are now backing their old boss’s political aspirations.

i am sure you guys have seen this? it's pretty incredible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOPp9K1JUCs

"I'll monitor the calls Al-qaeda makes into America"

Goon.

mitt Romney is a REPTILIAN

watch?v=BnCFxDesp2w

and THERE IS NO SUCH GROUP AS AL QAEDA...YOU HAVE ALL BEEN LIED TO...WAKE UP NOW

these PEOPLE LIVE OF YOUR FEAR ENERGY...WAKE UP NOW

(pronounced "Wa-way," as if Gilda Radner of Saturday Night Live fame were asked to pronounce the name)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6341.html

I kinda like him

I can't watch local television stations now without getting a Romney barrage during the commercial break. Living in Iowa gets harsh this close to primary time...

i heard he covered a doggy with poop and put it on the roof of his car
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

that does sound fun though

http://www.slate.com/id/2176197/fr/flyout

But ask voters about Romney's flip-flops, and they speak out loud. In a recent Des Moines Register poll, likely caucus attendees listed Romney's multiple positions as his biggest liability—on par with Rudy Giuliani's pro-choice stance on abortion. In a Pew Center poll, only 12 percent of respondents thought of Mitt Romney when the word honest was presented to them, the lowest of the four major Republican candidates. A Washington Post/ABC News poll showed that only 13 percent of Republicans find Mitt Romney honest and trustworthy, also the lowest of the four major Republican candidates. A CNN/Opinion Research poll found that 15 percent of adults found Mitt Romney to be the most honest—again, the bottom of the field.

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 10:110)

Joseph Fielding Smith stated, "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race" (The Way to Perfection, p.101).

2 Nephi 5:21 For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

Jacob 3:8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.

Alma 3:6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.

http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2007/11/politics_the_tr_5.php

I am comforted to know that this dude and randy are the clear frontrunners

if we don't swift boat the shit out of either of them then we absolutely deserve to lose

randy giuliani?

weird thing about swiftboating is that you have to pitch it to the same audience that ate that shit up the first time around. but yes if we get through another few months with the ideas "rudy is strong & capable on national security" and "mitt romney is a man of principle" intact, it'll be a crying shame

Making Mitt Romney: How to fabricate a conservative

"The task of reformulating and repackaging the Romney brand—from the moderate Republican governor of the most liberal state in the Union to a red-meat social conservative and heir to Reagan—has been entrusted to an army of consultants far larger than that of any of his challengers."

ha wtf was I thinking "randy" for

That Harpers article was good, tho I had to turn the magazine upside-down always bcz the bobblehead Romneys on the cover really disturbed me.

from the comments in the youtube vid Tracer linked to above:

i want my arm to turn into a gigantic dick and shove it into mitt romney's eye

lolololol

Being a Mormon should be enough to keep him out office. They really believe some crazy shit, like Rasta-level crazy.

So apparently all these Romney attack ads are being funded by...Romney?

from the recent new yorker profile of Mittney. took my breath away, wotta prick!

Romney’s transition from the boardroom to the campaign trail has been clumsy in other respects, too. According to “Turnaround,” at Bain Capital, the investment firm that Romney headed, the partners suspected that their boss fostered a cutthroat competitive environment in order to motivate them. When he greets voters, this competitiveness often surfaces as posturing; chitchat turns into one-upmanship. After a voter at the New Hampshire diner told Romney, “My daughter goes to Michigan State,” he replied, “Oh, does she, really? My brother’s on the board of Michigan State.”

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/15/romney/index.html

Mitt Romney, then and now: showing what a super-tough patriot he is by cheering on wars that other people -- but never he nor his family -- risk their lives to fight. What makes it all the more repellent is that while many Mormons did enlist -- Brigham Young was one of the few campuses that was a hotbed of pro-war activism -- Romney actively avoided service, first with his missionary deferment, and then by obtaining a student deferment once he got back from France.

And now, he has the audacity to claim that he wanted to fight, but cites his high lottery number as a reason why his supposed desire was never fulfilled -- as though there was no such thing as voluntarily enlisting:

Mr. Romney, though, said that he sometimes had wished he were in Vietnam instead of France. "There were surely times on my mission when I was having a particularly difficult time accomplishing very little when I would have longed for the chance to be serving in the military," he said in an interview, "but that was not to be."

Note the lack of agency that he tries to insinuate -- military service "was not to be," as though he so desperately wanted to fight but it was just a matter of bad luck, having nothing to do with his own actions, that he never managed to make it to the glorious combat fields of Vietnam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoU41UwL5LI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ZQQzp93eA&watch_response

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/059631.php

http://www.slate.com/id/2178568/#

It ought to be borne in mind that Romney is not a mere rank-and-file Mormon. His family is, and has been for generations, part of the dynastic leadership of the mad cult invented by the convicted fraud Joseph Smith. It is not just legitimate that he be asked about the beliefs that he has not just held, but has caused to be spread and caused to be inculcated into children. It is essential. Here is the most salient reason: Until 1978, the so-called Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was an officially racist organization. Mitt Romney was an adult in 1978. We need to know how he justified this to himself, and we need to hear his self-criticism, if he should chance to have one.

Mitt Romney, who was an outspoken critic of the proposed immigration law and who sent out a mailing on the subject last week with a chain-link fence on the cover, was forced to again defend himself for employing a lawn service that used illegal workers at his home in Massachusetts, where he was governor.

can somebody plz force romney to give his opinion on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_Mother_%28Latter_Day_Saints%29 ???

In some branches of the Latter Day Saint movement, Heavenly Mother or Mother in Heaven is the mother of human spirits and the wife of God the Father. Those who accept the Mother in Heaven doctrine trace its origins to the movement's founder Joseph Smith, Jr.

In 1845, after the murder of Joseph Smith, the poet Eliza Roxcy Snow, published a poem entitled "My Father in Heaven", (later titled "Invocation, or the Eternal Father and Mother", now used as the lyrics in the popular Latter-day Saint hymn "O My Father"), acknowledges the existence of a Heavenly Mother.[10] This hymn contained the following language:

In the heavens are parents single?
No, the thought makes reason stare.
Truth is reason: truth eternal
tells me I've a mother there.

According to one sermon by Brigham Young, Joseph Smith once said he "would not worship a God who had not a father; and I do not know that he would if he had not a mother; the one would be as absurd as the other" (Journal of Discourses, vol.9, p.286).

"The church's material triumphs rival even its evangelical advances. With unusual cooperation from the Latter-day Saints hierarchy (which provided some financial figures and a rare look at church businesses), TIME has been able to quantify the church's extra-ordinary financial vibrancy. Its current assets total a minimum of $30 billion. If it were a corporation, its estimated $5.9 billion in annual gross income would place it midway through the FORTUNE 500, a little below Union Carbide and the Paine Webber Group but bigger than Nike and the Gap." (Time, August 4, 1997, p.52)

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/07/romney-i-can-post-up-against-barack-obama/

new meme: mitt wants to keep obama from becoming president just like his church wanted to keep blacks from becoming members

good work

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:4SOlw-gI85NeeM:http://www.cipater.net/img/sarcasm01.jpg

is that about basketball?

im on the block posted up like a mailbox

[T-Rock]
I keep my money stash in the cellar
My life is crucial more suspense than a Stephen King seller
Beretta for chedda the bravest rebel living clever
I'll suffer you fellas go get the bullets off the dresser
Never snitch under investigation
Loud mouths can suffocate with no resuscitation
I'm in a Caprice with my player partners smoking mean and drinking Vodka
This is the continuation of the saga running like lava
Gunning and robbers I'm blunted with mobsters
Packing choppers so sophisticated still a shortstopper
Constantly a dope clocker to presidentials
Bitches run up get their vital organs this the symbol
Even my mental is a rebel longer level more psychotic than the devil himself
Resting with death until no vessels is left
Betraying ruthless get 'em bat 'em toothless
Checking and undisputed when I spew it to refuse it, we posted up!!

[Chorus - 2X]
We posted up! We posted up from the front to the back
We posted up! We posted up blowing blunts by the packs
We posted up! We posted up with a trunk full of gats
We posted up! We posted up nigga you know where we at

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/51221680.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A6792FEE2CFD4F9A6278A0E721FD50B7AE

good work, guys!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/07/romney.campaign/index.html

and now, to keep Rodham from etc

"In this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding an escape from a manufactured sense of terror. This is not an easy decision. I hate to lose," the former Massachusetts governor said.

er i know you're joking about the "manufactured" part but even the direct quote makes no sense to me -- in what way is his presidential campaign related to terrorism??

if he stays in the Dems might win, if the Dems win we wave the white flag to the terrists

no freaking way

http://www.colitz.com/site/4608967/fig1.gif

http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f161/dalmat/my%20blog/votingaid.jpg

VIEIRA: So, let me ask you, would you characterize John McCain’s campaign as dignified and honest?

ROMNEY: Well, what I’d characterize the entire campaign as is extraordinarily negative on the part of Barack Obama.

VIEIRA: So you think his campaign was dignified?

ROMNEY: Well, I think it’s going to come down to this, and I think that is, who is going to be able to keep America safe and who is it that’s going to add jobs.

VIEIRA: Governor, not to beat a dead horse here, but once again, do you believe that the campaign was dignified?

ROMNEY: Was it dignified? It was presidential.

Didn't realize his father ran for president too

On August 31, 1967, Governor Romney made a statement that ruined his chances for getting the nomination.[13] In a taped interview with Lou Gordon of WKBD-TV in Detroit, Romney stated: "When I came back from Viet Nam [in November 1965], I'd just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody can get." He then shifted to opposing the war: "I no longer believe that it was necessary for us to get involved in South Vietnam to stop Communist aggression in Southeast Asia," he declared. Decrying the "tragic" conflict, he urged "a sound peace in South Vietnam at an early time." Thus Romney disavowed the war and reversed himself from his earlier stated belief that the war was "morally right and necessary".

The connotations of brainwashing, following the experiences of American prisoners of war (highlighted by the 1962 film The Manchurian Candidate), made Romney's comments devastating to his status as the GOP front-runner. The topic of brainwashing quickly became newspaper editorial and television talk show fodder, with Romney bearing the brunt of the topical humor. Republican Congressman (later U.S. Senator) Robert T. Stafford of Vermont sounded a common concern: "If you're running for the presidency, you are supposed to have too much on the ball to be brainwashed."[13]

The infamous 12th Street riot in Detroit took place on July 23, 1967. It continued until July 29, 1967 and eventually escalated to the point where president Lyndon B. Johnson called in federal troops, perhaps dimming Romney's chances for the presidency.

Romney announced his withdrawal as a presidential candidate on February 28, 1968. At his party's national convention in Miami Beach, Romney finished a weak sixth with only fifty votes on the first ballot (44 of Michigan's 48, plus six from Utah).

It is notable that while Romney was born in Mexico, he was still considered to be a viable and legal candidate to run for office. His Mormon grandfather and his three wives fled to Mexico in 1886, but none of them ever relinquished their citizenship. While the Constitution does provide that a president must be a natural born citizen, the first Congress of the United States in 1790 passed legislation stating: "The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural-born citizens of the United States." Romney and his family fled Mexico in 1912 prior to the Mexican revolution. However, the Naturalization Act of 1795 repealed the Act of 1790 and changed the status of such children born to US Citizens abroad to that of citizen. Therefore, Romney, if challenged, would likely have been ruled ineligible for the office of President.