ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [217] -- At Night, The Ice Weasels Come

[ Posted Friday, July 6th, 2012 – 17:05 PDT ]

A bright, shining ray of hope beamed upon the world of political wonkery this week, but then NBC dumped rain all over this parade by issuing denials of the rumor that David Gregory would be replaced as host of Meet The Press. Now, NBC actually has a few intelligent and serious political journalists on its staff who would likely do a pretty good job of hosting the Sunday morning chatfest, but as we've all known all along, Gregory is simply not one of them (neither, for that matter, is Brian Williams). So, like I said, we were all very hopeful when the rumor that NBC was thinking of getting someone with enough brains to ask a followup question to host their flagship MTP program, only to later be disappointed by NBC's denials. But who knows, maybe the rumors are true and the denials are fake. One can always hope.

One sad fact dawned this week in the media world, though. Before there was Futurama, before there were The Simpsons, there was "Life In Hell" -- a weekly comic by Matt Groening that helped a lot of folks cope, all through the Reagan years. Sadly, Groening has announced the comic's 34-year run is now at an end. We heartily agree with the NPR story which highlights a fitting quote from the comic as an epitaph for Binky, Bongo, Akbar and Jeff and all the rest of them, and which also sums up our feelings perfectly: "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, trapping you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."

Now, sadly, the ice weasels cometh for "Life In Hell." We'd like to offer up a moment of silence in loving memory. As we frantically try to pry pieces of the snowmobile off, to use as weapons in the gathering dusk, so to speak.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

It was a pretty quiet week in the world of politics, as everyone in Washington took yet another of their week-long vacations. Nice work, if you can get it. Or maybe things were happening and we just didn't notice them, as we were writing not just one, but two columns on American history for Independence Day week. Maybe, not unlike San Diego's fireworks, there was a brief, brilliant moment of illumination, but we were off getting another hot dog and beer, and just completely missed it. It's been that type of week, so it's entirely possible.

Republicans, this week, had some mighty odious things to say about Democrats. So, even on vacation, we had some politics-as-usual. One of these was so despicable that we feel duty-bound to offer up a Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week in response. Tammy Duckworth served as a Black Hawk helicopter pilot in Iraq, and rose to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Sadly, she got both her legs blown off in the service of her country, and is now running for the House seat occupied by Joe Walsh, a Republican. Walsh, following his party's grand tradition of mocking the military service of politicians they don't like (while not serving themselves), charged Duckworth with talking too much about her sacrifices for flag, country, and apple pie.

What is it with Republicans -- they think they're the only ones who are allowed to be patriotic, or what? What Walsh did was the opposite of being patriotic, in fact -- denigrating the patriotism of someone who has given far, far more for her country than Joe Walsh is going to manage in his entire life. Walsh even used John McCain as an example of how, precisely, veterans should talk about their service. No word yet from McCain, denouncing Walsh for politicizing the issue in his name, and we're not exactly holding our breaths here waiting for one.

Duckworth's response is worth reading, from a CNN interview she gave after the controversy erupted. Duckworth handled the attack with class, and we look forward to her election to the House of Representatives in November, when she will replace the blithering idiot who holds the seat currently. For being the target of the most disgusting attack on military service since Max Cleland, and for her response, Tammy Duckworth is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week.

[By longstanding policy, we do not link to campaign websites here. So you'll have to do your own web search on her name if you'd like to congratulate Lieutenant Colonel Tammy Duckworth, or contribute to her campaign.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Since it was a quiet week, we weren't massively disappointed by any Democrat this week. Again, perhaps while on a trip to the grill or ice chest, we may have missed something, so feel free to offer up candidates for the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award in the comments.

Instead, we're just going to hand out a default MDDOTW award this week. This is actually the second award we've given to this faceless entity somewhere deep within the White House, as last summer we also had to cite the same anonymous person in FTP [178].

President Barack Obama took a miniature road trip this week, and he did so in what I have dubbed "Greyhound One" -- a new concept in presidential conveyances: the presidential bus. Now, while the idea of having a bus for the president to use is certainly a defensible one, what is not is the Darth Vader-esque paint job it currently sports (best described as "black on black, with black trim").

Instead of conceptualizing the presidential bus as a beefier limousine-on-steroids, someone with half an ounce of political sense would instead reconceptualize it as a low-flying Air Force One, instead. A nice white paint job with blue trim, or perhaps a solid "presidential blue" would look one whale of a lot friendlier and stylish, in our humble opinion.

So, to whomever made the initial "what color should we paint the bus" decision, and whomever in the White House is currently responsible for making such decisions has earned themselves a second Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award.

Somebody, please stick their hand up in a strategy meeting and get all outside-the-boxey with a suggestion that "perhaps Greyhound One is a little, I don't know... intimidating..." and then send the damn thing into the body shop for a better color scheme. Until that point, we'll just have to keep giving out these default MDDOTW awards every so often, on slow weeks, we suppose.

[Contact the White House on their official contact page, and make the suggestion to "Repaint the bus!" if you agree.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 217 (7/6/12)

We're getting dangerously close to that time of year known in political circles as "the silly season." Centered around August, when all politicians flee the Washington swamp for not just a week, but a full month-long vacation, this is when craziness rules. The media, bored with waiting around for Romney to announce his vice presidential pick, will latch on to one silly story and hammer it home for all it's worth, in an effort to gin up some ratings. We'll all go along for the ride, as usual.

Maybe I should run a contest, as we get closer to August, where we can all get creative and offer up predictions as to what this year's silly season obsession will be.

For now, we turn to the campaign of Mitt Romney. A few weeks back, this column offered up an avenue of attack on Mitt Romney: his serious lack of leadership skills, and his seeming inability to make any sort of decision on any particular issue, no matter how important or how center-stage the issue becomes. Back in FTP [215], I wrote:

Romney has played the weasel on any number of important policy questions. He is running, to be blunt, as a pig in a poke. Elect him, and soon secret plans to make everything better will sprout in the Oval Office -- you've got to just trust him on that, because he's not saying what any of these magic plans actually are.

It's time to attack the weaseling, instead of each individual policy. Because it is a theme that could run throughout the entire campaign, if the Obama folks are as smart as they're made out to be.

About the only thing I'd change in that would be to work "At night, the ice weasels come" in there, somewhere. Ahem.

Kidding aside, our blatant attempt to influence the thinking of everyone in the political universe is either paying off, or it's just become so obvious to everyone else now that they're writing about it. The amusing thing is that Romney is not getting attacked from the left on this issue, but from the right. None other than the Wall Street Journal is offering the Romney campaign some mighty strong suggestions, likely because they are afraid of the direction (off into Ditherland) Romney's campaign seems to be taking.

But while it certainly is fun to see conservatives eat their own in such fashion, this is truly a bi-partisan opportunity to slam Romney. Democrats (including every single "Obama surrogate" out there being interviewed on television) really need to start doing a much better job of it. Below, a few suggestions on how they could do so.

 

1
   Every side of every issue

This should be the main thrust of the attack: Mitt Romney cannot, for the life of him, make up his mind -- about anything.

"Mitt Romney seems to want his cake and eat it too on every single issue. In fact, he doesn't just want his cake, he wants to buy everything in the whole bakery, so he can have a wide range of choices. He'll even buy those "doughnut" things he's just recently learned about. Romney seems terminally incapable of making up his mind. He takes every stance possible on political issues, which is really no stance at all. Being on every side of every issue may have the political benefit of not annoying anyone too much, but is this really the quality Americans are looking for in a president?"

 

2
   Penalty or tax, Mitt?

Romney's most recent meltdown happened in response to the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare, of course. This, apparently, was the final straw for the Wall Street Journal editorial board, which slammed Mitt over his campaign, and lack of leadership. So, by all means, help them point it out!

"I see that even the conservative Wall Street Journal is starting to worry about Mitt Romney's absolute inability to make any sort of decision. When Mitt couldn't seem to decide whether the individual mandate in Obamacare was a 'tax' or a 'penalty,' the Wall Street Journal asked, quote, Why make such an unforced error? Because it fits with Mr. Romney's fear of being labeled a flip-flopper, unquote. They went on to say Mitt's campaign, quote, looks confused in addition to being politically dumb, unquote, and expressed their fear that Mitt was 'squandering an historic opportunity' to defeat Obama, and suggested that the campaign team 'ought to be fired for malpractice.' Wow -- with friends like these, eh, Mitt? Even the core of the Republican Party is starting to get very, very worried over Mitt Romney's inability to show the slightest shred of leadership, on any issue, it seems."

 

3
   Take your pick of issues

Thread it all together. These are just a few -- there are lots of other issues to choose from in the Romney repertoire.

"Mitt Romney never met an issue he didn't want to have it both ways on. He's either flip-flopped or vacillated like a spineless jellyfish on any number of important issues that have popped up. An issue makes the news, and Mitt takes a full week to say anything about it, and when he does it is a meaningless attempt to cover all bases simultaneously. On immigration and the DREAM Act, Mitt won't say what he'll do. Maybe he'll veto it, maybe he'll keep Obama's policy, maybe he won't. On the individual mandate, Mitt still can't figure out whether he wants to call it a penalty or a tax -- complicated by the fact that he championed this idea a few years ago. But the more serious lapses have occurred on foreign policy. When a crisis pops up, Mitt is nowhere to be seen. After the fact, he'll tell you everything Obama did was wrong, but he refuses to say what he'd do when the crisis hits. His entire foreign policy seems to be to ignore those 3:00 A.M. phone calls, and wait for someone else to tell him what to do. Do we really want such a man to lead our country? I think not."

 

4
   Speaking of taxes, Mitt...

The White House has been pushing this particular talking point this week, and we think it's a pretty good one to hammer Romney with. It's such a simple charge to make.

"What is Mitt Romney hiding? Why won't Mitt release even one year's full tax return? Why won't he release more than two years of summaries? What, exactly, has Mitt's money been doing in Switzerland and the Caribbean and other exotic locales? Mitt won't say. Has he been dodging taxes? Mitt won't prove it, one way or another. Running for president is a job interview with the American people. So far, Mitt Romney is the candidate who has shown up unprepared and refuses to answer all the questions put to him about his finances. We have no idea what Mitt is hiding, and I truly wish more reporters would pressure him about these serious omissions in disclosure."

 

5
   How many houses, Mitt?

This question was used to devastating effect after we suggested it in the last presidential campaign. John McCain's answer was so unbelievable (that he wasn't quite sure how many houses he owned, but he'd get back to you on that) that it did him some serious political damage. So why not break the question out once again, to show the type of world Mitt Romney has lived in all his life.

"Governor Romney, I have just a simple question for you: how many houses do you own?"

 

6
   Just wait a while

This one is really perfect, as talking points go, because it is a very common "local" saying in a lot of places in America. Just as pretty much any American city brags about how bad its traffic is (and how insane its drivers are), everyone likes to take pride in their crazy weather patterns. So tell the advance team to do a little research, and then find a location (the Miami Valley in Ohio would be a good place, for instance) where this is a common saying.

"You know, I've heard the saying here in Dayton that 'if you don't like the weather, just wait fifteen minutes, and it'll change.' You folks know what I mean, right? Well, that seems to be the entire campaign Mitt Romney is running. You don't like his stance on any important political issue? Well, just wait a short while, and it'll change. The man's an absolute weathervane for which way the wind is blowing, and as a result he winds up doing a lot of spinning."

 

7
   Flip. Flop.

And finally, in our own category of "they should be fired for political malpractice" if they don't jump all over this one -- we have a photo opportunity of Mitt Romney sitting on a personal watercraft. Now, the only problem with the photo is that Ann Romney is also in the photo, so perhaps some judicious cropping is called for, but still... it just begs to be turned into an almost-identical ad as the one run eight years ago against John Kerry. You know, the windsurfing ad. Just show Mitt flipping and flopping (use the same visual trick as in the Kerry ad, to hammer the point home), and run pretty much any text you like over it. Call this a do-it-yourself talking point. Punctuate your ad copy with the repeated use of "Flip. Flop." Bonus points for working in an Etch A Sketch at the end. Make your suggestions in the comments, as always.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: Democrats For Progress
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

79 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [217] -- At Night, The Ice Weasels Come”

  1. [1] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    "You know, I've heard the saying here in Dayton that 'if you don't like the weather, just wait fifteen minutes, and it'll change.' You folks know what I mean, right? Well, that seems to be the entire campaign Mitt Romney is running. You don't like his stance on any important political issue? Well, just wait a short while, and it'll change. The man's an absolute weathervane for which way the wind is blowing, and as a result he winds up doing a lot of spinning."

    The reason O can't make a charge like this is because he's guilty of it himself. How many times has he infuriated the Left over this? You folks called them "cave-ins," but they can just as easily be labeled flip-flops.

  2. [2] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    P.S. Here's another hypocrisy on O's part: He's out there trying to label Romney as a job destroyer. Meanwhile, O's about to destroy an entire industry with a stroke of his pen tonight:

    "A tiny amendment buried in the federal transportation bill to be signed today by President Barack Obama will put operators of roll-your-own cigarette operations in Las Vegas and nationwide out of business at midnight.

    Robert Weissen, with his brothers and other partners, own nine Sin City Cigarette Factory locations in Southern Nevada, including six in Las Vegas, and one in Hawaii. He said when the bill is signed their only choice is to turn off their 20 RYO Filling Station machines and lay off more than 40 employees."
    http://www.lvrj.com/business/roll-your-own-cigarette-operations-to-be-snuffed-out-161539845.html

    This is also the perfect example of why Republicans are forever saying that too much regulation hurts business.

  3. [3] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Chris1962 [2] -

    I've heard this is a thing in NYC, too.

    But remember, Republicans in the House passed this too. Obama's not singlehandedly doing anything on his own, here.

    -CW

  4. [4] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I've heard this is a thing in NYC, too.

    Blue York? Why am I not surprised? Still, the point is that O holds the veto pen. He can stop this. He, in fact, can make a hero of himself by saving these jobs. Instead, he'll close down this industry (and it's not the first industry he'll be putting a regulatory hurting on) all while simultaneously claiming that Romney is a job destroyer.

    While I'm thinking of it, I read a terrific article that explains the role of a Bain with a very simple comparison to a lemonade stand. Thought you might like it: http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/who-offshored-my-lemons--20120705?mrefid=skybox

  5. [5] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Chris1962 -

    Then why didn't the Tea Partiers strip it out in the House? If the Tea Partiers cared, they could have stopped this. They didn't.

    Plenty of blame to go around, in other words.

    I think (I'm not totally up on the subject, I admit) that the state governments were the ones who pushed this, because it is basically a tax dodge, at the state level.

    But here's a present for you (since you made such a stink about it last week) -- some of us are keeping score better, and Obama broke his word on taxing the under-$250Ks a long time ago, for two specific groups: customers of tanning salons, and cigarette smokers. Obama signed new federal taxes on both, years back. Make of it what you will, and you're welcome for reminding you of the fact.

    :-)

    I'm in a weird mood tonight.

    "At night, the ice weasels come." That's downright poetic, when you think about it. Sounds like something Tolstoy could have written, in fact.

    -CW

  6. [6] 
    dsws wrote:

    yet another of their week-long vacations. Nice work, if you can get it.

    You can, just not at the same pay grade: a Congressional "vacation" consists of long hours begging for money. There's a slot open in front of our 7-11 if you want to experience it first-hand.

    what I have dubbed "Greyhound One" -- a new concept in presidential conveyances: the presidential bus

    I actually saw Ground Force One rolling through Boston. It was white with huge blue letters saying "United States" along the side and "Ground Force One" on the back. Of course, just as with Air Force One, it's not a specific vehicle; it's any vehicle of the relevant type that happens to be tapped for presidential use. Anyway, they don't all have the Vader look.

    Punctuate your ad copy with the repeated use of "Flip. Flop." Bonus points for working in an Etch A Sketch at the end. Make your suggestions in the comments, as always.

    "For it before he was against it" is a timeless classic.

  7. [7] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    dsws -

    You can, just not at the same pay grade: a Congressional "vacation" consists of long hours begging for money. There's a slot open in front of our 7-11 if you want to experience it first-hand.

    BWAH hah hah hah! Now THAT was funny! Best laugh I've had all week, thanks...

    :-)

    -CW

  8. [8] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    dsws: "For it before he was against it" is a timeless classic.

    Or, in the case of O and the mandate, against it before he was for it.

  9. [9] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    CW:Then why didn't the Tea Partiers strip it out in the House? If the Tea Partiers cared, they could have stopped this. They didn't.

    I don't know the history of this bill. Often is the time when one side sneaks something in there. I really don't know. But the point is not the House or Senate; it's Obama and his veto pen.

    But here's a present for you (since you made such a stink about it last week) -- some of us are keeping score better, and Obama broke his word on taxing the under-$250Ks a long time ago, for two specific groups: customers of tanning salons, and cigarette smokers. Obama signed new federal taxes on both, years back. Make of it what you will, and you're welcome for reminding you of the fact.

    ROFL! I appreciate the sentiment, but I already knew that. You KNOW I know every bad thing that O does. I'm an aficionado.

    "At night, the ice weasels come." That's downright poetic, when you think about it.

    Hahahaha. I forgot to tell you how much I loved that line.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Damn, already nine posts!!!??? :D

    Somebody, please stick their hand up in a strategy meeting and get all outside-the-boxey with a suggestion that "perhaps Greyhound One is a little, I don't know... intimidating..." and then send the damn thing into the body shop for a better color scheme. Until that point, we'll just have to keep giving out these default MDDOTW awards every so often, on slow weeks, we suppose

    Oh, it gets better...

    Obama is using the Vader Bus to go all around the country, ripping Romney for allegedly out-sourcing jobs..

    The bus?? It was built in Canada...

    (including every single "Obama surrogate" out there being interviewed on television)

    Do you REALLY think you want to call out the Obama surrogates???

    Because, if the past is any indication, they sure have been doing a bang up job... For Romney...

    Michale.....

  11. [11] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    O's already laying the groundwork for where the finger of blame should point:

    Obama camp: GOP spending 'could cost us the election'
    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/07/obama-camp-gop-spending-could-cost-us-the-election/1#.T_fgSnBTdDQ

    No, it won't be the +8% unemployment, snail's-pace growth, $15.6T debt, historic downgrade, and/or the country wanting his CrapCare repealed. Nah, it'll all be the fault of the other guy's spending.

  12. [12] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    Yeah, I'm actually awake for comments (for once).

    But tell me, did you appreciate the poetry of "At night, the ice weasels come"?

    Enquiring minds want to know. Matt Groening's a genius, in my humble opinion...

    :-)

    -CW

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    As far as showing pics of Romney at leisure, that really has the possibility of back-firing..

    Obama has been the "leisure President" of the decade...

    Do Dems REALLY want to open the flood gates of ALL the hundreds of thousands of pictures that exist of Obama out playing and campaigning when he should be leading???

    Im just sayin'...

    Michale.....

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    CB,

    Or, in the case of O and the mandate, against it before he was for it.

    Good catch.. Obama derided and ridiculed the term "Obamacare", almost calling it a "slur"..

    Right up until it became politically advantageous to embrace it... Which he promptly did...

    So Obama was against ObamaCare before he was for it.. :D

    CW,

    Holy crap, yer awake!! :D

    But tell me, did you appreciate the poetry of "At night, the ice weasels come"?

    Enquiring minds want to know. Matt Groening's a genius, in my humble opinion...

    I must admit, I am an uncultured swine....

    "Hay Ham! Look!!! I'm Picasso!!"
    "I.... I don't get it."
    "You uncultured swine!!!"
    -Toy Story

    :D

    My knowledge of Groening extends to Simpsons and Futurerama only....

    But, strictly as poetic prose, "At night, the ice weasels come", is a literary great... :D

    Michale.....

  15. [15] 
    Steve wrote:

    If you are really considering sending commercial ideas to the DNC, perhaps you could include this one (or tell me where to send it):

    Open with a split screen Obama and Romney. Obama says how pleased he is that the Supreme Court validated his Health Care Program; Romney says he will kill Obamacare his first day in office.

    No for the fun. A quick clip of Obama making a comment about Obamacare followed by Romney making the same comment about "MassCare". This is followed by a slight morph of Romney to look a tad like Obama.

    After four or five repetitions of the above, the screen has two Obamas.

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    "I suspect that most people in Cincinnati would acknowledge that I've tried real hard...."
    -President Obama

    Well, I guess Obama has tried everything else..

    Maybe whining will score points with the Independents and NPAs...

    Michale.....

  17. [17] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I tried to save the patient, but he died. But, hey, I tried really hard.

    Not to be a nudge, but the floor in the store needs sweeping, Michale. Why is it that men never think to sweep the floor? (Can I be your virtual business partner?)

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    I tried to save the patient, but he died. But, hey, I tried really hard.

    "Your 'best!? Losers always whine about their 'best'. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen.
    -Sean Connery, THE ROCK

    :D

    Not to be a nudge, but the floor in the store needs sweeping, Michale.

    You should see the area BEHIND the camera.. :D The Front is immaculate compared to the back.. :D

    Michale....

  19. [19] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    You should see the area BEHIND the camera..

    I think that's the area I'm talking about. When I tuned in, you had your camera facing an area where it looked like you did repairs.

    I trust you've seen this:
    The tax man cometh to police you on health care
    http://apnews.myway.com//article/20120707/D9VS2E3O0.html

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    I trust you've seen this:
    The tax man cometh to police you on health care
    http://apnews.myway.com//article/20120707/D9VS2E3O0.html

    Yea, it's going to be a nightmare, if Obama is re-elected...

    "Total breakdown of basic social services worldwide-- rioting, mass religious hysteria. Total chaos. You can imagine. Basically the worst parts of the Bible."
    -Billy Bob Thornton, ARMAGEDDON

    :D

    Michale.....

  21. [21] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Steve -

    First off, welcome to the site. Your first comment was held for moderation, but from now on your comments should appear here instantly. As long as you post only one link per comment (multiple links comments are held for moderation to protect against comment spam).

    As to your idea, here's what wound up on the cutting room floor this week, which is surprisingly similar:

    Read the following quote:

    You guys are bright enough to look at the numbers. I came in and the jobs had been just falling right off a cliff, I came in and they kept falling for 11 months. And if you are going to suggest to me that somehow the day I got elected, somehow jobs should have immediately turned around, well that would be silly. It takes awhile to get things turned around. We were in a recession, we were losing jobs every month. I’m very pleased that over the last a two, two and a half, years we’ve seen pretty consistent job growth.

    Obama on the campaign trail, right?

    Wrong. Mitt Romney from a 2006 press conference. Here's the story, and a handy video made by a group called American Bridge.

    The ad would be something akin to what you suggested, just with slightly different text.

    -CW

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Steve,

    There is one problem with your idea..

    One MAJOR problem...

    What the States can do and what the Federal government can do are two completely different things.

    Further, what may work for States would be complete chaos for the Federal Government..

    Trying to compare effective State practices and extrapolating those practices over to Federal practices is like trying to force a round peg into a Quadrotriticale hole...

    :D

    Oh... and...

    "Welcome to the Party, pal!!!!"
    -John McClane, DIE HARD

    :D

    Michale.....

  23. [23] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Michale: What the States can do and what the Federal government can do are two completely different things.

    ...which Pelosi, Reid and O just found out from the Supreme Court.

    Further, what may work for States would be complete chaos for the Federal Government..

    Yet, to this day, O keeps comparing CrapCare to RomneyCare, like he thinks a state program and a federal program are one and the same thing and executed in the same manner. To this day, I don't think he understands the difference between state governments and the federal government, and which can do what, how and why. I'm not even sure, from the way he's talking, that he's yet to "get" that the federal government can't "mandate" under the Commerce Clause.

  24. [24] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Wrong. Mitt Romney from a 2006 press conference.

    Except that O came into national office like it was the second coming of the Lord and Savior, with 500 campaign promises under his belt and Kool-Aiders swooning at his feet (including the press). "Hope and change," remember? "Yes, we can!" So his feet are little bit more to the fire when it comes to NOW claiming, "Well, I didn't mean we could do it overnight." O's problem is that he sure as hell made it sound like he could. And now here he is, three and a half years later, with unemployment still higher than when he had entered office.

    As an aside, I think the Left is just blowing money with those ads that scrutinize Romney's governor's record. Every time I hear O, himself, point the finger and talk about it, the first thing I think is, "Well, what about YOUR record, Mr. President?" I just know that same reaction has to be going on in the heads of many a viewer/voter out there. That approach just begs for a comparison to be made. I think it's bad strategy and just plain bad advertising, on the part of the Left, and Team-O, as well. I don't think the Lefty PAC is gonna get the ROI that makes that type of advertising worthy of throwing big bucks behind. I think they'll end up singing to the choir at the end of the day.

    Not to mention, I don't believe the average voter is particularly interested in the politics of Massachusetts, where Republican Romney had a hard-core Dem congress in the bluest of all blue states. Compare that to O, who came into the presidency with major majorities in both the House and Senate, who gave him virtually everything he had asked for, and STILL we have 8.2% unemployment. And O's never even had a solid Republican congress; the Dems still hold the Senate. I think the Left's advertising that would be relevant if Romney were running for reelection in Massachusetts. But it's too apples-and-oranges to make any real impact on the national level, IMO.

  25. [25] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    michale and CB,

    here in the reality-based land of weigantium, it's perfectly valid to emphasize the distinction between similar policies enacted at the state and federal levels. yes, there are some things that state and local governments are much better equipped to handle than the feds. however, in the world of PR and advertising, i don't see an easy way to get the average american of average intelligence to understand how romneycare and obamacare, though practically identical, are completely different. to be clear, i'm not saying you're wrong about the difference. what i am saying is that it's still probably a losing proposition for your side to spend energy on it with the general public.

    joshua

  26. [26] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    nypoet: however, in the world of PR and advertising, i don't see an easy way to get the average american of average intelligence to understand how romneycare and obamacare, though practically identical, are completely different.

    I think people who understand states' rights, and want less federal control in their lives (as in the majority of Americans, whom none too coincidentally have been against CrapCare from the start) already know this. The Left, OTOH, who's inclined to support more federal control, seem to be the ones who don't get the major difference between RomneyCare and CrapCare. And that includes Obama. He still seems to think that all he has to do is explain CrapCare's contents and benefits to bring folks around to accepting, if not loving, it. He doesn't understand that too much control in the federal government's hands has always been the thing that the majority of Americans have been against.

    CW: I think this is the reason Romney's sticking like glue to the subject of the economy: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/june_2012/31_give_obama_positive_marks_on_handling_economic_issues

  27. [27] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    CB,

    I think people who understand states' rights, and want less federal control in their lives [snip] already know this.

    perhaps for hardcore conservatives that's the case. nonetheless, my impression is that most voters don't see healthcare as a states' rights issue. i'm not generally in the habit of giving advice for the righties to run with, but it's a strange year. if romney wants to win, the cons need to stop trying to attack the substance of obamacare (which is where romney is weak) and jump straight to the centralized power issue.

    (e.g. obama wants to force every single state to be the same as massachusetts. governor romney believes that every state is unique and should decide for itself how to help make health care more affordable.)

    as much as it may sting, there's really no use in splitting hairs on health care policy differences. any criticism of obamacare's substance is a boomerang that will rebound on romney faster than you can say "flip-flop."

  28. [28] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    You guys are bright enough to look at the numbers. I came in and the jobs had been just falling right off a cliff, I came in and they kept falling for 11 months. And if you are going to suggest to me that somehow the day I got elected, somehow jobs should have immediately turned around, well that would be silly. It takes awhile to get things turned around. We were in a recession, we were losing jobs every month. I’m very pleased that over the last a two, two and a half, years we’ve seen pretty consistent job growth.

    wow, obama should read that verbatim, then after he reads it reveal the source.

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    The problem with #28 is that Obama didn't run on "It's going to take a while" or "It's not going to happen in my first term" did he??

    If he had, he wouldn't be held as responsible as he is...

    He ran on a platform of "HOPE" and "CHANGE".. He sold the American People a false bill of goods.. The only HOPE the American people have now is that we can CHANGE things back to prosperity...

    For all intents and purposes, Obama is the first "marketed", the first Affirmative Action president this country has ever had...

    Michale.....

  30. [30] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    nypoet: perhaps for hardcore conservatives that's the case.

    I think it's the case for anyone on the Right, i.e., hard-core conservatives, Republicans and Right-leaners (which includes swing voters who are leaning that way re: CrapCare, as they have since the get-go, which is why there continues to be a majority in favor of repeal).

    nonetheless, my impression is that most voters don't see healthcare as a states' rights issue.

    The majority of Americans don't want more federal government in their lives; they want less. There have been polls out there reporting that for years. Like so:

    58% Say An Overly Powerful Government Is A Bigger Danger Than A Weak One
    As they have for years, Americans feel a government that is too powerful is a bigger problem than a government that is not powerful enough...
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2012/58_say_an_overly_powerful_government_is_a_bigger_danger_than_a_weak_one

    There's another from early June that says...

    51% See Federal Government As Threat to Their Rights
    Just over half (51%) of Americans continue to believe that the government is more of a threat to individual rights than a protector of them.... only 34% of Adults in this country regard the federal government more as a protector of individual rights....

    That's where the ire over the "mandate" has always come from. And that's what I don't think the Left realizes — including O himself.

    any criticism of obamacare's substance is a boomerang that will rebound on romney faster than you can say "flip-flop."

    Not among those who know the difference between a state creating a "mandate" for a program and the federal government doing it. The latter is when folks start to feel something in their gut that says "Wait a second..." Again, I think that's the part that the Left just does not "get," because they're perfectly comfortable with the federal government assuming this level of power.

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Again, I think that's the part that the Left just does not "get," because they're perfectly comfortable with the federal government assuming this level of power.

    Which is mind boggling, considering what the 60s were all about... :D

    Michale.....

  32. [32] 
    dsws wrote:

    This is followed by a slight morph of Romney to look a tad like Obama.

    After four or five repetitions of the above, the screen has two Obamas.

    Two or three. Then have him morph into Newt Gingrich a little faster. Maybe they could even work in Dukakis.

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is becoming really depressing...

    The Original McHale (no relation) has died...

    Oscar-winning film star Ernest Borgnine dies at 95
    http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/07/08/oscar-winning-film-star-ernest-borgnine-dies-at-5/#ixzz204oimkWh

    MicHale....

  34. [34] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    New Republican governors rapidly bringing down unemployment in their states
    http://www.examiner.com/article/new-republican-governors-rapidly-bringing-down-unemployment-their-states

  35. [35] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    For all intents and purposes, Obama is the first "marketed", the first Affirmative Action president this country has ever had...

    now that's just silly. the title of first marketed and affirmative action president belongs to JFK. in the present day his status as catholic or his media savvy campaign may seem insignificant, but my understanding of the time period is that both were as big a deal then as the marketing of obama was in 2008.

  36. [36] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    The Original McHale (no relation) has died...

    Aww, it's like the end of an era. Remember "Marty"?

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    CB,

    New Republican governors rapidly bringing down unemployment in their states
    http://www.examiner.com/article/new-republican-governors-rapidly-bringing-down-unemployment-their-states

    Awwwwwww, you stole my thunder!!

    It's funny.. All the Left (and people around here (not that I lump ya'all in with the Left :D) ) claim gloom and doom if the GOP ever gets back in control..

    Yet, this study indicates that the country will prosper under GOP Control.. :D

    Joshua,

    now that's just silly. the title of first marketed and affirmative action president belongs to JFK. in the present day his status as catholic or his media savvy campaign may seem insignificant, but my understanding of the time period is that both were as big a deal then as the marketing of obama was in 2008.

    That was a little before my time... I was a little over a month old when JFK was killed.

    (As an aside, apropos of nothing, did you know that the writers of Star Trek TOS had floated a story idea whereas Kirk et al travel back in time and had a hand in the JFK assassination.. The story was shelved after a fan revolt..)

    But, I don't think you can claim that JFK's election was solely based on Marketing. He came from a political family and had very diverse military/political experiences prior to being elected. By comparison, Obama had no relevant experience that would indicate he could be president.

    With regards to the claim of JFK being an Affirmative Action President, this is also not valid as being a Catholic was not being in a minority group..

    Just like, when Romney is elected President, he couldn't be called an Affirmative Action President, just because he is Mormon, because Mormon is not a minority group..

    Obama's election was completely, solely and unequivocally based on Marketing and Affirmative Action...

    It's easy to prove. Simply ask yourself one question.

    Would Obama have been elected if everything about him would be the exact same it is in the here and now, except that Obama was white???

    If you answer that question honestly, you would have to say 'no'..

    CB,

    Aww, it's like the end of an era. Remember "Marty"?

    That also, was a bit before my time. :D

    Michale.....

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Joint Economic Committee (JEC), spearheaded by Texas congressman Kevin Brady, put out a report saying that the Obama recovery now ranks dead last in modern times. That’s a real milestone in the post-WWII era. It’s ten out of ten for both jobs and economic growth. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, real GDP has expanded only 6.7 percent over the eleven-quarter recovery since the recession ended. The Reagan recovery at the same stage had increased by 17.6 percent. The Clinton recovery by 8.7 percent.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304935/obama-s-goose-cooked-larry-kudlow

    Obama's ideas aren't working..

    Democrat's ideas are NOT working..

    Contrast that to the report above that, in all states that elected GOP leadership in 2010, the economic situation is much better and getting better, faster....

    This a clear, concise and undeniable choice to voters..

    It's a choice between ideas that work and ideas that don't...

    If Romney has more than two brain cells to rub together, that should be his ad for the month...

    Ideas that work. Ideas that don't...

    Michale.....

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Would Obama have been elected if everything about him would be the exact same it is in the here and now, except that Obama was white???

    On the other hand, there is evidence to show that Obama's election was the result of a secret conspiracy by the Borg to assimilate the planet..... :D

    "ASSIMILATE THIS!!!"
    -Worf, STAR TREK VIII: First Contact

    :D

    Michale....

  40. [40] 
    akadjian wrote:

    "It's like how much more black could this be? And the answer is none. None more black." - Nigel Tufnel, Spinal Tap

    I was actually a bit surprised Chris that you neglected to use one of the best lines ever about Obama's bus :)

    -David

  41. [41] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Michale: That also, was a bit before my time. :D

    ROFL! A bit before my time, as well. They'll probably have it on the American Movie Classics channel, now that he's passed away. That was the movie that made him his name. ;D

    David: Nigel Tufnel, Spinal Tap

    Great, great movie. I may have to go and watch it now. Again. For the zillionth time. Remember the Stonehenge set? And when Derek got trapped in the pod on stage? Hahaha!

  42. [42] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Hill Poll: Majority believe Obama has changed country for worse
    "A new poll for The Hill found 56 percent of likely voters believe Obama’s first term has transformed the nation in a negative way, compared to 35 percent who believe the country has changed for the better under his leadership...."
    http://thehill.com/polls/236627-hill-poll-majority-feel-obama-has-changed-country-for-worse

    Wow. Likely Voters, no less.

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, Obama said he was all about CHANGE...

    But I don't think that's the change that we, the Americans who voted for him, had in mind...

    Michale...

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh my gods, he did not really just say that!!

    "There's a different theory. Mitt Romney wants to take that bus -- probably a bus made in Switzerland or Bermuda -- "
    -Robert Gibbs, Obama Campaign Advisor
    http://realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/07/09/gibbs_on_economy_obama_has_pulled_the_bus_out_of_the_ditch.html

    You mean, as opposed to the Vader Bus that Obama tools around in...

    THAT WAS MADE IN CANADA!!???

    Could Obama's campaign really be any more moronic...

    Michale.....

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dnc-chief-urges-romney-release-tax-returns-wont-release-her-own_648292.html

    The hypocrisy of the Left is in full bloom.... :^/

    Tell ya what...

    When Obama releases his school records, Romney will release all his tax returns...

    Fair??? :D

    Michale

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    GOP unnerved by Democrats' candid camera techniques
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78217.html

    No red lines yet???

    Astonishing.....

    Michale.....

  47. [47] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    THAT WAS MADE IN CANADA!!???

    Kinda, sorta, maybe. Well, the the shell at any rate.

    Just out of curiosity, were you going on about the made in Canada thing when George W. Bush was driving around in his made in Canada bus during his "Yes, America can" tour in 2004?

    Though I hope the right keeps up with line of attack as I hear there is a second bus just like it, for the republican nominee...

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just out of curiosity, were you going on about the made in Canada thing when George W. Bush was driving around in his made in Canada bus during his "Yes, America can" tour in 2004?

    I was, if George Bush was slamming Kerry for sending jobs overseas..

    Doesn't it seem kinda hypocritical to you to slam someone for sending jobs overseas and then not being squeaky clean in the AMERICAN FIRST department??

    Call me silly, but it seems to me that someone should make sure their own house is in order before casting stones...

    Wouldn't you agree???

    Michbale.....

  49. [49] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare

    How good can ObamaCare be if over 80% of doctors are willing to quit their careers over it???

    Michale.....

  51. [51] 
    Chris1962 wrote:
  52. [52] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare

    Too bad that was not the question asked in the "poll". And I use that term very loosely. I've seen both of you trash polls you did not agree with. Take a smidgeon of that skepticism and apply it to this poll (link to the raw poll data in the link you posted) and see what you come up with...

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    So, we DO agree about polls!! :D

    I knew we had something in common... :D

    Michale....

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    CB,

    No immigration bounce for President Obama
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/president-obama-gets-no-immigration-bounce/2012/07/10/gJQAG2tkaW_blog.html?wprss=rss_the-fix

    That's what I can't understand about Obama. Everything he is doing is turning NPAs, Independents and even core supporters (Religious blacks) against him...

    I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at Obama Campaign Headquarters (AKA, The Oval Office) and learn exactly what the hell they are thinking...

    Michale.....

  55. [55] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    That's what I can't understand about Obama. Everything he is doing is turning NPAs, Independents and even core supporters (Religious blacks) against him...

    funny, i read the polls as absolutely nothing turning anyone for OR against him who didn't feel that way already.

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    funny, i read the polls as absolutely nothing turning anyone for OR against him who didn't feel that way already.

    Exactly..

    The euphoria for Gay Marriage, Illegal Amnesty and ObamaCare....

    And NOTHING changes..

    Those who support him, still (for the most part) support him and those who oppose him are given MORE incentive to oppose him..

    I mean, after the big ObamaCare "win", wouldn't you expect a bump in the polls???

    After giving amnesty to illegals, wouldn't you think it would show in the polls???

    About the only thing that is showing Obama sinking (and sinking fast) is the fundraising...

    If the election were held today, Obama would likely lose...

    Michale.....

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russia sends warships to Syria
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9390177/Russia-sends-warships-to-Syria.html

    Comments???

    Looks like we won't need Iran to set off a Mid-East conflagration....

    Michale.....

  58. [58] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Michale: I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at Obama Campaign Headquarters (AKA, The Oval Office) and learn exactly what the hell they are thinking...

    Well, considering that he won in 2008 with 53% of the vote, they've got to be concerned that he's in the 40's. He surely doesn't have the following now that he had then.

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Howz THIS for irony!!?

    The NAACP went euphoric over Eric Holder talking about how bad Voter ID laws are...

    Yet, the NAACP required ID for anyone attending!??

    It's like the Left just doesn't care how blatantly their hypocrisy shows...

    Michale

  60. [60] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The NAACP went euphoric over Eric Holder talking about how bad Voter ID laws are...

    Yet, the NAACP required ID for anyone attending!??

    It's like the Left just doesn't care how blatantly their hypocrisy shows...

    not that there isn't plenty of hypocrisy to go around on both the left and the right, but that comparison is really apples and oranges.

    being a member of the NAACP (or attending their events) is not a constitutionally protected right. they're a non-government entity that can deny entry to anyone they choose. not so for voting.

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    they're a non-government entity that can deny entry to anyone they choose. not so for voting.

    True...

    But voting ONLY for American Citizens IS a constitutionally protected right...

    Any illegal vote denigrates, lessens and nullifies a LEGAL vote...

    My point is, if the NAACP demands ID for their racist club, then surely they can see the logic of demanding an ID for voting..

    Something FAR MORE important than their racist club..

    Michale.....

  62. [62] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    BashiBazouk: Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare

    Too bad that was not the question asked in the "poll".

    1. How do current changes in the medical system affect your desire to practice medicine?

    I'm re-energized - 4.6%

    Makes me think about quitting - 82.6%

    Unsure/no opinion - 12.8%

    I've seen both of you trash polls you did not agree with.

    Sounds a bit like what you're doing with this doctors' poll, Bashi.

    Take a smidgeon of that skepticism and apply it to this poll (link to the raw poll data in the link you posted) and see what you come up with...

    I generally view all data, including any verbatims that might be included. You?

  63. [63] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Sounds a bit like what you're doing with this doctors' poll, Bashi.

    Well, as I said the poll asked about current changes in the medical system. Not specifically Obamacare. And not specifically government involvement in the medical system. That would skew the data somewhat, would you not agree?

    The question:

    7.Who’s most to blame for current problems in medicine? (Choose three)

    President - 27.2%
    Congress - 25.8%
    Government involvement in general - 65.2%
    Hospitals - 7.0%
    Health plans/insurance - 49.5%
    Third-party payers - 41.5%
    Lawyers - 41.5%
    Patients - 7.3%
    Doctors/Medical professionals - 12.1%
    Medicare/Medicaid - 15.4%

    So, the blame goes to Government involvement in general first. This could be local/state as well as federal. Insurance, third party payers and lawyers in a virtual tie for second and Congress and the president tied for a distant third. Hard to get the premise that 83% are against Obamacare from that, yes?

    Then there is the poll it's self. It was Faxed. The respondents had a month to reply. 36,000 were faxed. They know 16,227 were confirmed delivered to a fax machine and 699 replied, 4.3%. I'm not sure how that compares to more professional polling but it seems like a small enough response rate to skew the results somewhat, though in which direction, I'm not sure. In any rate not exactly the best practices in polling…

    So, yes I find the poll it's self questionable but not half as bad as the journalism reporting on it...

  64. [64] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Most Voters Favor Photo ID At Polls, Don’t See It As Discrimination
    "...only 21% of Likely U.S. Voters nationwide think it’s discriminatory to require all voters to prove their identity before being allowed to vote. Seventy-three percent (73%) disagree..."
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2012/most_voters_favor_photo_id_at_polls_don_t_see_it_as_discrimination

    So 21% think it's discriminatory, and there are 21% of self-defined liberals in this country. Coincidence? ;D

  65. [65] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Hard to get the premise that 83% are against Obamacare from that, yes?

    With 65% citing government involvement, in general, as the cause, including the president (27%) and congress (26%), who passed CrapCare? No.

  66. [66] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    65% government in general. 27% the president. = 83% Obamacare? In what alternate universe?

    I mean how many were referring to their local state laws when picking that? I don't know, do you?

    I get it supports your political beliefs but come on...

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    The point is, ObamaCare is not HealthCare reform.

    It's not going to bring down costs.

    And it's going to add TRILLIONS to the debt over the next 10 years..

    So, let's take stock..

    Doctors hate ObamaCare.

    Costs are going to rise.

    Many Americans will NOT be able to keep the Health Plans they had..

    It's a huge tax increase...

    These are the facts...

    ObamaCare is simply a debacle from A to Z...

    That's an opinion.. :D

    Michale....

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    I thought you might like this.. :D

    And {Romney} expertly used education reform as a wedge between the president and his supporters in the audience, earning sustained applause when arguing that "candidates cannot have it both ways" -- i.e., Obama must choose between advancing education reforms and protecting teachers' unions.
    http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2012/07/romney-steps-up-his-game-with.php

  69. [69] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    BashiBazouk: 65% government in general. 27% the president. = 83% Obamacare? In what alternate universe?

    Did I say that or did you say that? I believe I said "including."

    I mean how many were referring to their local state laws when picking that? I don't know, do you?

    "The government" is a term that generally refers to the federal government.

    I get it supports your political beliefs but come on...

    I think it's just at odds with your political beliefs, which isn't sitting too well with you.

  70. [70] 
    Chris1962 wrote:
  71. [71] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Did I say that or did you say that? I believe I said "including."

    With 65% citing government involvement, in general, as the cause, including the president (27%) and congress (26%), who passed CrapCare? No.

    The no was in disagreement to my response that ended in a yes? taking the opposite stand...

    "The government" is a term that generally refers to the federal government.

    I'm sure the far right thinks so, the rest of Americans would take it to mean government in general. Or do you have another general term to cover local, state as well as federal government? But in the end it's not how you or I view the term but how the responders to this poll view the term...

    I think it's just at odds with your political beliefs, which isn't sitting too well with you.

    Bull. Give me a real polling outfit to do a similar poll with best practices and I'll accept it. Post a inflammatory headline of bad journalism making questionable extrapolations to a poll that is quite obviously poorly conducted and you will get called on it.

    Example: I have no problem with the Rasmussen poll you posted in post [64] even though I might want it to come out differently.

  72. [72] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I'm sure the far right thinks so, the rest of Americans would take it to mean government in general.

    According to whom?

    Or do you have another general term to cover local, state as well as federal government?

    People generally specify a state/local government they're referring to. Same way with titles: "Senator" refers to a U.S. Senator, unless you want to cite a state Senator, in which case you specify it. That's the general rule of thumb.

  73. [73] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    When I see the term "government" I think of all it's possible meanings and modify that by any accessory information to get more specific.

    But can you prove that all the respondents to this poll took "government" to mean federal government? What percentages either way? How would it influence the poll outcome?

    Do you stand behind the validity of this poll from a best practices rather than political belief standpoint?

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    People generally specify a state/local government they're referring to. Same way with titles: "Senator" refers to a U.S. Senator, unless you want to cite a state Senator, in which case you specify it. That's the general rule of thumb.

    She's got a point there, Bashi...

    When people talk about the government in the context of the upcoming election and/or ObamaCare, it's not really a stretch to assume that the FEDERAL Government is the government mentioned...

    When you hear "Senator Barack Obama" do you think Chicago State Senator or US Congress Senator??

    On another note, I see that the Obama Campaign is still whining and crying about Romney's Tax Returns....

    Romney could shut them up quite easily...

    All he has to say is "I'll release the requested Tax Records as soon as President Obama releases the requested School Records"..

    We KNOW that Obama will never do that.

    So, that will end that particular discussion...

    Michale.....

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:
  76. [76] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    When I see the term "government" I think of all it's possible meanings and modify that by any accessory information to get more specific.

    I don't think that's representative of the norm. It's pretty standard practice to say "the government," when referring to the federal government, and "state government," or "city counsel," etc., when referring to other levels of government.

  77. [77] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Whoops. City "council." I can never keep those two straight.

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can never keep those two straight.

    You could if you were ever hired to "counsel" the "council"...

    Yuk Yuk Yuk :D

    Couldn't resist... :D

    Michale....

  79. [79] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    You could if you were ever hired to "counsel" the "council"...

    I'll go to my grave getting that one backwards, too. ;D

Comments for this article are closed.
[Powered by WordPress]