ChrisWeigant.com

Some Humor, And A Challenge

[ Posted Tuesday, July 24th, 2012 – 17:25 UTC ]

Program Note:

OK, since everyone's getting so frisky in the comments section here, I am going to try an extended experiment -- in letting the inmates take over the asylum (so to speak... ahem). No, that wasn't the humor referenced in the title -- that comes after this program note, in a hilarious bit of satire from C.W. Cunningham.

As I did last year at this time, I'm going to cut back on my blogging for the next month or so. The reason now is the same as the last time around: to be able to devote more time to a book proposal I am currently writing.

Sadly, last year at this point I was confident that I could complete my book proposal by the end of August. This year, I am hiding behind the old chestnut: "Well, I didn't say which August, now did I?" Sigh.

Yes, this project has taken much longer than I expected. But you'll be happy to hear that the end of the tunnel is actually now in sight. I am preparing a final draft of the sample chapters to send out to agents and publishers, and I am targeting the end of August to achieve this goal. August is a slow political news month anyway, commonly called the "Silly Season" of politics in America. Plus, I am going to have a ton of things to do to get ready for the upcoming Democratic National Convention. So, from this point on, I will only be posting here on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, likely right up to the convention itself (right after Labor Day).

Which leaves two days of the week free. Now, I can just re-run old columns here, or I could leave the site un-updated, but that's kind of boring. So I am going to throw the door open to my faithful commenters to sit in my metaphorical chair and fill in for me. You write a blog post, and if I like it, I will post it here. Got something original to say? Well then, have at it!

I will not be editing the submissions (other than perhaps for minor grammar and punctuation problems), and my acceptance criteria will not include which side of the aisle you're coming from, but rather whether your submission is well-written and not too long or too short. It will be up to you how the work is credited: with your real name, or with the login name you use here (either way is fine with me, this will be completely up to you).

If this experiment crashes and burns, then I will stop taking submissions. If I am so snowed under by numerous submissions, then I may stop taking them as well (remember: this idea is supposed to save me time). If you start to see column repeats, it is because I am not getting enough submissions. Nobody is guaranteed to be posted, and I can reject any submission for any reason under the sun. But rather than be all reactionary in the comments, I would encourage you to try driving the conversation itself. Here's a hint: humor always catches my eye.

We'll see how it goes. Contact me privately via email (use the Email Chris page, if you have never done so before) with any questions or submissions (DON'T use the comments to submit something, because that kind of misses the point).

With that out of the way, we have our first example of a guest columnist. Today's article is a satirical news release from our old friend C.W. Cunningham (whom everyone might remember from his days as "house cartoonist" here). It needs no real introduction, other than to point out you've got to read the date at the top, for this news report to make sense. Enjoy.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Dateline: January 8, 2014

President Romney today announced that Sri Lanka has won the bid to represent the American people in Congress, having narrowly edged out both India and China with a spate of well placed bribes in the final hours of the race.

President Romney explained that this will be the most responsive Congress in American history. The Sri Lankans have vowed to show up four days each week -- a 68% increase over the previous session -- and since they won't be given any vacation time, they will be poised to pass any and all bills as quickly as lobbyists can type them up.

In keeping with the president's vow of "More jobs for more millionaires," the outgoing legislators will be retained, freeing them up to devote all their time to fundraising -- a 2% increase over the previous session. In an expression of the President's focused managerial style, each ex-legislator will be given a monthly quota, and those who fail to meet their numbers will either be laid off, or given a post in the Cabinet. Democrats will naturally be given higher quotas since they are well connected with latte-drinking elites, and are more likely to have George Soros' phone number.

In related news, President Romney announced that Offshore Investments for Freedom (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bain Capital) has once again won the bid to oversee the I.R.S. and the Congressional Budget Office. Though many have complained that these arms of the government have become less transparent and basically unaccountable since the Bain takeover, it's almost universally agreed that their reports are visually stunning, since they now use office products exclusively from Staples.

-- C.W. Cunningham

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

89 Comments on “Some Humor, And A Challenge”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    First off, please accept my hearty congratulations on being invited to the Democratic National Convention. Too bad it's not in some foreign land like Hawai'i, though. If it was, I'd be offering to carry your bags. Heh.

    As funny as that satirical spoof on fantasy President Romney is, real candidate Romney through his campaign speeches comes awfully close to the same level of hilarity. And, have you noticed, he always has that slight hint of a grin that says, look at me ... I'm spewing nonsense up here like an idiot and they're lapping it up - hook, line and sinker.

    Now, let's not everyone take up the guest columnist challenge at once, shall we!? Or is everybody just too busy typing up a first draft?

    Well, I for one, am looking forward to commenting on a full-fledged article from more than one of my comrades here, to be sure. Type away!

  2. [2] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    LizM -

    Well, thank you for the salutations!

    I do want to apologize, because I kind of pre-empted CW Cunningham's post, so I encourage everyone to skip over my blatherings and go back and read it, because it is really funny.

    Think you can be as funny?

    Well, the challenge lays on the ground. Pick it up and run with it if you dare...

    :-)

    -CW

  3. [3] 
    michty6 wrote:

    I think I can top that dateline satire :)

  4. [4] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Maybe I'll write an article about how Scotland leads the way in the UK on social issues: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18981287

    :)

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think I can top that dateline satire :)

    I'm looking forward to reading your article. You'll have to get started on it right away and get it submitted to Chris!

    I'm not going to click on that link as I prefer to read what YOU have to say about it ...

  6. [6] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "I'm not going to click on that link as I prefer to read what YOU have to say about it ...

    Haha ok. I'd have thought you might be bored by my comments by now :)

    I have submitted a satirical comment to CW, will see what he thinks!

    Maybe I'll comment on how Scotland is more socially progressive than the UK (and how both the USA and UK could learn from us) in a more serious post too...!

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, you know, michty, your submission must not be in the form of a comment. It must be a full-fledged article and remember, there are no word limits.

    You can respond to the comments that are made on it in the comments section!

    You may have to submit an addendum ... :)

  8. [8] 
    michty6 wrote:

    I could do an article about Romney's visit to the UK from the perspective of someone from the UK. Although I imagine he won't be giving the same speech that he did during the 2002 Olympics:

    Romney in 2002 "You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own power. For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in and organized competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them. We've already cheers the Olympians, lets also cheer the parents, coaches and communities!"

    I couldn't agree more. Although it does sound quite similar to something a certain someone said quite recently that Romney apparently has issues with...

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    I couldn't agree more. Although it does sound quite similar to something a certain someone said quite recently that Romney apparently has issues with...

    That being Obama's quote that business owners didn't really build their business'es???

    We can debate that..

    As soon as you acknowledge that the people who built the roads and bridges share responsibility for Bain sending jobs overseas...

    :D

    Michale....

  10. [10] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "As soon as you acknowledge that the people who built the roads and bridges share responsibility for Bain sending jobs overseas..."

    Lol I don't think that was their intended purpose. Generally speaking roads and bridges were built to help get Americans to school/work/whatever in America. Quite the opposite from shipping jobs overseas.

    So yes roads and bridges can have responsibility for American jobs/businesses in America without taking responsibility for shipping jobs overseas, because their intended purpose was to be part of a stronger American society.

  11. [11] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "That being Obama's quote that business owners didn't really build their business'es???

    We can debate that.."

    Sure, here's my review of the two speeches:

    Obama: If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own
    Romney: You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own

    Obama: If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.
    Romney: For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided [you]...

    Obama: Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.
    Romney: ...communities built venues in order to organize competitions.

    Obama: Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive
    Romney: All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them.

    Obama: The point is, is that... we succeed... because we do things together.
    Romney: We’ve already cheered the Olympians, let’s also cheer the parents, coaches, and communities.

    I love it when both sides agree on something. Great to see non-partisan agreement in politics :)

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, we agree that the people who built the roads and bridges to Bain are also responsible for Bain outsourcing jobs...

    Like you said.. It's great when both sides agree... :D

    Michale.....

  13. [13] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol clearly you didn't read my post [10].

    You are missing the purpose and actual job of the roads and bridges in your assessment (opinion). Here I'll make it clearer:

    PURPOSES/JOBS IN LIFE
    Roads/Bridges:
    Make it easier for Americans to get to school/work. Contribute to American society by allowing flexibility of movement, for example the ability of businesses to transport goods/resources/commodities across America to where they are needed.
    Management Of Bain: Make decisions about the running of the company, including the outsourcing of jobs.

    So yes, roads and businesses are responsible for helping to build American businesses - this is, after all, part of their purpose. To claim they are responsible for anything other than the purpose they were intended for and presently serve is a ludicrous nonsensical argument.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    michty,

    Michale is just trying to make your head hurt. :)

    But, I have to say, that Romney 'olympic' speech is very interesting when lined up next to the Obama "you didn't build that" speech.

    I hope the re-election campaign is aware of this ... I think that ad would be fun to watch, unlike the one with Romney singing which is just hard to listen to.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mitchy,

    Lol clearly you didn't read my post [10].

    Oh, I read your post..

    Like Obama, you want to give the people who had NOTHING to do with the success of a business ALL the CREDIT for the success of the business, but NONE of the responsibility that goes hand in hand WITH said success..

    That mentality may work in the UK...

    But it's not very welcome here in the US..

    As the public outcry against Obama has clearly shown....

    Just another shining example of how Obama (and you, apparently) just don't understand Americans...

    Liz,

    Michale is just trying to make your head hurt. :)

    And doing a damn good job of it, if I do say so myself!!!

    And I do!! :D

    Michale.....

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    So yes, roads and businesses are responsible for helping to build American businesses - this is, after all, part of their purpose. To claim they are responsible for anything other than the purpose they were intended for and presently serve is a ludicrous nonsensical argument.

    So, in other words... A successful road JUST equals a successful road...

    A successful road has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether a business is successful or not...

    OK... Glad we have THAT cleared up...

    Michale....

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's face the facts... Obama was playing to his base again and he stepped in it.. He, once again, showed he is absolutely CLUELESS as to what mainstream America is all about..

    It's been THREE WEEKS since Obama made the comment and Team Obama is STILL on the defensive over it..

    Michale......

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    "The only reason to have an armor-piercing bullet is to go through a bullet-resistant vest. The only people that wear bullet-resistant vests are our police officers."
    NYC Mayor Bloomberg

    It's this kind of utter and complete ignorance that makes dealing with the Gun Control crowd so frustrating...

    If I recall correctly, Holmes was wearing body armour.. So, even if there WAS an armed citizen in the theater, Holmes would have been a LOT harder to stop unless the citizen was packing teflon rounds...

    Michale.....

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    DOH!!!!

    Sorry about that.. THAT should have gone into the LOSING ON GUN CONTROL commentary... If you wish to address, PLEASE address it there...

    My bust..

    Michale

  20. [20] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "I hope the re-election campaign is aware of this ... I think that ad would be fun to watch, unlike the one with Romney singing which is just hard to listen to."

    Agreed and AGREED.

    "Like Obama, you want to give the people who had NOTHING to do with the success of a business ALL the CREDIT for the success of the business, but NONE of the responsibility that goes hand in hand WITH said success..
    That mentality may work in the UK...
    But it's not very welcome here in the US..
    As the public outcry against Obama has clearly shown....
    Just another shining example of how Obama (and you, apparently) just don't understand Americans..."

    I know you are ludicrously biased to the Republicans, but surely you can read comments in their context. And read the comments your own candidate made.

    At no point did Obama (or Romney) say people themselves get NO credit and Government ALL the credit; just like when Romney made the EXACT SAME SPEECH he didn't give all the credit to everyone other than the athlete:

    Obama: If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own
    Romney: You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own

    Obama: The point is, is that... we succeed... because we do things together.
    Romney: We’ve already cheered the Olympians, let’s also cheer the parents, coaches, and communities.

    What they are BOTH saying is that yes individual spirit and hard work is undeniably important in both business and sport.

    But to say that individual hard work and spirit ALONE gets you to the top is to completely ignore everything in the environment around you that helped you - for example education, safe roads, regulation, bridges and infrastructure (businesses) or education, coaches, training facilities and infrastructure (sports).

    So if you are arguing Obama 'doesn't understand America' then you are also arguing Romney 'doesn't understand America' (although the latter is certainly more accurate).

  21. [21] 
    michty6 wrote:

    BBC "Mr Romney, who will meet Mr Cameron on a visit to the UK later, has expressed concerns about "disconcerting" signs of a lack of readiness for the Games."

    Not the way to make a good first impression Mr Romney. Even if this is accurate (it probably is) no country appreciates an arrogant American coming in to tell them how bad they're doing...

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not the way to make a good first impression Mr Romney. Even if this is accurate (it probably is) no country appreciates an arrogant American coming in to tell them how bad they're doing...

    I gotta agree with you on this....

    That was kinda rude of Romney.....

    Michale.....

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mitchy,

    There is a flaw in your Olympic analogy..

    The coaches, trainers, parents etc etc worked WITH and ON BEHALF of the athlete...

    The guys who built the roads and bridges didn't work with the business owner to enrich the business..

    They were paid to do a job and they did it. PERIOD..

    I am also constrained to point out that the business owner (and every other taxpayer) PAID for the roads and bridges, NOT the government...

    Michale.....

  24. [24] 
    michty6 wrote:

    British PM "We are holding an Olympic Games in one of the busiest, most active, bustling cities anywhere in the world. Of course it’s easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere,"

    Oh no he didn't! Day 1 not going so well for Mr Romney...

  25. [25] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "There is a flaw in your Olympic analogy..
    The coaches, trainers, parents etc etc worked WITH and ON BEHALF of the athlete...
    The guys who built the roads and bridges didn't work with the business owner to enrich the business..
    They were paid to do a job and they did it. PERIOD.."
    I am also constrained to point out that the business owner (and every other taxpayer) PAID for the roads and bridges, NOT the government..."

    1. The first coach of any athlete is usually their school coach/gym teacher. Often it is at school where they get the first experience of their sport, the chance to practice it leading to representing their school in community competitions. These coaches/teachers were 'paid to do their jobs and they did it' just like the road builders. They didn't exist just to coach one specific athlete; like roads and bridges they exist to serve many people in the community.
    Like the roads/bridges, after the athlete leaves they will continue on to serve the interests of other athletes and individuals in the community that follow them.

    2. Romney said "communities built venues in order to organize competitions." There are thousands of community (Government) built venues that allow these athletes to train and compete. Again, these are often in schools. These venues were not built specifically for these athletes, they were built to 'enrich' the community as a whole. And yes they were paid for by the taxpayer, the Government is usually the venue that represents the money of taxpayers ;)

    They are talking about identical things:
    Obama-> Roads and bridges helped businesses
    Romney-> Community centres/teachers helped athletes.
    Both require high levels of individual effort but neither businesses nor athletes got there solely by themselves.

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Giving credit to the guys who builds the roads and bridges for the success of a business is akin to saying that I don't get credit for my skills and intelligence, that a guy that wears flowing white robes, has a long beard and lives in the clouds, deserves some of the credit and payment for my skills..

    Same concept... Same ridiculous concept..

    Michale....

  27. [27] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Mitt Romney, 17th July:
    "He said this, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” That somebody else is government, in his view. He goes on to describe the people who deserve the credit for building this business. And, of course, he describes people who we care very deeply about, who make a difference in our lives: our school teachers, firefighters, people who build roads. We need those things. We value school teachers, firefighters, people who build roads. You really couldn’t have a business if you didn’t have those things."</B<

    Bold added for emphasis. Obama's campaign should cut this sentence out and run it out of context - see how Romney likes it...

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mitchy,

    Well, if you insist on equating the two, that leaves only one logical response..

    Romney is as much of a moron as Obama....

    Michale.....

  29. [29] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Giving credit to the guys who builds the roads and bridges for the success of a business is akin to saying that I don't get credit for my skills and intelligence, that a guy that wears flowing white robes, has a long beard and lives in the clouds, deserves some of the credit and payment for my skills.."

    Lol most Conservatives would argue exactly this.

  30. [30] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Well, if you insist on equating the two, that leaves only one logical response..
    Romney is as much of a moron as Obama...."

    Or maybe, just maybe, they are both correct? :)

    Regardless, it is pretty hypocritical for Romney to run Obama's comments out of context as a campaign ad when he has said the same things (see another quote in [27]) agreed?

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bold added for emphasis. Obama's campaign should cut this sentence out and run it out of context - see how Romney likes it...

    Well at least we can agree that Obama is feeling the heat.. :D

    Michale.....

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    mitchy,

    Lol most Conservatives would argue exactly this.

    Which is why, when you accuse me of being conservative, it makes me laugh.. :D

    Michale.....

  33. [33] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Out of interest, what would you define yourself as?

    I think you are still Conservative from what I've seen of your posts. Certainly quite far right. But (at least in my world) you don't have to tick every single box (especially the religious box) to be considered a Conservative. You also can be a Conservative and support the Democrats (I have friends in this position) because the Democrats have moved right and the Republicans have moved waaaay right.

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Out of interest, what would you define yourself as?

    It's easy..

    Socially, I am more liberal than most people..

    In aspects of national security, law enforcement, self-defense, I am VERY conservative...

    Michale......

  35. [35] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Socially, I am more liberal than most people..

    In aspects of national security, law enforcement, self-defense, I am VERY conservative.."

    I can't believe that you'd be socially liberal but such a big advocate of Romney.

    I mean the guy isn't running on his conservative national security, law enforcement or self-defense prowess - he is running on his social economic solutions which are about as Conservative as it gets: lower taxes for the rich, less regulation, kill universal healthcare, reduced environmental checks/regulations, federal ban on gay marriage, reduce/get rid of minimum wage etc etc. He isn't socially conservative, he is severely socially conservative!

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can't believe that you'd be socially liberal but such a big advocate of Romney.

    Once again, you misunderstand me..

    I am not a "big advocate" of Romney..

    I am a big... a HUGE advocate of anyone that will replace Obama..

    I would vote for Bugs Bunny if he was the alternative to Obama.. :D

    Michale.....

  37. [37] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "I am a big... a HUGE advocate of anyone that will replace Obama..

    I would vote for Bugs Bunny if he was the alternative to Obama.. :D"

    Well this makes a lot of your comments make more sense.

    I personally think it is an awful way to look at any vote.
    You don't care if the guy doesn't represent you or your interests?
    You don't care what the policies of the guy you are voting for?
    An example: Romney comes out tomorrow and says 'I will ban guns' you're still voting for him?

    You seem very opinionated and smart but you have bought into a tonne of crap about Obama and are basically voting based on emotion not sense. I think you should reconsider (even if this means voting for Romney, do it for the RIGHT reasons).

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    I personally think it is an awful way to look at any vote.

    You and me both...

    You seem very opinionated and smart but you have bought into a tonne of crap about Obama

    I assure you, I don't "buy into" anything. I check out all the evidence, from as many sources as available and then make up my own mind..

    and are basically voting based on emotion not sense

    Actually, the only vote that MAKES any kind of sense is to vote Obama out of office..

    Look at all the bad that has happened to this country under Obama. And not just because he was unlucky to be President when bad things happened (like Bush and 9/11) but rather Obama INSTIGATED the things that turned out really REALLY bad..

    I honestly and truly believe that this country, as it exists in the here and now, cannot survive with another 4 years of Obama and Democrats in control..

    And I say this as a person who HAS voted Democrat in the last 3 elections...

    Michale.....

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Socially, I am more liberal than most people..

    As a matter of fact, I would say that I am the most liberal person here... :D

    Michale.....

  40. [40] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Look at all the bad that has happened to this country under Obama. And not just because he was unlucky to be President when bad things happened (like Bush and 9/11) but rather Obama INSTIGATED the things that turned out really REALLY bad..

    I honestly and truly believe that this country, as it exists in the here and now, cannot survive with another 4 years of Obama and Democrats in control.."

    Sure, please give me some examples.

    I am genuinely interested what Obama has done to not just turn you against Democrats, but to be a LIBERAL supporter of probably the most far right mainstream party ever seen in America!

    I can tell you right now I think the same about Romney, because as a person he would be an awful leader but that doesn't concern me as much as how his background (and supporters) influence his policies. Pretty much every policy I mentioned in [35] I disagree with. He would be the biggest sell-out President you've ever seen.

    Let me put it this way: I work in business. If Romney was elected my first thought would be to sell my American investments. And I'm not kidding. For a guy who is running on the economy that should tell you all you need to know. You can go along with Bush 2.0 and wait for the next crash as millionaires fight over each other to gamble their money and push the non-existent regulations to the limit under the Romney regime but I'm out.

  41. [41] 
    michty6 wrote:

    In addition to [40] I'd also like to hear how, as a liberal, you feel about handing over Supreme Court nominating duty to the most far right mainstream party ever seen. This is another issue that makes this election important.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sure, please give me some examples.

    Let's start with a 160 billion dollar deficit that ballooned into over 1.6 TRILLION dollars under Obama.

    Let's start there and move our way forward...

    Let me put it this way: I work in business. If Romney was elected my first thought would be to sell my American investments

    And yet, DEMOCRATS, including the POSTER BOY for Democrats have commented what a "sterling" business career Romney had...

    If BOTH sides of the aisle applaud Romney.... well, that has to be taken into account...

    In addition to [40] I'd also like to hear how, as a liberal, you feel about handing over Supreme Court nominating duty to the most far right mainstream party ever seen.

    "There you go again....."
    -Ronald Reagan

    I am NOT "a liberal"...

    If you MUST label me, then I am an NPA. No Political Affiliation. That's my official Florida designation.

    I have some liberal tendencies.. I have some conservative tendencies...

    That's the extent of it...

    Now, what's your question about the SCOTUS???

    Michale.....

  43. [43] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Come on man. Seriously that's it? You are not telling the truth here for sure.

    First you say
    "And not just because he was unlucky to be President when bad things happened (like Bush and 9/11).."

    then you say

    "Let's start with a 160 billion dollar deficit that ballooned into over 1.6 TRILLION dollars under Obama."

    You know fine well who caused the Great Recession of 2008-2009. And you should know that the same person inherited a SURPLUS budget in 2000, when the CBO was predicting a $5.6 trillion SURPLUS from 2000-2011. Read Wikipedia if you don't know the facts - it is quite easy to find out why America has a large deficit.

    You said very clearly:

    "Obama INSTIGATED the things that turned out really REALLY bad.."

    I want to hear what those things are since they must be pretty bad to make someone 'liberal minded' vote for the most far right party ever to run in an American election...

    Obama did not 'instigate' the bad economy and awful budget, he inherited it. Now let me hear specifically the policies he instigated that turned you against him (we can get to SCOTUS stuff after!).

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, Obama didn't instigate the bad economy.. He just made it a hundred times worse..

    What's the first thing, THE VERY FIRST THING you do when you find yourself in a financial hole..

    What's the FIRST thing you do??

    YOU..... STOP...... DIGGING.....

    Obama did not even STOP digging, he brought in very expensive heavy equipment to dig more, faster and deeper...

    The blame for where we are at right now belong firmly and squarely on Obama's shoulders.

    And ya know what makes it worse???

    OBAMA **STILL** doesn't think he did anything wrong... He **STILL** believes that his policies are going to work...

    Think Martin Sheen as Greg Stillson in the Oval Office and you'll get how I feel this country is going to go...

    "Mr President! We've found a diplomatically solution!"
    "No need, General. The missiles are away. Hallelujah!!"

    -THE DEAD ZONE

    Michale....

  45. [45] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol we're making progress at a snails pace but we're not quite there! I mean you are being pretty vague, not showing any facts or policies and basically just repeating Romney rhetoric -

    "He just made it a hundred times worse"

    This is classic Romney rhetoric. And you have told me you are a man of facts, logic and reason who does his own research.

    So please explain how you think this is the case. Name some policies. Give me some facts.

    Because I can tell you right now I can quite easily prove the economy has gotten better under Obama by almost every single measurement.

    In fact, Romney was called out on this lie and he retracted it:
    "I didn't say that things are worse"
    Romney, June 28th

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qBmkDO6oo0

  46. [46] 
    michty6 wrote:

    London Mayor (about 55 secs in) "I hear there's a guy called Mitt Romney who wants to know whether we're ready"
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19006480

    Then starts getting the crowd chanting 'yes we can'. Oh dear. Slapped down by the PM, ridiculed by the Major. Day 1 has not gone well lol.

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    In fact, Romney was called out on this lie and he retracted it:
    "I didn't say that things are worse"
    Romney, June 28th

    But PRESIDENT OBAMA did..

    "Of course, Americans were better off 4 years ago."
    -President Barack Obama

    I am sure we'll continue this, but I am heading home now..

    Michale....

  48. [48] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "But PRESIDENT OBAMA did.."

    You're listening to Romney rhetoric. Look at the facts and stats. Do some research. Heck even name 1 policy of his you disagree with. You've had about 5 comments now since I asked and haven't even named one policy! Literally all you've done since I asked you to explain why you hate Obama so much was give some rhetoric and opinion.

    ""Of course, Americans were better off 4 years ago."
    -President Barack Obama"

    He made this quote in 2011. If he was to say Americans were better off than 4 years ago (2007) he'd be LYING. Lol. The Great Recession was 2008-2009!. It started before he started in 2009. So he is saying that we have not recovered from the Great Recession! OF COURSE this is true! No country on the planet has!

    Ask him that now and he'd say YES. America is better off now than it was in 2008 when he took over. This is why you can't say "Obama made it worse". He inherited the Great Recession. Show me how he made it worse in your world.

  49. [49] 
    CWCunningham wrote:

    I lived in Salt Lake City during the floods of the 1980s.

    I worked in a small store on the west side of third west. The floods got so severe that the "rivers" were channeled down any large street (including third west). People actually were catching fish on State street, the main street of SLC proper.

    Thanks to unpaid volunteers, most businesses in the downtown area were sandbagged to save their lives. We sandbagged the area near our store which kept us from becoming a swimming pool with cash registers.

    The unfortunate part for us was that 99% of the population of the Salt Lake valley was on the east side of third west, and it was a 14 mile round trip just to get across the street to the store.

    Cut-off from both our customers and suppliers. Lay-offs ensued, and as the weeks wore on, only the owner and I were left to deal with the 3 or so customers per day we were getting during the flood. As the work, once done by 15 other people, fell way behind, the owner leaned more an more heavily on me to do everything, and when the day came that he asked me to go without a paycheck, I had to say thanks, but no thanks. The store was out of business before the month ended, and though the owner sued the city for failure to maintain the storm drains, I don't know if he ever got any satisfaction.

    So if anyone tells you that roads and bridges are not some small part of the foundation of a successful business, tell them for me, they have no clue.

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    CWC,

    Ooops Had to add the extra C to differentiate..

    I can feel for your story. We (barely) lived thru the Willamette Valley floods of 1996, so I know EXACTLY where you are coming from...

    But, once again, the point is missed..

    You helped your friends and neighbors and they helped you.... It was specific. Like Mitchy's Olympic example. Of course you had help in your hour of need and of course you helped others in their hour of need. Of course parents and trainers help athletes...

    That is NOT what Obama is talking about. Obama is talking about the guys who built the roads 20 30 years ago deserve credit AND compensation for THEIR work...

    Obama isn't really even talking about those guys...

    Obama is talking about government. Even though it's the CITIZENS that pay taxes (you and I and every other American) that ACTUALLY built the roads, Obama is talking about the GOVERNMENT had a hand in building those roads that made MY business successful..

    And, BECAUSE the GOVERNMENT "deserves" credit for making those roads, then *I* should have to pay government MORE of my hard earned money because, after all, I didn't earn it all by myself..

    Now, even though I am loathe to do it, I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt..

    He might not have MEANT to say that.. He might not have even MEANT it in the manner it came out.

    But here's the thing... The American people, the Independents and NPAs seem to think that THAT is exactly what Obama meant to say..

    So, it doesn't matter if you think Obama didn't say this or didn't say that. It doesn't matter what *I* think Obama said or meant..

    You have to ask, what the majority of Independents and NPAs heard.

    What THEY think is most important...

    And, considering Obama is STILL trying to explain things, THREE WEEKS later.....

    Well, I guess Obama is scared shitless at what us NPAs and Independents are thinking...

    Michale....

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Anyone who thinks things are better is deluding themselves...

    If things are so much better, Obama would be running on his record..

    But the reality is, Obama can't run FAST enough AWAY from his record...

    Which is why Obama is All Negative All the Time...

    Michale

  52. [52] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    You really should be spending your time writing the big article and getting it sent on to Chris for publication.

    I'm guessing that might take up most of your waking spare moments from now until the end of, say, the third week of August?

    Anyways, I'd shoot for having it published as the last in the experimental series ...

  53. [53] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    CWC,

    First off, it's very nice to see you posting here!

    Your personal story of the flood and how it affected business is very instructive and a good example of what President Obama was talking about in his 'you didn't build that' speech.

    It is surprising, even to me, that the GOP is getting away with the nonsense they are spewing about what Obama said. I have to believe that the people who are spewing this nonsense and the people who are repeating it or lapping it up are just showing their crass political natures and don't really believe a bit of it.

    And, Michale is quite purposefully pushing this nonsense for all it's worth because he just has so much fun being the bane of our existence here at CW.com. Ahem.

  54. [54] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Michale: And, considering Obama is STILL trying to explain things, THREE WEEKS later.....

    Well, I guess Obama is scared shitless at what us NPAs and Independents are thinking...

    Obama campaign stepping up damage-control over remark
    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/240187-obama-campaign-stepping-up-damage-control-over-remark

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    The more I read about Romney's gaffe the more I think what a total putz Romney was...

    I mean, com'on! Obama has done so much to offend the Brits. Why does Romney feel he has to continue the tradition??

    I hope Romney has the good sense to choose Condie Rice as his VP.. She can definitely shore up what Romney is lacking (which is everything) in Foreign Affairs...

    Michale.....

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    It is surprising, even to me, that the GOP is getting away with the nonsense they are spewing about what Obama said. I have to believe that the people who are spewing this nonsense and the people who are repeating it or lapping it up are just showing their crass political natures and don't really believe a bit of it.

    As I am wont to say, elections are 95% (if not 100%) perception...

    The "You didn't build that" gaffe ad is successful because it plays to the American public's perception that Obama is out of touch with REAL Americans..

    It re-enforces what Americans already think so people accept it readily..

    Compare and contrast that to Obama's BAIN ads.. It doesn't play well to middle America because it disputes the perception that Americans have of Romney..

    In other words, the Romney ad plays well because people already THINK that about Obama and Romney's ad just confirms it..

    Whereas the Obama ad about Romney doesn't sit well with Americans because it doesn't feed the perception that Americans already have of Romney.

    If Team Obama is smart, they will start playing up Romney's Britain gaffe and paint Romney as a bungler in Foreign Affairs..

    There is a risk because such an ad may also cause Americans remember all of Obama's bowing to every world leader he could find...

    You don't want to run an ad against your opponent that reminds people of your OWN problems...

    It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out..

    Michale.....

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Okay, having not had breakfast yet, I'll bite ...

    What has President Obama or anyone remotely connected to the Obama administration done to offend the Brits?

    No, don't answer that. That's a great idea for another Michale column!

    P.S. I'm told by two very reliable sources - impeccably so, in fact - that Condi will not run, ever. It's too bad, really, because I think she and Biden would have produced a veep debate for the history books.

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Speaking of ads ...

    The Republicans have one out now that I think is exceptional. Seriously.

    It's the one where the voice over says that "Obama tried, you tried. It's okay to make a change".

    It's a very serious-looking, black-and-white ad that is precise and concise and, I think, the most effective ad I've seen this season. It sure beats the Hell out of the Democratic attempt where they have Mitt Romney singing over their entire message. Who was the bright bulb who thought that piece of nonsense up?

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    What has President Obama or anyone remotely connected to the Obama administration done to offend the Brits?

    The better question would be what HASN'T the Obama Administration done to piss off the Brits...

    Getting rid of Churchill's bust at the White House.

    Giving a DVD Box Set as a gift to a visiting Head Of State

    Releasing classified details of a UC asset that belonged to MI6

    "The list is long, but distinguished."
    "Yea, so'se my Johnson."

    -TOP GUN

    :D

    I'm told by two very reliable sources - impeccably so, in fact - that Condi will not run, ever. It's too bad, really, because I think she and Biden would have produced a veep debate for the history books.

    I hope you're wrong.

    It's the one where the voice over says that "Obama tried, you tried. It's okay to make a change".

    Haven't seen that one yet.. I like Scott Brown's recent ad..

    Michale....

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama is running scared on the "You didn't build that" gaffe...

    http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577551344018773450.html

    Michale.....

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's why Mr. Obama's "out of context" complaints aren't getting traction. The Republican National Committee's response to that gripe was to run an ad that shows a full minute of Mr. Obama's rant at the Roanoke, Va., campaign event on July 13. In addition to "you didn't build that," the president also put down those who think they are "smarter" or "work harder" than others. Witness the first president to demean the bedrock American beliefs in industriousness and exceptionalism. The "context" only makes it worse.

  62. [62] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Michale: In addition to "you didn't build that," the president also put down those who think they are "smarter" or "work harder" than others. Witness the first president to demean the bedrock American beliefs in industriousness and exceptionalism. The "context" only makes it worse.

    I agree. Here's another interesting article about the damage control that's going on. http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577551344018773450.html

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    I agree. Here's another interesting article about the damage control that's going on. http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577551344018773450.html

    "It's déjà vu all over again"
    -Yogi Berra

    :D

    Michale.....

  64. [64] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol the Chris62 and Michale nonsense show has returned. I can't be bothered getting into detail to refute your nonsense so I'll say a few things:

    - Obama's comments are correct, as CWC pointed out. As I have pointed out Romney agrees with them - but this is because Romney is not a crazy right wing nut-job at heart, he just has to pretend to be because that's what his party has become. If you fail to see how the helping hand to small business owners that ALL parts of society give them you are blind to reality.
    - I can tell you first hand Obama's ratings would be considerably higher in the UK than in America. Probably throughout Europe too. He has done so much to repair the foreign policy damage of Bush - which Romney is already looking to reignite lol. Here is what the UK papers are saying today:
    - "Who invited him?", Daily Mail - the most right wing paper in the UK
    - "Come on. We needed this. It’s a little comic relief. He's kind of like Mr. Bean, only he’s an American" Guardian blog.
    - "'seriously, some Americans just shouldn't leave the country', Carl Lewis
    - Many papers are suggesting the fact he called the leader of the opposition 'Mr Leader' is "cringe-worthy" and suggested he had forgotten his name.
    I'll certainly agree the whole thing has been thoroughly entertaining (in a laugh at him way). I declared a truce against Mr Cameron yesterday in light of his "middle of nowhere comment", that's how good it was!
    - About 10 posts back Michale you stated you were a liberal who was so disgusted with Obama you were going to vote against him and for the most right-wing party ever seen in mainstream American politics. For about 10 posts I have asked for any facts, statistics, heck even ONE policy of Obamas that led you to this massive reverse. You have given me nothing but right-wing rhetoric straight from the Limbaugh show.
    - One more thing: your comments here on Obama's 'didn't build that' show that you are clearly not socially a liberal. Acceptance that we're in it together, the power of community and society is greater than the power of an individual and everyone contributing to society together are the bedrocks of social liberal policy. If you don't believe in these you are certainly not a liberal...

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mitchy,

    My opinion of what Obama meant or did not mean is irrelevant..

    It's the opinion of the majority of Americans....

    And, considering the panic of Team Obama, THAT opinion on what Obama meant is 1000% crystal clear..

    Remember. In presidential elections perception trumps reality every time...

    If Team Obama doesn't think the comment was all that bad, why are the back-pedaling and trying to explain the comment THREE WEEKS LATER!??

    Michale....

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    If you don't believe in these you are certainly not a liberal...

    I never claimed I was.. I have liberal thoughts and opinions. I have conservative thoughts and opinions..

    They make me what I am today.

    NO POLITICAL AFFILIATION..

    Michale....

  67. [67] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "If Team Obama doesn't think the comment was all that bad, why are the back-pedaling and trying to explain the comment THREE WEEKS LATER!??"

    Lol pretty simple: because Romney put out thousands of adverts quoting him out of context. Generally when someone does that you have to explain the context. Not rocket science.

    Michale - I don't think there is a political affiliation for you. I believe you are a right-wing conservative who is embarrassed to admit that he is a conservative (not that surprising), so you masquerade as 'non affiliated' or a 'liberal' when you really know what you are.

    I'll try one more time. ONE Obama decision, policy, statistic, fact - SOMETHING. You hate the guy so much but the only reasons you can give me are right-wing propaganda rhetoric. So either you have been brain-washed or there are lots of reasons why you hate him and for some reason and, even though you love to comment and write in here, you have decided not to mention ALL these things that Obama has done wrong..

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lol pretty simple: because Romney put out thousands of adverts quoting him out of context. Generally when someone does that you have to explain the context. Not rocket science.

    No you don't.. Because, if the "thousand of adverts" are way off base (as you would like us to think they are) it's easy to ignore them and make the guy putting out the adverts look like a fool..

    But if the adverts start resonating with the public (as Romney's definitely are) THEN you have to address them. It's called "Damage Control"... And, like most everything else Obama does, he does Damage Control very poorly...

    Michale - I don't think there is a political affiliation for you. I believe you are a right-wing conservative who is embarrassed to admit that he is a conservative (not that surprising), so you masquerade as 'non affiliated' or a 'liberal' when you really know what you are.

    You are welcome to believe that. Many people here have made that exact same mistake.. :D

    As to why I hate Obama, that's no secret.. I have been very clear about that.

    He lied to me. He made me believe that he was something he is obviously not..

    He con'ed me.. Pure and simple.. And THAT is why I am going to take great pleasure in seeing him crash and burn...

    What he is doing to this country is simply more of a reason to hate him...

    And, I really don't like the word "hate" because it has so many negative connatations..

    I "hate" terrorists and have no problem espousing on THAT hatred...

    Let's just say that, with Obama I dislike him intensely and don't respect him at all..

    And, as a military man thru and thru, not respecting a Cnc is NOT something I do lightly...

    Michale....

  69. [69] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Lol the Chris62 and Michale nonsense show has returned. I can't be bothered getting into detail to refute your nonsense so I'll say a few things

    Maybe you should say them to Team-O, michty. They seems to be having a little problem with damage control.

    Acceptance that we're in it together, the power of community and society is greater than the power of an individual and everyone contributing to society together are the bedrocks of social liberal policy.

    Yeah, that's the liberal hand that O, sans teleprompter, inadvertently tipped, big time. And it isn't playing well in this country, which consists of a big 21% of liberals. That's precisely the problem O has found himself having to damage-control. In this center-right country, where the majority wants less Big Government, not more, he's "defined" himself as a big-government liberal, who believes in the "commune" over the individual.

    That is the philosophical sword O has handed to the R's, like so: http://youtu.be/oqDIjGsBEP8 I fully expect to see those four infamous words — "You didn't build that" — play over and over over again in all sorts of ads across the nation, until election day. And as well they should. Because O didn't make a boo-boo when he made that statement; rather, he was giving Elizabeth Warren's hard-core-leftie message a test drive (for God only knows what ill-advised strategic reason). And his problem is that while he's just as much a hard-core leftie as Warren, she's running in the bluest of all blue states in the nation and can get away with it. O, on the other hand, is running in all the states. And those four words alson may end up crashing-and-burning his reelection chances.

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    You see, that's the crux of it..

    It doesn't matter what ANY of us in Weigantia think...

    It doesn't matter what the Left or Right thinks...

    It only matters what the American VOTER thinks..

    Even THAT is not entirely accurate..

    It matters what Team Obama THINKS the American thinks...

    And, from all available facts, Team Obama is thinking that the American voter is pretty pissed off about the whole "you didn't build that" message...

    Team Obama is in panic mode.. That could change. Probably will..

    But in the here and now???

    Advantage: ROMNEY

    Michale.....

  71. [71] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Because, if the "thousand of adverts" are way off base (as you would like us to think they are) it's easy to ignore them and make the guy putting out the adverts look like a fool..

    But if the adverts start resonating with the public (as Romney's definitely are) THEN you have to address them. It's called "Damage Control"... And, like most everything else Obama does, he does Damage Control very poorly"

    When Chris1962 comes back I notice that your nonsense level goes through the roof!

    An advert can be way off base but still need to be refuted. This ESPECIALLY applies when they are misquoting you. People (especially right leaning) are far too ignorant to do their own research and find out the quote was out of context. So you have to release adverts to point this out. This is pretty much what has happened, Obama's campaign released a simple ad showing it was out of context, it really is quite straight forward...

    "And his problem is that while he's just as much a hard-core leftie as Warren"

    I mean if Obama is a 'leftie' he is the WORST LEFTIE I'VE EVER SEEN since he's governed from a right of centre position. The difference is that the opposition have moved righter, righter, righter, righter, riiiiiiight in response to this. People on the left are actually upset at him. Again this sort of 'leftie' stuff is nothing but you regurgitating the thought of the day from Rush Limbaugh. Either that or you don't know what 'left' is. I would challenge you to give me one Obama policy that is left leaning but you can't even give me one policy that you disagree with and you hate the guy lol so I'd be better not bothering...

    "And, from all available facts, Team Obama is thinking that the American voter is pretty pissed off about the whole "you didn't build that" message..."

    I agree. Out of context it sounds really bad. Like REALLY bad. Hence why they are refuting it. This really isn't rocket science lol. Romney quotes Obama out of context, it sounds bad, Obama refutes the claim attempts to show the context. Not exactly hard to follow the chain here!

    "Advantage: ROMNEY"

    Heck I'm a reasonable, rational guy - I'll even agree with this. Romney using that quote out of context is dirty politics but that's the world we live in. He has worked it well and taken some advantage from it. For once he has done something well!

  72. [72] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Obama just got a +8% in Ohio in a poll today, giving him a large jump in every collegial predictor. I can't believe that poll would be accurate, if it is Romney is in HUGE trouble.

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    I agree. Out of context it sounds really bad. Like REALLY bad. Hence why they are refuting it. This really isn't rocket science lol. Romney quotes Obama out of context, it sounds bad, Obama refutes the claim attempts to show the context. Not exactly hard to follow the chain here!

    Yes, what you say makes perfect sense.. For the first few days... MAYBE even the first week at the outside..

    But for THREE WEEKS!???

    The ONLY explanation that makes sense is that Team Obama is thinking, "Holy crap!! People are actually BUYING into this!!!"

    And that's all I am saying.. Personally, I think OBAMA told a "DC Truth".. He inadvertently revealed what he honestly and truly believes.. It's another "Cops Acted Stupidly" moment or a "Spread The Wealth Around" moment or a "People cling to god and guns" moment..

    That's my personal opinion. But it doesn't matter what I think..

    Heck I'm a reasonable, rational guy - I'll even agree with this. Romney using that quote out of context is dirty politics but that's the world we live in. He has worked it well and taken some advantage from it. For once he has done something well!

    Yea, Romney brought a gun to a gun fight.. Obama is left holding his pea shooter and thinking to himself, "WTF!!!???"

    Or, if you prefer a movie analogy, Obama is Apollo Creed and Romney is Drago...

    Michale.....

  74. [74] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Yes, what you say makes perfect sense.. For the first few days... MAYBE even the first week at the outside..

    But for THREE WEEKS!???"

    Honestly you need to slow down and think before you post. Obama only made the quote 2 weeks ago. I mean seriously stop getting your facts from RushLimbaugh.com

    "Or, if you prefer a movie analogy, Obama is Apollo Creed and Romney is Drago..."

    Omg I almost spat my coffee out. Hilarious! I can just imagine robot Romney 'I must break you'.

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    Honestly you need to slow down and think before you post. Obama only made the quote 2 weeks ago. I mean seriously stop getting your facts from RushLimbaugh.com

    DOH!! My bust.. I had actually thought 2 weeks, but then looked it up, miscounted the date..

    Yer right. Two weeks. Still, the point is valid... Things like this, if they last a few days, that's doing good...

    Omg I almost spat my coffee out. Hilarious! I can just imagine robot Romney 'I must break you'.

    I am glad you took it in the humorous manner it was intended. :D That is, indeed a hilarious mental picture.. :D

    Michale.....

  76. [76] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Well Romney released the first adverts on the 17th. Super-Pacs went with them on the 20th.

    So really not even 10 days - hardly the weeks of panic you are posturing about... In fact the whole Bain and Romney taxes thing lasted considerably more than 10 days.

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    So really not even 10 days - hardly the weeks of panic you are posturing about...

    Time will tell.. :D

  78. [78] 
    michty6 wrote:
  79. [79] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    "...A June 2012 Pew Global Attitudes poll “Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted,” found global approval of Obama’s policies has “declined significantly” since 2009. Of 19 countries including Europe polled, just 23% approve of Obama’s drone war tactics. Although Obama’s approval ratings in Muslim countries are better than Bush’s 2008 numbers, 69 percent of Muslim countries polled (including Egypt) have no confidence in Obama.

    Despite his Cairo speech and his effervescence, healing of the nations has not occurred under Obama’s watch.

    Another Pew poll on July 10, 2012, conducted in 21 countries found Obama’s policies have hurt our image and his in the Arab Spring countries of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Tunisia, as well as in Turkey and Pakistan. 55 percent of those polled said they consider America an enemy of democracy! In Tunisia, where the Arab Spring purportedly began, 57 percent said they had zero confidence in Obama’s ability to handle international affairs...."http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/event/article/id/100042080/group/Opinion/

  80. [80] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol that's a blog you linked to.

  81. [81] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    It's a Minnesota newspaper. That aside, was there anything you wish to refute? Or were you hoping that simply shooting the messenger would somehow make the facts go away?

  82. [82] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Team Obama is in panic mode.. That could change. Probably will..

    But in the here and now???

    Advantage: ROMNEY

    Looks that way. Rasmussen's Likely Voters poll has Romney five points ahead, 49% to 44%.

    "... Romney’s five-point advantage is the largest enjoyed by either candidate in just over a month. As with any such change in the race, it remains to be seen whether it marks a lasting shift or is merely statistical noise.

    The president’s support has been at either 43% or 44% for six straight days...."
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

  83. [83] 
    michty6 wrote:

    My point is THIS is why you guys are so scewed and biased. You read one guys opinion on the poll and scew your opinion based on this. Maybe you should try reading the poll yourself?

    Sure I'll go through the facts and give you my opinion:

    "Just 23% approve of Obama’s drone war tactics"

    Sounds reasonable. I don't think people like drones dropping bombs on them! Americans strongly approve of them though...

    "Obama’s approval ratings in Muslim countries are better than Bush’s 2008 numbers"

    Yup. Like silly better (more on this below)

    "69 percent of Muslim countries polled (including Egypt) have no confidence in Obama"

    Sounds quite reasonable (nobody likes drones, Muslim countries don't like the American President). Let's look at how they've moved since Bush though:
    Turkey +22 (from 2 (lol) to 24)
    Egypt +18 (11 to 29)
    Jordan +15 (7 to 22)
    Lebanon +5 (33 to 39)
    Pakistan 0 (7 to 7)

    So yeh when the last guy had confidence ratings as low as 2% (that's a pretty amazing stat) it's no surprise that Obama still has yet to win their confidence. Definitely going in the right direction though eh?

    "Obama’s policies have hurt our image and his in the Arab Spring countries of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Tunisia, as well as in Turkey and Pakistan"

    Nope, I looked at the 10th July poll referenced this one is just completely made up. Nice try by the blogger though. I don't think they've ever polled the question 'has Obama hurt the American image' lol. And opinions of America are only going one way (up) from Bush (see above) so to call this 'hurting' America is nonsense. Nice try, no cigar.

    "55 percent of those polled said they consider America an enemy of democracy!"

    Nope, 55% of muslim countries said they thought America 'opposed democracy in the middle east'. Nice spin though.

    "In Tunisia, where the Arab Spring purportedly began, 57 percent said they had zero confidence in Obama’s ability to handle international affairs...."

    Wow the American foreign policy is (just about) screwing up the relationship with Tunisia - it should be changed immediately! Unfortunately there is no context to put this in (like the Bush effect) since surveys were only recently introduced into Tunisia...

  84. [84] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    My point is THIS is why you guys are so scewed and biased. You read one guys opinion on the poll

    It's backed up by facts. And I hate to tell you (once again), but Bush isn't running for president. You need to look at O's numbers, from then and now. Bush isn't in the race, michty.

  85. [85] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "You need to look at O's numbers, from then and now. Bush isn't in the race, michty."

    Uhm previous Presidents are kind of important in assessing foreign polls on opinions of American Presidents.

    Like if a guy called 'American President' comes along, blows up your house, calls your country stupid and gives your President a wet willy, it can take the next guy called 'American President' many years to repair this damage...

  86. [86] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Well, you seem to need to draw comparisons. So compare O then to O now, since he's the American president who's running for a second term. Maybe you'll catch a lucky break and Pew will run a survey on Romney some day.

  87. [87] 
    michty6 wrote:

    "Well, you seem to need to draw comparisons. So compare O then to O now, since he's the American president who's running for a second term."

    Sure you're right since 2009 International opinion of him has gone down. Sure that's a bad trend for him I agree. The drones things is apparently really impacting this but as far as I know, this isn't even an issue in the election as both GOP and Democrats support the use of drones...

    I will absolutely agree in the following poll result:
    Obama 2009>>Obama 2012>>>>>>>>>>>>Bush anytime
    :)

    "Maybe you'll catch a lucky break and Pew will run a survey on Romney some day."

    Ha that would be a amazing! I'd love to see his numbers for the UK just now, they'd be at Bush levels!

  88. [88] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    chris1962,

    Don't you have an article to write, or something?

  89. [89] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I will absolutely agree in the following poll result:
    Obama 2009>>Obama 2012>>>>>>>>>>>>Bush anytime

    Whatever that's supposed to mean.

Comments for this article are closed.