September 6-8, 2011
Sep 06 03:40 Harpootlian condones Hoffa's exhortation to violence Sep 06 07:37 Debbie Downer Does Desperate Dodges Sep 07 03:06 Rumors of Michele Bachmann's demise definitely premature Sep 07 04:10 Townhall Observations Sep 07 17:23 Romney's Jobs Plan Found Wanting Sep 08 02:54 Minneapolis Mugged by Rybak's Eccentricity Sep 08 09:42 Debate Notes
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Harpootlian condones Hoffa's exhortation to violence
When Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa told President Obama and an audience of union thugs that the Teamsters were his army and that he wanted to " take these sons of bitches out ," I thought I'd heard it all. Obviously, I underestimated the darkness within the Democrats' souls.
Less than an hour after Hoffa's exhortation to violence, Dick Harpootlian, the former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, talked with FNC's Megyn Kelly about Hoffa's statement. Harpootlian said "I'm sorry. I just don't see anything wrong with that." Earlier in the interview, he said that Brad Blakeman he needed to "take a deep breath", implying that this wasn't a big deal.
I take exception to Harpootlian's attempt to downplay this thug's exhortation to violence. The reality is that Katherine Windels, a Wisconsin early childhood teacher, allegedly sent email threats to Wisconsin legislators during the March protests:
Madison - A 26-year-old woman was charged Thursday with two felony counts and two misdemeanor counts for allegedly making email threats against Wisconsin lawmakers during the height of the battle over Gov. Scott Walker's budget-repair bill.
Katherine R. Windels of Cross Plains was named in a criminal complaint filed in Dane County Criminal Court.
According to the criminal complaint, Windels allegedly sent an email threat to State Sen. Robert Cowles (R-Green Bay) March 9. Later that evening, she allegedly sent another email to 15 Republican legislators, including Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau).
The subject line of the second email was: "Atten: Death Threat!!!! Bomb!!!" In that email, she purportedly wrote, "Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your families will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks."
" I hope you have a good time in hell ," she allegedly wrote in the lengthy email in which she purportedly listed scenarios in which the legislators and their families would die, including bombings and by " putting a nice little bullet in your head ."
Thoughtful Democrats should criticize Mr. Harpootlian for defending Jimmy Hoffa's indefensible statements. Mr. Harpootlian's statement indicates that he doesn't take seriously the numerous union thug actions of the last 9 months.
Katherine Windels isn't the only union thug to allegedly threaten violence. Let's remember how SEIU union thugs violently beat up Kenneth Gladney for selling flags outside a townhall meeting held by Rep. Russ Carnahan:
Kenneth Gladney, a 38-year-old conservative activist from St. Louis, said he was attacked by some of those arrested as he handed out yellow flags with 'Don't tread on me' printed on them. He spoke to the Post-Dispatch from the emergency room of the St. John's Mercy Medical Center, where he said he was waiting to be treated for injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face that he suffered in the attack. Gladney, who is black, said one of his attackers, also a black man, used a racial slur against him before the attack started.
That's in addition to SEIU thugs showing up at the home of Greg Baer :
Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer. Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that, in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action, makes his family fair game.
Waving signs denouncing bank "greed," hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer's steps, and onto his front porch. As bullhorns rattled with stories of debtor calls and foreclosed homes, Baer's teenage son Jack, alone in the house, locked himself in the bathroom. "When are they going to leave?" Jack pleaded when I called to check on him.
Baer, on his way home from a Little League game, parked his car around the corner, called the police, and made a quick calculation to leave his younger son behind while he tried to rescue his increasingly distressed teen. He made his way through a din of barked demands and insults from the activists who proudly "outed" him, and slipped through his front door.
"Excuse me," Baer told his accusers, "I need to get into the house. I have a child who is alone in there and frightened."
Do these sound like the actions of a misunderstood bunch of unionistas or do they sound like something far, far worse? Here's what Nina Easton wrote about the incident:
Now this event would accurately be called a "protest" if it were taking place at, say, a bank or the U.S. Capitol. But when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be "mob." Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might "incite" these trespassers.
This is but a tiny sampling of the threats and intimidation tactics employed by union thugs. The actions witnessed by Nina Easton are becoming more frequent. In many minds, they're the rule, not the exception.
Another instance of union thug tactics was AFSCME's attempted intimidation of Wisconsin businesses :
Members of Wisconsin State Employees Union, AFSCME Council 24, have begun circulating letters to businesses in southeast Wisconsin, asking them to support workers' rights by putting up a sign in their windows.
If businesses fail to comply, the letter says, 'Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means 'no' to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members.'
Union thugs are becoming famous for their threats and intimidation tactics. These tactics have been employed in Maryland, Missouri, Michigan and Wisconsin. Tactics have included threats of violence (Michigan and Wisconsin), actual violence (Missouri) and acts of intimidation(Wisconsin).
For Mr. Harpootlian to act like these union thugs are innocents who are simply misunderstood is insulting. He needs to admit that he tried downplaying a serious situation. He needs to admit that union thugs have gained a well-deserved reputation for inciting violence while using threats and intimidation to get what they want.
That Mr. Harpootlian won't denounce the Teamsters' thug tactics and President Obama won't talk about the unions' threats and intimidation speaks to the fact that their souls are very, very dark.
Posted Tuesday, September 6, 2011 3:40 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 06-Sep-11 12:37 PM
You want thugs, those Bachmann body guards roughing up reporters was thuggery and uncontestedly so. Using pejorative wording when the lady's in a glass house seems a questionable tctic. Those goons assulted people. Look up the definition of assault. It happens.
Now, dropping the 'goon' and 'thug' stuff might be a step to consider. It's more heat than light. It is inflaming passion, not seeking reasoned agreement.
Turning it around per the Bachmann body guards is more to show how the shoe can be put on any foot; but it adds little to reasoned debate.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 06-Sep-11 05:01 PM
Eric, What Bachmann body guards beat up reporters? If it happened, it'd be front page news in every newspaper in America. It'd be blasted to the masses by the Daily Kos & MMFA, MinnPost & MnPublius.
I'll drop the goon & thug stuff when union operatives stop with their thuggish behavior & intimidation tactics. Not a split-second before it. When SEIU thugs beat a street vendor up to the point where he's hospitalized, when a school teacher tells the majority leader of the Wisconsin state senate that she hopes he fries in hell, that's stuff to be taken seriously.
Here in Minnesota, GLBT activists spat on Rod Hamilton after the marriage amendment debate. Shame on those thuggish intimidation tactics.
I'll stop using accurate terms to describe the rabid left's tactics when they don't fit. BTW, I don't think of you as part of the rabid left.
Debbie Downer Does Desperate Dodges
This morning, Debbie Downer, aka Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, was asked for her reaction to Jimmy Hoffa's 'take those S.O.B.'s out' statement. Falling in line with the White House's refusal to condemn Hoffa's vitriolic statement, Debbie Downer dodged the question.
When asked for her reaction to Hoffa's statement, she said "My reaction is that we should be working together to get America working again." When pressed repeatedly by Gretchen Carlson on the issue, Debbie Downer repeatedly dodged the question by repeating her mantra of 'can't we all get along'?
It was one of the most pathetic interviews I've ever seen. Debbie Downer definitely didn't want to answer Gretchen Carlson's question because there wasn't a good answer for her to give.
If she lit Hoffa up the morning after he tried rallying the faithful, that would've been the political equivalent of her pouring a five-gallon pail of cold water on a raging fire.
On the other hand, if she didn't dodge the question by attempting to change the subject, she would've been forced to condone Hoffa's despicable comments.
The downside of Debbie Downer's dodging is that independent voters are fleeing the Democratic Party in droves. They're starting to realize that, in addition to not having a clue about getting the economy growing, Democrats are utterly despicable people who put unions ahead of everyone else.
At this rate, Democrats will have to pray that independents stay home in droves and that President Obama's campaign catches one lucky break after another. If they don't hit a 2-card inside straight, then the factors working against President Obama will bury him and congressional Democrats.
Frankly, I think Democrats should thank Hoffa for creating this firestorm. Without this firestorm, people might actually watch his speech. If that happens, rest assured that they won't be impressed with President Obama's rehashed jobs speech in a grander setting.
Posted Tuesday, September 6, 2011 7:37 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 06-Sep-11 12:30 PM
Off point a bit, but Strib reports Romney has released an economic plan, prior to Obama doing the same. Do you think you and KB will be looking and commenting in the next few days? That seems the kind of thing about which KB could write a guest post. Finally, do you suppose that after the mid-week GOP hopefuls match, others might follow?
I cannot see any candidate seriously posturing himself/herself as a candidate, without that step. Otherwise it's like-me love-me rhetoric.
The Hoffa situation, I need to read your earlier posts and find the links, the context, etc.
Sometimes things can be blown out of proportion, as with Romney's corporations are people thing.
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 07-Sep-11 09:44 AM
Blown out of proportion? You mean like Sarah Palin's bullseyes?
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 07-Sep-11 01:45 PM
Bob, Thanks for referencing that. Talking points aren't allowed on this blog. Sarah Palin doesn't have a history of shooting people.
Unions, on the other hand, have a lengthy history of physical violence. I've outlined a short list of instances where union thugs committed acts of violence or where they sent emails threatening Wisconsin state senators with assassinations.
Playing the moral equivalence game doesn't work with thinking people. It only works with liberal idiots. Thanks for identifying yourself. Here's your dunce cap.
Rumors of Michele Bachmann's demise definitely premature
So far, I haven't read where people are writing Michele Bachmann's presidential campaign off, though numerous pundits are questioning her staying power. As one of her constituents, I've seen people, mostly Tarryl Clark, write Michele off as politically dead. That didn't work out that well for Tarryl.
It's true that Michele lost alot of momentum when Rick Perry jumped into the race. Still, it's foolish to think that Michele can't regain that momentum. She's too solid on policy issues. Based on his quotes in this article , Prof. Larry Jacobs thinks she's stalled but not out of it:
'The question though, I think, at this point is, 'Can Bachmann stabilize her campaign?' Jacobs said. 'Can she regain momentum that catapulted her from really a nobody in the presidential sweepstakes to a leading candidate by the Iowa straw poll? Now she's fallen out of favor, and this is the kind of test that often knocks out campaigns.'
Despite her recent setbacks, Jacobs said, it's too early to write off Bachmann, who so far has a good debate track record. He said Bachmann could well build on that to distinguish herself from Perry.
The thing that Democrats underestimate Michele on is her debating and policymaking abilities. Anyone who's met Michele knows that she's smart, competent and a skilled policymaker.
People make the mistake, at their own peril usually, of thinking that her gaffes are proof of her incompetence. That definitely isn't an accurate picture. Michele's gaffes are only proof that she sometimes gets wound a little too tight, nothing more.
Certainly, Michele has an uphill fight. Rick Perry certainly has momentum. Still, it's important that her opponents still take her seriously. She's left lots of impressive politicians in her dust after they chose to underestimate her.
Posted Wednesday, September 7, 2011 3:06 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 07-Sep-11 02:30 PM
The candidate session will be tonight. It will be a chance to see how, gender aside, Bachmann can distinguish herself from Perry.
That kind of format, with so many, makes it hard to have a substantive session. And being broadcast, live blogging is not as big a help as your "post-game" wrap on how the hometown team did in the contest.
Gary, I hope you'll do that, since otherwise it will be Strib carrying an AP feed and local content tacked onto a few buried paragraphs.
Comment 2 by eric z at 07-Sep-11 02:35 PM
Do you know anything about the new campaign staff head?
Whether there will be consistency on message, or revisions?
I guess that will be first shown in the televised California candidate forum.
Do you think Bachmann will be over-awed by it being at the RONALD REAGAN Library? I bet they all will be falling over one another to claim the Gipper's legacy, except for Ron Paul remaining above that fray.
Again, Gary, I hope you post your viewpoint after it has ended. Perhaps Triple-A will too.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 07-Sep-11 05:30 PM
Eric, I'll be watching tonight's debate & I will be writing about it afterwards.
As for Michele feeling awed by being in the Reagan Library, I don't think that'll be a factor. There isn't much that intimidates her.
As for differentiating herself from Gov. Perry, I don't think that's that important. The conventional wisdom has been that there'd be a conservative 'semifinal' to see who takes on Mitt Romney.
I won't say that Romney won't be a finalist but his jobs plan is a bust with conservatives. There's nothing in the plan about EPA reform, which is a total must with conservatives.
With the importance of winning the TEA Party vote, it's impossible to picture him going far without making serious proposals to limit government.
Townhall Observations
Tuesday night's townhall meeting at St. Cloud's Whitney Senior Center brought out alot of different questions on a wide array of topics, with health care being one of the hot topics.
Charlotte Fischer said that she was troubled with the lack of accountability of HMO's contracted by state government to provide insurance to the working poor. Rep. Steve Gottwalt dealt with that by noting his reform legislation had a provision in it that provides greater accountability from HMO's.
Rockville City Councilman Duane Willenbring said that unfunded mandates from the state were putting undue burden on local units of government, citing a program mandated by the state that sports coaches learn how to detect warning signs of concussions. Councilman Willenbring said he thinks the training is worthwhile. He just thinks that the state should fund it if it's imposing the training on local units of government.
SCSU Aviation student Logan Vold told Sen. Pederson, Rep. Gottwalt and Rep. Banaian that MnSCU has a 9-point procedure to follow for shutting degree programs down. Vold then said that SCSU didn't follow that procedure prior to shutting down the Aviation program.
Vold pointed to a provision that mandated "consultation with appropriate constituent groups including students, faculty and community." Vold said that students weren't consulted before President Potter announced the Aviation program was being shut down.
That information brought a response from Rep. Banaian. Rep. Banaian said that he is an economics professor at SCSU before saying that he's bothered if MnSCU procedures aren't being followed. Rep. Banaian then said he'd look further into this with the MnSCU Board of Trustees.
Rep. Banaian noted that the procedure was put in place by the MnSCU Board, meaning that the MnSCU board must enforce the procedures it puts in place.
Between 30 and 50 people gathered for the meeting in the main hall of the Whitney Senior Center. The event was moderated by St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis.
Posted Wednesday, September 7, 2011 4:10 AM
No comments.
Romney's Jobs Plan Found Wanting
Mitt Romney has touted himself as the jobs guru. According to Mitt, he's the man who would transform the rumbling, bumbling, stumbling economy of this administration into a great economy worthy of the 21st century.
Unfortunately, Mitt has a priority blind spot in his plan. Unfortunately, it isn't a tiny priority blind spot but a gaping priority blind spot:
Regulatory Policy
Mitt Romney will act swiftly to tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama Administration has imposed on the economy. He will also seek to make structural changes to the federal bureaucracy that ensure economic growth remains front and center when regulatory decisions are made. As president, Romney will work to repeal laws like Obamacare and Dodd-Frank that have given bureaucrats unprecedented discretion to craft unpredictable, job-killing regulations by the thousands of pages.
Romney will also initiate the immediate review of all Obama-era regulations with the goal of eliminating any that unduly burden the economy and job creation. And he will impose a regulatory cap on all agencies at zero dollars, meaning that an agency issuing a new regulation must go through a budget-like process and identify offsetting cost reductions from the existing regulatory burden. Other initiatives in a Romney Administration will include a new, cost-conscious approach to environmental regulation; an increased role for Congress in the approval of new regulations; and reforms to the legal liability system.
Mitt didn't mention the EPA, which is a huge job killer. The only bigger regulatory job killer is Obamacare.
As a result, conservatives have a right to question why Mitt doesn't have a specific plan to radically transform the EPA. If he's serious about regulatory reform, then changing the EPA must play a high profile role in that reform.
Based on Mitt's documentation, we can't tell whether he's taking EPA reform seriously. There's no doubt where Rick Perry stands on the EPA:
America's loss of freedom, he said, started with the imposition of an income tax and continues to this day through massive over-regulation from Washington.
"I'll tell you one thing: The EPA officials we have an opportunity to put in place, they're going to be pro-business , and there's not going to be any apologies to anybody about it," he said. "Those agencies won't know what hit 'em."
Some people might not like such blunt talk. I'm not one of those people. Frankly, it's refreshing to hear a politician speak with this much enthusiasm and clarity. I can't imagine that that response is one his speechwriter came up with or that his handlers suggested to him.
In 2008, John McCain's bus was known as the Straight Talk Express. In 2012, Mitt Romney is closer to McCain ideologically but it's Rick Perry who's doing the straight talking.
I'm not endorsing Rick Perry or any other candidate at this point. That said, I'm disappointed that Mitt Romney took the time to put together a 59-point plan that didn't include EPA reform.
At this point, my finalists don't include Mitt Romney because a) his Romneycare plan tells me that he isn't a limited government conservative and b) he isn't serious about changing government's operating philosophy.
At this point, my finalists are Gov. Perry and Rep. Bachmann. In terms of policy, Mitt doesn't stack up against either Gov. Perry or Rep. Bachmann. Gov. Perry and Rep. Bachmann both speak forcefully and with great clarity.
Finally, they both put the right priority on regulatory reform. That's what America needs.
Posted Wednesday, September 7, 2011 5:23 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 08-Sep-11 09:31 AM
With Perry we'd have a chance to overtake China for air and water additives-loading. Whoopie.
Comment 2 by eric z at 08-Sep-11 09:42 AM
You take Gov. Huntsman out of the hunt. He seemed the most sensible to me. One who could capture independent votes. I understand he's in the single digit poll figures, at present, but if he's strong in New Hampshire he may get attention. In liking Bachmann and Perry, I presume you discount New Hampshire and South Carolina.
How do you see Perry's "Ponzi scheme" characterization of Social Security playing in Florida? He's got backing and filling to do on that issue.
Earlier in posting, you had mentioned Santorum. Are you writing his campaign off at this point as not having enough strength?
Again in that "debate" Ron Paul was set up to look bad; and the focus clearly was to tout and match up Romney and Perry. Was that fair? As a Bachmann supporter, what do you think of how the thing was channeled?
Comment 3 by eric z at 08-Sep-11 09:48 AM
One final thought.
In terms of regulatory reform, where do you put Dept. of Homeland Security and its TSA? Those folks came in for some criticism among the GOP candidates having any questioning that way.
Any thoughts?
I have no real idea what DHS and TSA feelings Perry or Romney have. One thing -- There sure has been a bundle of spending on Homeland Security these days, the economy being down and all, is it the form stimulus spending should take? Is it the right priority, government spending on that bunch of bureaucrats?
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 08-Sep-11 09:49 AM
First, Perry's Ponzi Scheme language won't hurt him as much as you think. Yes, he'll lose some seniors but he's gaining support from the 18-39 bunch.
Next, Jon Huntsman is far to the left of McCain. He's a smug elitist who trusts the newspapers' headlines too much.
Actually, Rick Perry is well-positioned to outperform expectations in New Hampshire & end the nomination fight quickly.
Minneapolis Mugged by Rybak's Eccentricity
Mayor R.T. Rybak made a foolish mistake that shows off his eccentricity that Minneapolis taxpayers are getting mugged for. Yes, I'm talking about the artistic drinking fountans that Minneapolis's taxpayers are getting mugged for because they tickled Rybak's fancy.
Now that they're in place, the reviews aren't that great :
We've been staking out the four fabled city-financed artistic drinking fountains in Minneapolis recently. We wanted to see what the nearly $50,000 per fountain from our property taxes and water fees buys. You can judge for yourself from the photos.
We were also curious how much use they get. With one exception, the answer is not much.
We posted ourselves on E. Lake Street next to the Midtown YWCA. We discovered that the fountain there may be more successful from an artistic standpoint than as a watering hole. It's in a nicely landscaped corner of the Y, but it's not handy to either of the Y's entrances and is a good distance from the closest bus stop. Only eight pedestrians and a lone biker wandered by during our observation on an early evening warm enough to encourage taking a good slug of city water.
Intrigued, we finally flagged down one walker, Charles Anderson of Minneapolis, to ask him if he ever partook of the free city water.
"I never really knew it was a water fountain," responded Anderson, who said he mistook for a piece of sculpture the fountain designed by artists Gita Ghei, Sara Hanson and Jan Louise Kusske. It's the largest of the four fountains, and there's clearly a lot going on in the design. "Maybe that's why a lot of people don't use it," said Anderson, who suggested that adding a simple sign offering fresh water might attract more drinkers.
Minneapolis taxpayers should be outraged. These expensive water-filled albatrosses have cost taxpayers $200,000, with another $300,000 still appropriated to be spent. Had they bought the standard issue drinking fountains, they would've saved $440,000. More importantly, thirsty joggers and passersby would've identified the drinking fountains as drinking fountains.
Why have Minneapolis voters voted this guy in again and again? It isn't like they've gotten their money's worth out of him.
Most importantly, Minnesota should turn a deaf ear to Minneapolis when they whine about getting LGA cut. Minneapolis keeps electing Rybak even though he's spent money recklessly. The rest of Minnesota shouldn't subsidize Minneapolis's reckless spending habits.
If Minneapolis crashes because R.T. Rybak and the city council agreed to spending taxpayers' money foolishly, then they should accept responsibility for spending foolishly. R.T. Rybak and the city council should accept responsibility for spending taxpayers' money foolishly. The voters shouldn't be allowed to get away without accepting responsibility for electing irresponsible people.
Posted Thursday, September 8, 2011 2:54 AM
No comments.
Debate Notes
Last night's debate produced several embarrassing moments, mostly from Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, but it produced great TV moments, too. Newt's slapdown of NBC's John Harris was especially great TV.
In fact, it's painfully obvious that Newt's the best Republican debater and that whoever's in second place is a tiny dot in the rearview mirror.
Mitt Romney has a nice stage presence, not unlike President Obama, but I can't take him seriously after he put together a 59-point plan that didn't include anything substantive on totally changing the EPA. Romney's problems aren't his debate performances. It's what he's proposing.
I thought Rick Perry struggled at times but was strong enough to get in a couple memorable lines. My favorite line was his rejoinder to Jon Huntsman's demagogic line about Republicans becoming the anti-science party. Perry replied that the science isn't settled about global warming before adding that people thought that Galileo was wrong for quite awhile, too.
Michele Bachmann's debate personna needs to change. Her constant refrain that she's fighting for us is getting tiresome. People don't question her fight. That's her trademark. What's missing is her expertise on the financial industry, her fleshing out a coherent energy policy, the failure of Dodd-Frank against the backdrop of the looming Bank of America crisis.
Jon Huntsman comes across as part squishy liberal, part elitist snob. His talk about Republicans rejecting science was positively elitist. His talk about immigration reform (Let's remember this is about human beings) was directed at people's emotions.
HINT TO HUNTSMAN: It's about law enforcement, nothing more, nothing less.
Ron Paul embarrassed himself, which takes some doing. First, he tried playing the 'Rick Perry was an Al Gore shill' card. Gov. Perry replied that Paul quit the Republican Party over Ronald Reagan's policies. That's when he made his most assinine statement I've heard this debate season.
He said that he loved the things Ronald Reagan talked about. He just didn't like what he did.
It's exceptionally foolish to stand in this majestic shrine to Reagan and essentially accuse President Reagan of being a hypocrite. That's outright stupidity.
Herman Cain is a great speaker but his 9-9-9 plan is foolish. I'm fine with lowering the corporate tax rate to 9%. I could deal with a national 9% national sales tax. I can't agree with a plan where the federal government has both a sales tax and an income tax, though.
Think of the destruction that would've gotten done with a Democratic Congress and Democratic president with that system. It's frightening.
Finally, the biggest losers last night were MSNBC's post-debate analysis team and President Obama, both for the same reason. Compared with the top tier candidates, President Obama looks utterly incompetent and overly ideological.
MSNBC's analysis team looked incompetent because of their ideological rigidity. Everything they said during the time I watched (5-10 minutes) was predicated on the belief that conservatives were strange little green men from Mars. Chris Matthews went on a tirade about how the Republican Party might, gasp, nominate a person who questions the validity of global warming science.
Rachel Maddow was her usual smug self. Rev. Al was utterly unentertaining. It was so painful that I deleted the rest of the video before Lawrence O'Donnell and Eugene Robinson spoke. It was just too painful.
There's a reason why MSNBC is a ratings midget. Last night explained why they're laughingstocks.
Posted Thursday, September 8, 2011 9:42 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 08-Sep-11 09:57 AM
Huntsman was the only one who came across sensibly. He and Romney were the two I'd say looked smarter than a 6th grader. And Newt.
The rest did not acquit themselves well except for playing to the base, (which is the primary election game). But if getting the nomination, some of that bunch will have Emmer-scale trouble in the general election.
Perry seems to have too much Bubba in him.
Worse than GWB, who played a Bubba while not one, with Perry the real thing. Let's say Perry is no Ivy-Leaguer, like Bush who, gentleman's C's and all, was Ivy-League and Kennebunkport.
Perry in direct comparison to Bachmann, makes Bachmann look intelligent. That's a hard load to pull too.
Comment 2 by eric z at 08-Sep-11 10:00 AM
Did you see Chris Matthews with Santorum? Or did you leave MSNBC before that?
The party's over for RS, after CM's working him over. It was a kind of gutter theater, not high-brow, but it stuck a goad into Santorum that he will not shake.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 08-Sep-11 02:18 PM
First, little Chrissie Matthews is a gruff-sounding wuss. He's a blithering idiot & a total snob. He's full of himself & he's full of shit, too. The guy wouldn't know a thing if it wasn't for Democratic talking points.
Next, your disagreements with Michele Bachmann prevent you from seeing that she's an extremely intelligent person. She's 100X smarter on financial industry stuff than Barney Frank, who's about to lose what's left of his reputation on being a banking regulations expert.
He collaborated with Christopher Dodd on the financial regulations bill less than a year ago. Within 6 months, we'll need to bail out Bank of America because they're in a total mess.
Michele warned that Dodd-Frank was junk legislation. She's about to be proven right. Deal with it.
Rick Perry's speaking patterns mean nothing to me. He has a decade-long record of getting positive things done on the economy.
As for W, check my post about the 'bad old days' of the Bush administration. The worst annual unemployment rate under the supposedly stupid Dubya was 5.8%; the best it's been under supercool, supersmart President Obama was 9.3%.
Those are the facts, not the hype or chanting points. Again, deal with it.
Comment 4 by AJKern at 08-Sep-11 05:13 PM
Thought Newt won the debat... hands down!
MSLSD's analysis team was a joke.
Your summary is dead on once again!
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Sep-11 05:18 PM
Thanks AJ. Newt is a great debater. If put on a stage with President Obama in a winner-takes-all bet, President Obama's career would be over in the first 10 minutes.
Comment 5 by Joseph at 10-Sep-11 04:16 PM
You should read a little history. Reagan talked a good game. He talked about a lot about small government. Remember quotes like "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem."
However, during his time as president spending increased dramatically and so did taxes after his initial tax cuts. All in all he did not live up to his rhetoric.
Comment 6 by Gary Gross at 10-Sep-11 05:24 PM
Joseph, had he had control of the House of Representatives, he would've lived up to his goals.
Comment 7 by Ron J at 13-Sep-11 08:29 PM
Gary, That seems like a weak argument when you factor in that Reagan signed the tax increases. He could have vetoed them if wasn't in line with his goals.
