Michelle Obama is done. Take aways:
- The lies told about Barrack Obama from the DNC podium tonight were breathtaking. I’d expect no less. That said – Romney needs to up his game. Lies are powerful things.
- This convention is going after the GOP message hard. Velvet gloves on the jugular. They are taking back the word “success”. It’s a meme that will work.
- Michelle’s re-rebranding of her husband was powerful. Barrack Obama is the wise, calm and powerful guiding leader. Obama understands you. Mrs. Obama’s speech was at many moments spectacular and the message sold. The only low point was in the moment she seemed to beg for the 08 coalition to show up. Overall, her speech worked in both grand and subtle ways.
- Mitt Romney will need every bit of cash the GOP Superpacs have. That’s not a judgement. It’s a weather report on how this will play out. A shit storm of campaign money like we’ve never seen is coming.
- A Lunesta ad popped on right after her speech. Ah… reality always intrudes somehow. This drug will make you drowsy… sleep…sleep…sleep…
Older notes below:
San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro is speaking. “Rising star” is overused. However, Castro is one.
More later…..Okay it’s later. Castro has some work to do on the teleprompter reading. But he’s got the bromides of “mom and grandma” down pat. I was moved and this game is not new to me. So far it’s a slightly better show than the RNC. Of course, what isn’t being said is more interesting that what is being said.
Michelle Obama is next….. I shall not comment on the dress for fear of being labeled crass and sexist… but the dress is there. Okay, now she’s starting to talk. One more note: The woman is gorgeous. Slam me if you want to… but she is.
- The revisionist history of Obama’s mama is breathtaking in its audacity. Actually, his mother married a rich Indonesian and decamped to Asia. And Lordy, did she just imply that Obama played “fair and square”. My oh my.
If these speakers weren’t lying so much and pretending so much, they’d TOTALLY be my people. Castro couldn’t keep my attention. Too studied somehow.
This is Castro’s ’2004 moment.’ He’s already being tapped as the “New Obama.”
So much for the Dems giving Hillary a chance in 2016…ain’t gonna happen. Hope she’s wise enough to figure that out — I don’t have the stomach for another massive disappointment and sense of betrayal.
I predict that the first woman prez will be a Republican. Only the ‘daddy party’ would feel secure enough to do that…god knows the ‘mommy party’ (Dems) couldn’t keep their misogyny at bay.
Ugh, as if a community organizer turned junior senator wasn’t unqualified enough, now the Dems want us all to crown the mayor of a midsize city as the big hope of 2016. They really don’t have much of a bench, do they?
I know, Jen, it’s ludicrous. But, as long as they’re men who went to the Ivy League and are NOT white, they’re all ‘qualified.’
Coming up next: The First Hispanic (male) President, courtesy of the Dems. Women to the back of the bus.
NES the bull I’m reading on FB is that the bots what MEechelle to run in 16 and Castro for VP.
This is why the stories about Castro using his brother to stand in for him should go viral. After being caught doing it in the past, he just did it again!
http://www.chron.com/news/bizarre/article/San-Antonio-candidate-s-twin-a-parade-stand-in-1953987.php
DE — What a horror show Michelle in ’16 would be! Let the Hunger Games begin.
“We learned that you don’t take shortcuts or play by your own set of rules.” Michelle Obama, Tonight
They should have held this convention on Mars. I mean, since we’re there and everything.
And yes — she’s gorgeous. And really good behind a mic.
I agree, she is gorgeous. But it’s worth noting that she stole Condi’s color. Just sayin’.
Ha! I only ever picture Condi in bright, what I’d call Republican red.
mechelle’s a mofugly freakazoid.
Thank you tamerlane
I’m with Tamerlane and Anthony. MO is not the most attractive woman but really folks, it shouldn’t matter. She’s always struck me as brighter than her husband but a bit too enamored of the short, gold-plated leash they keep her on.
I don’t think looks & ‘glamor’ should matter, but they keep telling us that mechelle’s do.
So I merely point out the fact that her waist starts just below her armpits, her freakishly long arms make Lew Alcindor look like Herve Villachez, and whenever I see her ominous grimace of a so-called smile, I expect her second set of jaws to dart out at any moment, like in ALIEN. Her hideous dresses are “dazzle ship” camouflage to hide her bizarre figure, while the rest of her ostentatious, tacky wardrobe pegs her as the poncey snot she is. All I can say about her shoes is, had they been on the Titanic, more lives could have been saved. Her hair is something out of Sendak. Her dragon-lady fingernails are kept long & sharp, to scratch out the eyes of anyone foolish enough to criticize barry or scarf an Egg McMuffin. Her harridan’s voice — whether chiding barry for not taking out the garbage, or America for being lazy, fat, & racist — grates, it grates.
In my book, Hillary is still to this day a FLILF. Mechelle: not if she was the last freakazoid female on Earth.
Another thank you, Tamerlane. Blech and blech and blech again.
When they cut to the older black faces in the audience, I can’t help but be moved by how glorious listening to Michelle has to be for them. Nice.
Related topic: http://peacocksandlilies.com/2012/09/04/o-b-a-m-a-2008-2012/
CNN commentators are noting that O can’t run from his record. Interesting.
CNN is doing their best to resurrect their credibility. Yes. Their ratings are THAT low.
Ha! Yes, Anita, I think you’re right.
Okay, the snit about “God” not being in the platform is very entertaining. Some Dem is on Fox right now insisting that God wants the to help the middle class….and that Dems are doing that work, of course. Talk about handing the Mormon dude a gift. Now there’s not an born again anywhere in the U.S. who will stay home…
And I’m greatly relieved to know that Jesus is a proud member of the bourgeois.
Wow! They really said that about God? Holy Chit! Romney got lucky (for once!).
I just read her speech on yahoo – it’s the same recycled chit that she has been saying for the last year.
Also, if the Obamas student loan debts are to be used as campaign fodder, I see no reason why we shouldn’t see the man’s college records.
If I were a person who used the phrase, “Oh, snap!”, I would use it here. Wait…
Dream on.
The “dream on” comment was a response to JWS’s comment.
Jay, rofl on the “Oh, snap!”
John, apropos of your comment re money. I have it on good authority from a certified member of the Repub. Establishment that Mitt “will have as much money as he needs; period.” The money disadvantage this time around will be on O’s side.
Sorry, MO is Not gorgeous, she is living proof that given enough time and money, Anyone can be attractive. Cheek implants, chin implant, gallons of botox and a 15 grand per day, yes, per day, makeup artist make a huge difference. Not to be forgotten the Aisian hair extensions help, too. Granted, she is the one who spends insane amounts of time in the gym, but she seems to do little else in any case.
Her public speaking is improving, even if her diction hasn’t. Her acting skills have improved though, but the lies still shine through.
She doesn’t look too ‘done’ to me. I just found her striking tonight.
Now if somebody could invent a botox for the ‘lie’ muscles…
Jay, you must be referring to her clothing, make-up, etc. The biatch is mofugly.
Phew, rough crowd between connor/sophie and Tamer.
I find Michelle’s looks vary – sometimes she looks good, sometimes not at all. I do envy her height though.
Usually when I see her, I see a man in a dress. This time, I saw a full fledged graduate of Ru Paul’s Drag U. Quite an improvement.
I rest my case
Damn! Tried to embed a pic.
Link: http://thesibylspeaks.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/drunk-drag-queen-copy.jpg
Amen Connor – thank you for saying that. If people want to see true beauty look at Hilary, our hardworking SOS
Thank you, PiperMN. I’ll never forget all the photos circulated of Hillary without makeup to show how supposedly unattractive she was and all I could think was “damn, that woman’s got it all.” You just can’t fake the real thing.
gxm – Recently Drudge had a picture of Hillary au naturel (without makeup I mean) and all I could think was she should go like that all the time. She looked so much prettier with her freckles and real, though minimal for her age, wrinkles, than when she is all made up.
Speaking of the lies, how is it that the two children of a union City employee grew up so poor ?
Hasn’t she figured out yet that most of us know better ? Given her size and that of her brother, maybe the parents were going broke feeding them….
She made a nice speech about some other guy, surely she wasn’t speaking about her loser husband, was she ? I took note of the statement that O ‘turned down’ big job offers because he wasn’t ‘interested in money’; huh?..I swear I saw her nose grow as she said that sentence.
I bet Brrr-rock had to buy her two Hermes’ handbags and at least one vacation after tonight.
We pay for the vacations, Soph.
Barack Obama is a prep school boy, just like Mitt Romney. As for all that bullcrap about playing by the rules, what about all the caucus cheating in 2008? Or the May 31 RBC meeting? Or all the skullduggery that took place in Denver?
sophie/connor’s on a Rollllllll.
Oh, Sophie, that’s great!
Michelle Obama’s father was a ward healer in Chicago in addition to his job. He had some carrying cash, for sure.
O’s “poor downtrodden grandmother” was mostly downtrodden because her worthless husband flitted from job to job dragging his wife and daughter around the country until they finally settled in Hawaii. Once grandma had a stable living situation, she was able to move up to being a bank vice president – something almost unheard of in the 1960s. My aunt was head of foreign exchange for Bank of America, Santa Ana, about that same time. It was a real feat for a woman then.
O’s grand-dad sat around drinking and b-s-ing with his good buddy Frank Marshall Davis. That’s the communist (for real) that grand-dad picked to be O’s role model (he needed a black man in his life according to grand-dad).
And I find it hard to believe their student loan debt was more than a mortgage payment in the late 1980s. Average mortgage rate for people without much credit rating back then was about 10%.
Rumor has it, Davis was also banging Toots.
Tamer, is “Toots” grandma? I heard he was banging maman, but perhaps Toots is she.
I notice she did not mention the President’s maternal grandfather, did she?
djmm
What a nauseating spectacle.
She looks good, sounds good, likable, of course. Today, these are the devious, the deceivers, the destroyers. She’s perfect for our time.
And anybody who thinks Obama will pale following Clinton, like those who thought Clinton would use his speech to undermine Obama, are wrong. Compared to the too-thin aging Bill Clinton, Obama will seem youthful and fresh.
“She had her moment, she had some style …” — Evita
“And anybody who thinks Obama will pale following Clinton, like those who thought Clinton would use his speech to undermine Obama, are wrong.”
Ten bucks says you’re wrong, darlin’.
Long as the bet is for the common consensus reading, not those of us who’ll see Clinton as the only redeeming element of the convention, you’re on!
Alrighty then!
Disagree Zal. It’s not as superficial as a visual.
What people will see when they see Bill Clinton is a true leader. What they will remember will be a time of prosperity and a time of pride in our country and our leader.
What they will see afterward is a bumbling, egocentric putz with no leadership skills, and what they will remember is the job they no longer have, their hungry children, their foreclosed homes and their empty wallets.
I don’t know for sure what the general reaction to Obama’s speech will be any more than you do, Anthony, but I know a lot about sociopaths and seducers and human nature and the psychological bent of Americans today. I’m basing my read on that. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe you’re right, we’ll see in a couple of days, but my bet stays with my ability to read people and situations.
Michelle Obama’s style and lies speech is being greeted with positive appraisal. Even some here wrote flattering comments about the way she looks, dressed, delivers a speech – when your style impresses those who don’t like you and know you’re lying, it’s working. People were the same about Condi Rice’s speech even though she’s really no more than an incompetent SoS and war criminal with pleasing delivery.
Americans today are profoundly superficial, obsessed with youthful style and likability, and eager to accept deceit as long as it’s delivered in a nice package.
Bill Clinton will be appreciated for providing a Democratic link back to a successful economy, but the vast majority of Obamacrats, even the disappointed ones, have not really changed their feelings about the Clintons or the Obamas. The divide and rancor may be hidden beneath the surface but it’s still there. They’re watching Clinton closely and will be very sensitive to any whiff of anti-Obamaism. They’re prepared to cheer The One and give him a second chance; all Obama has to do is provide a performance they can hang their fantasy on.
“Her whole task was to say why. And her answer was, ‘Why? Because essentially he’s a saint.’ Because of his upbringing and because of his emotions and because of his humanity. He does of this because he cares. And the brilliance of it is this: It drained Obama of any, either, ideological motivation, or any having to do with self interest or ambition, which I think is sort of a more plausible explanation.
She told the story of a Gandhi. And, you know, looking at the scene, looking at how he’s conducted himself in the presidency and particularly in the campaign, with ruthlessness and determination and drive, it’s not quite a plausible story. I’m sure in the arena, it was a plausible story. I saw the tears, but I’m afraid, I thought it was a great speech, but I didn’t buy a line of it.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/04/krauthammer_on_michelle_obama_it_was_a_great_speech_but_i_didnt_buy_a_line_of_it.html
I think you’re both right. The progbots will love O’s speech and the rest of America will love Clinton’s (except for the diehard Clinton haters who won’t like either speech).
Also the difference they will see in Clinton is a politician who doesn’t refer to himself (uses “I”) constantly. Perhaps they’ll see the old Party Logo of the Donkey and not the new one emblazoned everyone created by the OFA team of red people [http://www.demconvention.com/]. Now how many references were there to Obama in the new dem platform?
Can’t wait to hear WJC tomorrow. I predict there will be one or more instances of thinly-veiled put downs of BHO. Also, there’ll be plenty of Bill on Bill, Bill on Hillary, and Bill on the Prosperous 90s talk, and very little Bill on BHO. The Obamans will shake with jury, but will have no recourse…beggars can’t be choosers, after all.
“..will shake with fury,….”
I hope WJC calls in sick. Otherwise, I’m with Zal on this. Sad to say.
I’m betting the Obamans are hoping WJC calls in sick. I understand he’s been stalling on giving them a draft to vet. Of course, that’s cold comfort since he’s notorious for editing drafts right up to the bell.
If Friday’s unemployment report is halfway decent it’ll nicely cap Obama’s convention.
I’m sure nobody at the White House has thought of that.
ROFL. I’m sure it’s already been ‘prepared’ for release.
Yep. I’ve mentioned before how funny it is that Obama always gets a break when he needs one: The book by the “Navy SEAL” about the Osama Bin Laden raid just happened to be released on the day the DNC started. ( And the stories about the Pentagon fretting that classified information may be included? That’s just publicity, baby.) And Rolling Stone magazine’s cover story for next week is “Greed and Debt- The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital”. How convenient.
And color me very surprised if the employment numbers released the day after Obama accepts the nomination aren’t “much better than expected”. Reported unemployment will hit 8% or just below before election day or I ain’t sitting here.
When the forces behind Obama aren’t really trying, the truth is easy to see. Barack looks like an arrogant lay about and Michelle is transparently cold and elitist. It was crystal clear all last year, so much so that even the Obots started to get a little confused. But when it’s showtime, Team O is very, very good and suddenly reality is forgotten.
The real battle Wed night will be a ratings one beteewn Bill and The Booboodashians.
Serious bragging rights are on the line . The Booboodashians beat the GOP convention last week …can Bill Clinton beat ” Here Comes Booboodashians?” He’s the Dems best shot
‘Member the old days when the conventions played on all three channels in prime time?
yes and I remember when they actually nominated someone lol
Hilarious on “The Booboodashians.”
I started watching conventions when I was 6 years old (in 1968). My parents were politically tuned in and we watched both conventions all the way through. I remember especially watching the 1972 DNC with my Mom while we were on our bi-annual trek to see her California family. I think glam rock and unitards were just coming in and I recall loads of people glittered up with those bouncing ball antennae on their heads. My other memory is of my Dad loading up on Maalox the year he thought Jesse Jackson might actually get the Dem nomination.
Fun times – now they talk about cancelling coventions altogether. And you thought there couldn’t be more low information voters than now? Think again if that happens.
I didn’t notice any Lunesta commercials on CNN, but the other night during Romney’s speech, I hit a wrong button and was suddenly watching THE EXORCIST. True story.
My takeaways.
First and foremost, we all belong to the government – it’s the only thing we all belong to? WTF? I miss the old Dems who knew we all belonged to the human race, we were all Americans – a shared identity with a melting pot basis. These lying liars with their deification of O are sickening.
Kal Penn – commercial a flop, live appearance a flop – ugh – a 35 year old guy trying to keep on pretending he’s a 20-something college stoner.
Julian Castro – drank the whole vat of kool-aid with the vodka – good speaker but speech full of lies – also it was very much a rip-off of Rubio’s speech at the RNC – go back and watch Rubio’s speech and listen to the tag lines. If Romney doesn’t win, look for a future match-up between Rubio and Castro. Also had to laugh when I saw sign in audience “Castro and Obama”. I thought, right names, different Castro.
I’ve never found anything attractive about Michelle Obama but she looked the best she has for a while. I guess I don’t find people who throw parties in their homes to raise money to oppose partial birth abortion attractive. She’s practiced in earnest appeal for her wonderful deity of a husband and she does the schmaltz well. I expected no less from her but it scares me thinking about her and ValJarr up in the Oval Office telling their puppet Barack what to do.
Also astounded by Dick Durbin in interview on Special Report with Bret Baier last night. He went nuts and just sounded deranged trying to say that Fox was trying to call all Democrats “Godless” just because Baier asked him why the Dems removed God and Jerusalem from the platform. This was a pre-scheduled live interview as they had announced Durbin would be on the night before.
Power and money are powerful aphrodisiacs and these folks will do anything to keep them.
Loved the benediction by the lady who is heading up an AIDS;/water (I think) advocacy in Africa. She blessed both sides and took a deep breath before launching into thanks to both parties for coming together to fund AIDS projects. She was classy.
This stadium is about half the size of the RNC venue so it makes everyone look closer together (crowded) and the sound really resonates. Another thing I can thank that idiot Michael Steele for choosing before he was drummed out as head of the RNC.
Romney will need all the money in the world but it won’t help unless his team steps up the defense and offense. Lies are already taking root and the media is calling Ryan a liar on-air (I believe truth-free zone was the phrase). They are definitely just propagandists for O at this point.
BTW, the national debt went over $16T yesterday afternoon. Did you hear that anywhere, even from talking heads except probably on Fox???
I missed that. Does anybody know her name?
Jena Lee Nardella, Executive Director
At the age of 22, Jena founded Blood:Water Mission alongside the band, Jars of Clay. Jena has been featured in Sojourners Magazine, Christianity Today, Relevant Magazine, and the documentary film, Sons of Lwala. Her collaborative writing includes Hope in the Dark, Zealous Love, and The Revolution: A Field Manual for Changing Your World. She serves on the board for the Center for Nonprofit Management and the Vanderbilt Institute for Global Health. Jena is a graduate of Whitworth University with a degree in Political Studies. She and her husband live in Nashville and travel often to Africa.
http://www.bloodwatermission.com/
Oh shoot – of course that should have been raise money to support partial birth abortion. Or to raise money to oppose partial birth abortion ban. ARGH!
The Dem Convention looked like a surreal version of Barnum and Bailey, complete with whips for the lion tamer, and little dogs named Tingles jumping through hoops.
To listen to their speakers is to set aside reality, there is no Depression, no ghost towns of empty homes and businesses, and everyone can be whoever they want to become, if they just wish really, really, hard and get some gov’t assistance. Oh, and btw, Israel doesn’t exist, and Iran is a vacation destination.
Is it just me or did a lot of the audience look like ‘people of walmart’, but only the ones who shop after midnight ?
I’m comforted to know that when my daughters are jobless and their cupboards are bare, at least they can get a free abortion, what else matters ?
Sophie, you’re hilarious.
I can’t believe I’m cracking wise over a woman who designed a program to switch poor people to other area hospitals, while working at her part time patronage job.. Mother Theresa she ain’t.
Her 22 assistants seem to have earned their pay last night.
Her ‘helping’ of military families is a joke…and I know quite a few.
If the Republican surrogates don’t run reality ad checks on Mrs. Obama’s stint at the UIC hospital soon, I would be surprised.
Where can you get a free abortion?
Also, it’s my understanding that a late abortion is done to preserve the health/reproductive ability of the potential mother. Are we pretending it’s a lifestyle choice? The fetus is not viable in the majority of cases, isn’t that right?
This joint-with notable exceptions-is beginning to resemble The Free Republic.
Were you all really Clinton supporters back in the day?
Also, it’s my understanding that a late abortion is done to preserve the health/reproductive ability of the potential mother
Exactly
Abortions are paid for under Obamacare, and currently, in some states under Medicaid, which is practically the same as Obamacare for low income women. Birth control is way cheaper and safer, but try telling them that. Maybe they would have listened to Hillary, but O thinks telling minorities to us b.c. will piss them off and make them stay home on Election Day….or something.
Hillary supporter, hell, I would’ve taken a bullet for her, and been honored to do it.
Actually, Conner, abortion is not covered by obamacare due to the Hyde amendment and various other wheelings and dealings.
My thoughts:
1) Can’t find Michelle attractive on the outside when I think she’s so ugly on the inside. Same for Obama. Those 2 bougies care absolutely nothing about anyone but themselves and makes them supremely unattractive in my book.
2) I found it fascinating – in a not nice surreal way – that Obama has been president for 4 years now and ran for 2 before that and Michelle still felt the need to essentially introduce him to America – the furniture from the dumpster, the rusty car, the struggling over student loans, his mom and grandma (that ole racist). And,frankly I find it hard to believe any of that anyway. The man was paid to take off to Bali for a sabbatical to write his book after law school. Must be nice and hardly the lifestyle of someone struggling. Those of us who really struggled with law school debt took jobs working 24/7 as associates in firms even when we most definitely wanted to do anything else to pay off our loans. Who knows – maybe most of Barack’s book advance went up his nose while in Bali and that’s why he had to stick with a rusty car.
3) As did Greyledge – the whole “government is the only thing we all belong to” monumentally creepy. Sell government based on it’s essential role as part of our civilization, not as some creepy communal entity we all “belong to.” For one thing, I most certainly do not think of myself as “belonging” to government. I pay taxes to the government to provide certain group services; I vote and participate civically, but I do not belong to the government. Plus, as part of society, we are forced to participate in some way in government; it’s not like we realistically have a choice. In the Democrats book, that means I now “belong” to the government. Well, if you forced everyone to participate in a religion, we could say we all “belong” to it to, but that’s totalitarianism, not republican democracy. Jeezus, do these people even listen to themselves anymore??!
Beyond creepy, run.
“We All Belong To The Government”
OMG! This is serious? Not a parody?
It’s amazing how mental Obamacrats are. Shudder.
Beyond being creepy, it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the American polity. Do these people realize the US of A isn’t Sweden?!
What both of you said. Plus, “the only thing we have in common is belonging to government?” WTF? Um – as an American, I thought what we had in common was our belief system that we all were created with inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and belief in our constitution as our common pact to uphold our rights. That’s what I’ve signed up for as an American. But, apparently, the democrats don’t think that’s something we have in common anymore . . . . They are mental.
As an addendum to my # 2 above just because this makes me so crazy. These 2 did NOT grow up poor or even lower middle class. For those of us who truly grew up poor – in foster care and on welfare and in homes (in the US, no less) with no running water – it makes me feel like my head is going to explode when I hear these fairy tales of struggle in their lives. By any measure, Obama’s stepfather was rich; his grandparents who raised him were rich. He went to elite private schools his entire life and then got a book advance to start his career; he worked as an associate in a law firm and then was taken under the wing of the cream of black Chicago society (plus Ayers and Dorn) and coddled into a political career.
Michelle grew up solidly middle class at a time when that was a very comfortable life. She went to one of the best public schools in Chicago – a high-demand magnet school. Then went to Princeton and Harvard. She also worked in a law firm until she went on to her mid-six figure career working for the city of Chicago. If those two struggled at all it was because they were living beyond their means trying to keep up with the surface status objects of their neighbors in Hyde Park. It’s certainly a bougie curse that I’ve seen many succumb to – everyone trying to keep up with the Jones’ BMWs, vacations in Nantucket, jewelry and designer clothes, but in no way is it financially struggling.
Romney didn’t struggle either in absolute terms, but compared to these 2 he did. He gave up his inheritance and lived as a Mormon missionary youth for 2 years and then scraped his own $ together with friends to start his own business. What a contrast.
This is what I mean. Romneyites are as steeped in fantasy as Obamabots.
Saying Romney “gave up his inheritance and live as a Mormon missionary youth for two years” is at best misleading. By the time he turned his inheritance over to the Mormon church he’d been heading Bain Capital for a decade and was a millionaire many times over.
Romney “lived as a Mormon missionary youth” in France much earlier, which, BTW, enabled him to avoid being drafted to serve in Viet Nam. A lot of people found creative ways to avoid being sent to the Viet Nam war, and I don’t fault Romney even if that was his motivation (and I don’t know that it was), but please already with the poor-Romney schtick. He always has lived comfortably to say the least.
As for scraping together his own money together with friends to start his own business — please tell me you’re not referring to Bain Capital because, really, that characterization is beyond the pale even for a cult follower.
Run, until they both can tell me they know what it is like to eat government cheese and go for days without adequate sources of protein … they are LYING. Neither of them know what its like to struggle for bare subsistence and I’m sick of hearing Dems telling me that Obama did.
Exactly Fem.
Why does she call herself ‘mom in chief’? – is she Baruck’s mother or is she all of us peons’ mother who need to be told how to live our lives (grocery shopping, exercising, finances – send all monies to their campaign, etc., etc.).
My husband speculates that Axelrude and O. have some kind of hold on Bill C.which is why he is speaking at the convention. Bill has to know that if the O. is re-elected, Hillary will never be President.
great comments and thanks for the recap from those who watched most of the spectacle…I found it too difficult to watch continously..talk about loud and angry….however i did notice that MO was trying to co-opt Romney’s “opportunity meme”…the Obama’s always try to ‘steal and copy’ whenever they can…reminds me of O conveniently parroting Hillary in the debates.”I agree with Hillary, Hillary is absolutely correct…”
…’fool us once’…you know the rest…
Zaladonis,
Since you are the fountain of information, please give us a detailed description of Romney early years from birth through jr. high school. Then I can compare it to Obama’s biblical story.
A fifth generation Mormon, Mitt was born in 1947 in Detroit; when he was six his family moved to Bloomfield Hills when his father became the Chairman and CEO of American Motors. Mitt has two sisters and a brother, all older than he. He went to public school until seventh grade when he transferred to a private boy’s prep school; in his senior year he and Ann Davies, who attended his prep school’s sister school, began to date. After high school he spent a year at Stanford then went to France as a Mormon missionary for two and a half years. At the end of this period, while driving through the South of France, the car Romney was driving was hit by another car and he and other passengers were seriously injured; one (the wife of the mission president) died. Although he verbally supported the Viet Nam War, Mitt applied for and ultimately received five deferments. Meanwhile, back in the States, Ann Davies had converted to Mormonism and enrolled at Brigham Young University. When Mitt returned, he too entered BYU and the two were married. He earned a BA in English from BYU. He then attended Harvard Law and Harvard Business School and holds a Masters in Business Administration. During his time at Harvard his wife gave birth to their first two sons and they lived in a nice house in Belmont. For two years, after Harvard, he worked as a management consultant at Boston Consulting Group, and in 1977 was hired by Bain & Co. By ’78 he was a Vice President at Bain and worked with Monsanto among other clients. In 1984 he took up Bill Bain’s offer and co-founded the private equity firm Bain Capital, of which he was sole shareholder although Bain raised a great deal of the $40 million in capital needed to start the new firm. Initially Bain Capital dealt in venture capital and their big success was investing in Staples’ start up. With that success, in short order Romney switched Bain Capital from a venture capital firm to leveraged buyouts, which uses bank loans to acquire struggling companies, then using the company’s assets as collateral before selling them off in a few years. It is a smarmy business, an essential element of the financial games that got us to where we are today.
You want more detail?
Piper – Zal doesn’t understand sarcasm.
FYI Anthony. This: “You want more detail?” was sarcasm.
Not sure why you are calling me Anthony – are you having a stroke? And, answering piper with a recitation of Romney’s bio means you didn’t get the sarcasm in the initial comment, doofus. Funny, because piper laid it on pretty thick too.
Hope he wasn’t spanking his monkey when that happened….
I recognized the sarcasm and had three options.
1. Ignore the post.
2. Respond in kind – i.e. with attack sarcasm.
3. Respond by answering the question and tag lining with a friendlier sarcasm.
I chose number three, and the responses to it help illustrate why I usually respond in kind. With some people being friendly only gets your ankles bitten.
Yeah – cause an addict can’t in any way ignore a post. The calling me Anthony is still just weird though, but par for the course
Some interesting bits of tid from Factcheck.org:
*The keynote speaker and others claimed the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would raise taxes on the “middle class.” He has promised he won’t. Democrats base their claim on a study that doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion.
The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office.
Castro also insisted Romney and Ryan would “gut” Pell Grants for lower-income college students. Actually, the Ryan budget calls only for “limiting the growth” of spending for the program, and Ryan has said the maximum grant of $5,550 would not be decreased.
A Democratic governor said Romney “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” Actually, Massachusetts went from 50th in job creation during Romney’s first year to 28th in his final year.
Two advocates of equal-pay legislation said women make 77 cents for every dollar men earn. That’s true on average, but the gap for women doing the same work as men is much less, and not entirely or even mostly the result of job discrimination.
A union president accused Romney of seeking “a government bailout” for “his company.” Not really. In fact, Romney negotiated a favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators on behalf of a former company, the one he had left to form his own Bain Capital firm. No taxpayer funds were involved.
Multiple speakers repeated a claim that the Ryan/Romney Medicare plan would cost seniors $6,400 a year. That’s a figure that applied to Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, but his current proposal (the one Romney embraces) is far more generous. The Congressional Budget Office says it “may” lead to higher costs for beneficiaries, but it can’t estimate how much.
In prepared remarks released to reporters, Rep. James Clyburn engaged in partisan myth-making with the claim “Democrats created Social Security” while Republicans “cursed the darkness.” History records strong bipartisan support in both House and Senate for the measure President Roosevelt signed in 1935.
If a white person said that, Clyburn, Sharpton, Tourè, Soledad and a whole lot more would be screaming “RACIST!” (and I’m not even a Republican)
Hah!
My guess is that both O’s know the jig is up and last night’s speech was an audition for what Mo wants to do in the future. Same with Obie, he’s already looking for his next score.
Not likely.
Whatever they want to do in the future, it will be greatly enhanced by a two term Presidency rather than a single term. And my guess is they hate the Romneys as much as they hated the Clintons, though differently, and want to dance on a Romney defeat.
Conner – there are stories afloat about a $35 M home in Hawaii being prepared for the O’s to move into in Jan. 2013. Pictures of it and everything, but all hush-hush of course. Of course, it’s just rumors, but I choose to believe it!
I don’t care what the First Lady has to say about her husband, any more than I care what Ann Romney has to say about hers. Even if what they’re saying is true. The world is full of nice people with heart-warming family histories who are devoted to their spouses and children.
Hardly any of them should be President of the United States.
Astute observation!
Absolutely!! Many of us have even more heartwarming, multicultural and unicultural stories- who gives a hoot. Give me skills and honesty. This whole charade has been an appeal to cheap emotion- what a load.
Sophie, the Hyde Amendment is still in effect, sadly.
Medicaid will pay for abortions in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is in danger.
I have no problem with that and I’m sure that Hillary Clinton doesn’t either.
Paul Ryan, on the other hand…
Sue, Paul Ryan is not running for President. Mitt Romney is, and he has no problem with those exceptions. Please save the “But he’s a heartbeat away from the Presidency!” speech for another time, another year. Romney is not McCain.
Thanks.
Anthony, I think the issue, at least for me, is that people are misrepresenting Obamacare as providing free abortions. That’s just not true. The Stupak Amendment pretty much signed Hyde into law.
I’ve noticed an increase in the “free abortions” and “late term abortions” propaganda of the far right anti-choice set populating the comments of a lot of so-called liberal blogs lately and it really has me scratching my head. I don’t know what the pro-Romney crowd is trying to do but IMO it makes Romney look less moderate than he is. Bad tactic. They
should back off. JMHO, and all.
It’s beginning to make sense to me.
Sue, I spent 20 plus years in Public Health in NY, women on Medicaid get free abortions every day.. The ‘life of the mother’ is a pretty broad description. Our patients were sent to Planned Parenthood, which accepts Medicaid.
Sophie, So you believe that abortion access should be denied to poor women? Is this a talking point that you feel will help Romney? I’m just not understanding why access to abortion for poor women is an issue for you. Is it a knee jerk reaction to the poor (leeches that they are) and women (harlots that they are) that you are hoping to induce? And why you think trumpeting the extreme “free abortions” talking points helps your candidate… I’m completely baffled by this tactic which, IMO, is entering the same Bizarro World as the DNC.
GXM, I have two (identical) comments that landed in spam saying pretty much the same thing.
This is, unfortunately, election year politics and straw men abound to no end from BOTH parties. While growing up knowing that I was unwanted (how else can a child perceive it when he hears that he was a “mistake” – not even a surprise), I am unrelentingly pro-choice.
I do understand the argument about federal funding, though, from the perspective of a fiscal conservative. Conversely, I am also torn about this re: the poor. For the life of me, I can’t come up with an idea that would sit right with both sides of my brain on this issue. Can you? I would really appreciate your input, especially since I cannot ever hope to see this from the perspective of a woman.
Anthony,
As a woman, I come down without hesitation on the side of women’s healthcare, which for me includes healthcare access and support for women who seek abortions, as well as healthcare access and support for women who don’t seek abortions. And for the poor women who don’t seek abortions, I come down on the side of continued healthcare access and support for the mother and child. I am, pretty much, the textbook definition of a bleeding heart liberal.
And for those who don’t agree with me and find moral outrage at having “their” money spent on “free” abortions, I simply remind them that I am anti-death penalty and anti-war and “my” money goes to actions (resulting in death, often neither quick or painless) I find morally abhorrent, but then again it’s not really “their” money or “my” money, it’s “our” money and we all have to compromise with how it is spent.
Apologies if my response seems short or gruff. It’s late, I’m fighting a bug and it’s well past time for the painkillers. I’m off to a nice, Nyquil-induced rest. Hopefully, this virus will finally decide to take a hike.
Goodnight all. Enjoy the DNC circus. Hope Bill rewrites the script!
Well said, gxm.
Agree Sweet Sue and brava, gxm17.
You’re welcome.
If Romney is elected, Ryan is positioned for 2020, or 2016, if Romney is a one-termer.
That scares me-a fundy Catholic who hates the safety net-but I’m still not voting for Obama.
Third party for the top spot and a vote for Democratic Senator, Sherrod Brown-may his tribe increase.
Save it. Nobody’s buying.
I’m with you Sweet Sue.
Not quite sure about the logic of imparting Ryan’s beliefs to Romney who expressly believes differently than Ryan on abortion because if “Romney is elected Ryan is positioned for 2020 or 2016.” First, if Romney is a one-termer . . .um . . . doesn’t that mean that Ryan will have also lost his seat in 2016? Not like Ryan can run as VP AND as a Presidential candidate at the same time in 2016. In fact the opposite is true, if Romney is NOT elected now, THEN Ryan would be positioned to run in 2016. Ryan literally cannot be positioned for 2016 if Romney is elected.
If Romney isn’t elected now, Ryan is still just as, if not more, positioned to run in 2020 as well as 2016. Plenty of losing running mates have come back to run again for president. And, being a VP for 2 terms didn’t help Al Gore, so why is Ryan any better positioned at all if Romney is elected.
This comment really makes absolutely no sense at all.
It makes sense if one understands human behavior and who Romney and Ryan are.
Ideologically, Romney’s always been spineless and easily swayed if the right kind of personality asserts itself. Earliest example I know off the top of my head is his support of the Viet Nam War while asking for and receiving deferments to avoid serving in the war, then when he returns from France and finds out his father changed his position, Mitt changed his position to match his father’s. That could have been youthful idol worship of a father but this pattern has continued throughout his life, hence the criticism of flip flopping and Mitt’s oddly unapologetic shrug that sure he changes his mind without offering explanation. It’s one thing to change one’s mind as a result of thoughtful consideration, the metamorphosis of which can be reasonably explained; it’s another to change one’s mind because of the way the wind, or someone else’s air, blows.
Paul Ryan is a different kind of man, a man who owns himself and his beliefs, and is simpatico with the newest generation of the GOP that’s aggressive about what they “deserve” and are entitled to. As Cheney did with Bush (who also was a son raised in privilege and expected to conform), it’s reasonable to predict that a VP of Paul Ryan’s personality would greatly influence a President of Mitt Romney’s susceptibility to it.
Um . . . Zal . . again with the complete non sequitors. What does Romney’s vietnam war position have anything to do with Sue’s comment on Ryan positioning himself for 2016 and 2020 if Romney is elected. Since you are Mr. Answer man today, please explain how Ryan can position himself to run as a presidential candidate in 2016 when he will be a sitting VP if Romney is elected? This should be good.
I don’t see it happening but if, as LBJ did in ’68, Romney chose to not run for a second term, Ryan would be positioned to run for POTUS in 2016.
And will not win the election if everyone who believes he’s such a fucking threat votes against him. Jesus – let’s grasp at straws, shall we?
So, Zal is doubling down on the crazy. We are not supposed to vote for Romney because it might position Ryan for a 2016 run because in some alternate universe Romney has decided 4 years from now to not run for re-election at all and let Ryan run? Uh huh. Like I said about the Dems during this convention – are you even listening to yourselves? This is 50 shades of crazy.
Should have added “This comment really makes absolutely no sense at all.” No wonder Zal agrees with it.
run. A trait that I admire in anyone is when they know Who They Are, I see that in Paul Ryan. No one is obliged to like these people but I find them often very likable. I believe Romney knows who he is too, he seems to be happiest as a patriarch of a large family, just not sure how that translates to world leadership.
Agreed.
HELP! – GET ME OUT OF SPAM!!
Enough with this Vietnam War and deferments. I seem to remember that Bill Ayers, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and even our sweet Chrissy Tingles all figured out ways to avoid serving in that ghastly war. So I will not hold that against Romney.
BTW, my info doesn’t come from Wiki or Media Matters or Snopes.
I don’t hold it against him, except the hypocrisy (or “flip flop” or spinelessness, whichever word suits) of supporting the war and getting deferments.
I find it particularly galling when younger candidates are considered immune because they weren’t obligated to serve. What war did Obama serve in? Just because there was no draft doesn’t mean he didn’t have a responsibility, if one considers military service a responsibility. My father served in two wars and it made him a staunch anti-war proponent. The asshats who want to hang non-service over any candidate’s head can fuck off as far as I’m concerned. Show your cred, or shut up.
This!
Considering military service a responsibility, in general, is not the only criteria IMO. If one supports a particular war, one has a responsibility to serve it in some capacity. For instance, although I would have served during WWII, I would not have served in Viet Nam.
My criticism of Romney is not that he didn’t serve, it’s his verbal support of American involvement in Viet Nam while getting deferments. And actually my criticism has nothing to do with serving in the military per se, but what it reveals about Romney’s character and personality and commitment to what he says he believes.
Well, Zal, by your standards just about all of America should have signed up for GW’s Iraq invasion. I distinctly remember being a lone voice of dissent in my small community of friends, family, and professionals. From where I’m sitting, the hypocrisy abounds. And I’m just tired of it. Romney. Obama. Who’s the bigger hypocrite? As far as war, Obama winds hands down because he has continued what GW started. He billed himself as anti-war and he’s a hawk of, IMO, psychopath proportions. I just don’t see how the progbots can point fingers concerning Romney’s war record. Who has done more damage with their actions? Does that question really need to be asked, much less answered?
I don’t defend Obama, he doesn’t deserve it. I don’t see criticizing Romney and Obama as an either or thing. If they’re both flawed in the same way, I call it; if one of them is then I call that.
My comment was about Romney taking action to request five separate deferments over several years while he spoke out in favor of the Viet Nam war. Hypocrisy abounds? You bet it does. Who’s the bigger hypocrite? I’d say Obama. But so what? Is this a reality TV show, Who’s the Biggest Hypocrite? I say no, it’s more serious than that. Then we’re back to does it make sense to choose the lesser of two evils for President and Commander in Chief? I say no to that, too, because the truth is there is another option.
This is Zal’s scam. He does the “oh me oh my, I’m not defending Obama; I criticize both Obama and Romney” and then spends 50 more lines going off only on Romney for something for which Obama is exponentially more guilty of. He does this in EVERY comment. Open with the obligatory – “Oh I think Obama is bad too, I don’t like either. Now let me spend 6 paragraphs blasting Romney.” And, he always is projecting some kind of bad action on Romney’s behalf which is actually something that Obama has done or engaged in.
I’m telling you all, the guy is an Obama supporter. And, don’t tell me because he opens some of his comments with a few, very minor negative things about Obama that he’s not. It’s an Alinsky tactic to do this – infiltrate and pretend you don’t support the person you support so that you can go off on the “enemy” full-throatedly.
Who but a true Obama supporter would try to start some kind of weird thread about Romney’s Vietnam war deferrments completely out of the blue and not mention at all that no one in this race volunteered for the military – not Obama, Biden or Ryan either – so what’s the point of starting this??? At least Romney volunteered for missionary work. Where was Biden during the Vietnam war – plagarizing his deferrment application? My point is that there is a new meme that the Kos, et al folks are trying to get off the ground about Romney being some kind of draft dodger and lo and behold, Zal interjects the same competely off-the-wall thread. Yeah, and I have a service that can clean up your credit if you just pay me . . . . Methinks Zal overplayed his hand with this one.
Run, you’re very wrong about Zal’s intentions. I’ve noticed a type around here, and you’re among them, who reacts as though every comment is a comparison against the other side, rather than just being a comment that’s singularly about its subject. An absence of ‘But Obama does this too’ does not indicate support or a preference for Obama. It simply means that the speaker is not talking about Obama. The sort of logic you espouse here has been thrown my way as well and I’m telling ya, it doesn’t wash.
Jay – you didn’t read my comment. I specifically said that Zal’s MO is NOT to absent critcism of Obama but INSTEAD to insert 1-2 sentences of “Obama does this too” so that he can then go on on a long diatribe about Romney. He does this as a means of bolstering his “I dislike both of them” bona fides when it is clear his aim is at Romney.
I have called Zal out on this because he is now doing it so obviously. His latest parroting out of the blue of the “Romney is a draft dodger” meme for no apparent reason or connection to another comment just as it is starting to surface on liberal blogs was just so over the top. He is the only one in here who does this – although I see the pattern much more frequently on other blogs – but he’s not trying to hide it now.
Run-dmc, I write more about Romney now because the conversation here is more about Romney now; when the conversation was more about Obama, I wrote more about him. Not that I think you should, but if you went back to my old posts you’d find a much bigger cache of criticism and harsh assessment about Obama from me than I’ve leveled at Romney. Much much angrier and voluminous. I feel that Obama ruined the Democratic Party and coalesced into greater power the lying cheating narcissists who’ve overrun this country; I realize that’s assigning more power to him than he deserves but it’s what I’ve felt and my blog comments (and front page pieces on another blog a year or two ago) relentlessly reflected that feeling. I’ve been commenting harshly about Obama, and for a long time almost solely about Obama, since 2008 and what I have to say about him, like what I said about Bush for eight years, is redundant at this point. That gets tedious. Since I’m still discovering things about Romney, I can write fresh elements into my comments, which is more interesting to me and to anybody who reads what I write.
Romney’s support of the Viet Nam war coupled with his deferments is something I just discovered, and actually I stumbled upon it looking up something you’d posted that didn’t make sense so I didn’t believe it. Although I didn’t know all the details, this sentence of yours didn’t make sense: “He gave up his inheritance and lived as a Mormon missionary youth for 2 years and then scraped his own $ together with friends to start his own business,” and when something doesn’t make sense, I tend to look into it. I knew he’d given his inheritance to LDS and that he was wealthy when he did it, and I knew he’d spent time in France as a Mormon missionary but I didn’t know exactly when or the circumstances around his missionary work. So I looked it up, and learning about that I discovered his positions about Viet Nam and deferments because they happened at the same time. And since that kind of rank hypocrisy and spinelessness is revealing about a person’s character and personality, I’ve now included it in my assessment of who Mitt Romney is. I did exactly the same with Obama as I read his books and learned of his choices and behavior, and ditto back to Dubya.
I’m not trying to convince anybody here of anything, including you with this comment. That’s not what I do; I gave that up years ago when I realized people are not persuaded by me, even those who adore me. People who agree with me agree with me, people who don’t, don’t. If they change their minds and agree with me it’s usually because they were convinced by someone, or something, else. Persuasion is not my strength; never has been. Observation and assessment and getting it right is my strength. My reason for posting here is to write about politics, which I enjoy and don’t do professionally, and frankly as a procrastination device to avoid working on what I should be working on.
No, Run, you aren’t hearing what I’m saying because you’ve made up your mind. Zal’s explanation directly above this comment of mine drives it home.
Labeling him a ‘Bot’ is completely absurd.
Yes, Jay – I have made up my mind about him. As I noted, I haven’t made this claim about anyone else so I don’t throw this around loosely and it took me a while to cotton on to Zal after watching his MO lo these many months. So, I didn’t throw this out there about him his first couple of comments out of the gate. I’ve made my point about why I believe this about him, and no, you aren’t going to change my mind. BTW – I’ve never called him a “Bot” because I don’t use that term. I think he’s an Obama supporter who thinks he’s being pretty canny about it. End of story. We can go back and forth on this if you want, but you won’t change my mind.
And Zal’s comment above yours is classic as he tries to twist himself into a knot coming up with explanations to deny the obvious. He makes little to no sense. He claims I led him to something about Romney’s lack of Vietnam war experience with no attribution to anything that I wrote; he’s just making that up. And, “the conversation in here is more about Romney, so that’s why I talk more about him” – WHAT??! That’s demonstrably and objectively untrue. The conversation has always been about the failure, dishonesty, narcissism, etc about Obama and only recently has there been a specific alternative to Obama to talk about. He first spent 99% of his time on Republicans and 1% on Obama (mabye 95/5). Now it’s 99% Romney and 1% Obama. And it’s strange, given his “reasons,” that he still has that ratio even in threads that are all about the DNC Convention and where the vast majority of discussion is about the Dems.
I mean Come On . . . . I have very good reasons to continue to know what I know.
I quoted you directly (that’s what placing words between quotation marks is for) from your comment in this thread, timestamp September 5, 2012 at 10:51 am.
This sentence of yours, upthread at that timestamp, “He gave up his inheritance and lived as a Mormon missionary youth for 2 years and then scraped his own $ together with friends to start his own business,” was clearly off but I wasn’t sure precisely how so I looked it up. In reading about the period surrounding Romney’s missionary work, I discovered for the first time that he’d supported the war in Viet Nam and at the same time applied for and received deferments to avoid serving.
GXM.. Most here already know I switched careers, and retrained as part of either an epiphany or mid life crisis, not sure which. Working in public health is not nearly as glamorous as my past career in advertising. Nor is it nearly as lucrative. I was not a health care provider, I was eventually
a director of a large clinic. which served a populous, diverse, and mostly low income district.
Much of my job involved fighting every day for more funding and better services.. It was a labor of love for a long time, until cynicism eventually and predictably, set in. I was warned that it would,
and it took me a bit longer than most. There is no brief way of describing gov’t services but trust me, the waste, unfairness, corruption and cheating would make a cynic of Jimminy Cricket., and I’m talking about the bureaucracy, not the patients. The patients are a whole other story, there are some who are so brilliant at gaming the social services system, one can only be in awe of what
they could do if they played it straight in life.
I am a practicing Catholic, but that’s personal to me and my family. I strongly support birth control and not having sex with losers who don’t give a damn who their partners are. I have seen far too many s.t.d.’s and HIV cases in teenagers to not think that the emphasis should be on prevention, for more reasons than pregnancy.
All these declarations of ‘rights’ are fine and I respect them, but they are a straw man argument
when our country is going over a cliff.,The poor women to whom you refer, are going to be joined by all the rest of us.
We must rein in the spending, and get our country back on track first,.
To reign in spending, I suggest cutting the waste, unfairness, corruption, cheating and gaming, not abortions for women in need who can’t afford them.
“When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail.” — Pearl S. Buck
Zal, this subject has been talked to death on John’s blog. I understand and appreciate that most have a different view from mine, I’d say ‘live and let live’ but it seems gauche in this forum.
However, to the best of my knowledge, I am alone here in having had fiduciary responsibilities for healthcare delivery..Public funds being used to pay for issues that are so easily preventable, just takes that funding from services for actual illnesses, and Medicaid covers all the popular and safe methods of birth control.
It’s a constant robbing of Peter to pay Paul, for those charged with creating budgets. The concept that an unwanted child is much more expensive to society than abortion may be true, but my budgets didn’t cover that issue.
Abstractions are interesting to debate, reality, however, usually does bite, and it is no fun to choose which alternative is the least awful.
For some, the upcoming election is in the same category.
One would think someone with an ounce of compassion and common sense, to say nothing of fiscal concern, would see abortion for poor women as a reasonable, even necessary, expense for society as a whole to shoulder.
Would I prefer preventative birth control over abortions? Of course! Everybody who is or used to be a liberal wants that. But you speak about reality. Well reality is young poor women who neither want nor can afford to raise a child get pregnant, don’t have insurance and can’t afford abortions; so what do we do about that, make them carry the child to term (expensive and wearing on the body and makes them less capable of holding a job) or do we pay for the abortion? Aren’t there enough human beings on the planet damaged by being unwanted? I don’t know which is worse, the adult who was an over adored child or the adult who was an unwanted child; they’re both nightmares in our modern age.
And –reality again– what really is the financial cost of these abortions? The actual dollar amount? Do you know? (I don’t.) What do we spend annually to provide abortions through Medicare? Compared with what’s wasted in the system or what our government spends bailing out the scams and schemes by firms like Bain Capital or banks like Goldman Sachs, that go on living large while poor women just remain poor?
Zal, you surprise me, you are treating this subject in an emotional manner, rather than an using your usual, more academic style.
About 250,000 abortions are performed in NY State per year, this number has not changed much in years. In NY Medicaid covers all costs for women whose incomes are 22,000 per year or less. There are a number of allowable deductions, so the income can realistically be quite a bit higher . The costs vary a lot from NYC to upstate locations and are adjusted accordingly.
As a rule of thumb, in the NYC area the cost is from 5 to 7 hundred dollars, for the first trimester, without complications. Women who want an immediate abortion can be given a type of conditional Medicaid, as prolonging the pregnancy results in a less safe and more costly operation. NY State pays all costs after the Fed contribution, and imposes no conditions, such as the Hyde Amendment…It’s all up to the individual states..An average contribution from the State would be around 3 to 4 hundred dollars. The women must have I.D., and be able to prove financial need. U.S. citizenship is not required in NY.
It is a ghastly, expensive, and avoidable mess. Most of the schools in NY are on board with educational programs that stress prevention, but it’s the old ‘leading a horse to water” problem.
Imagine how far all those millions would go to improve our schools, roads and parks.
Seventeen year old’s with a history of 3 abortions have the most soulless eyes you have ever seen.. Our little girls become cynics before they are old enough to drive at night,
I have plenty of compassion, no one can do the work without it. But I want childhood to last through the normal span of years.
As for the grownups, they claim that they must have the ‘right’ to choose. They have all the right in the world to choose a reliable, safe form of birth control, and the right to choose a responsible partner.. By the time they fall pregnant, they’ve made a wealth of choices, usually poor ones.
You have seen first hand the tragedy of HIV/AIDS, imagine receiving that diagnosis at fifteen, STD’s have reached epidemic proportions also. Imo,, teenage sex is almost always emotionally damaging, but they never think about the life long physical risks involved as well. Or they have not been educated about them.. We had an HIV support group that was almost all teenagers, the sadness of that is indescribable.
I don’t agree with your entire position Conner (particularly about teenage sex always being damaging), but you strike me as a remarkable person. I really enjoy when you chime in.
Sophie, obviously education and access to preventative birth control need to be top priorities. That still doesn’t speak to what we as a society should do to address the needs of women living in poverty, vulnerable and without resources, who face an unwanted pregnancy and the years of potential added burden that can mean. Unwanted pregnancies happen; they always have and they always will. Today, because of the nature of our culture’s moral boundaries and the amazing advances in contraception, there may be more unwanted pregnancies than ever. If you think providing abortion is not the answer to a young poor woman’s unwanted pregnancy, then what do you think is? And don’t say preventing it before it happens because I’m talking about those that aren’t prevented.
No it is not avoidable. We can assist and guide in many ways, and with more resources invested in education and contraception we could do better, but there are things we as a society cannot fully control and among those are how parents parent and the choices people of all ages make sexually. No matter what we do we will never eradicate unwanted pregnancies. And as human beings we will never eradicate ghastly messes. What we can do is adopt sensible ways of addressing those messes when they happen.
I couldn’t disagree more. In fact I think more often the opposite is true. I think being sexually active during teenage years can be about as natural as human response gets and can be, actually, empowering not only during teenage years but in the many years of one’s life that follows. Obviously, not for everyone. Some people, those who are coerced into sex when they don’t want it, those who suffer from life altering STDs, girls who become pregnant (and the boys who father unintended pregnancies don’t walk away undamaged either), and for some there are emotional burdens associated with sex that become damaging. But from what I’ve gleaned of human experience that’s not “almost always” the case, it’s much less often the case. And when it is emotionally damaging and an unintended pregnancy results, at the very least we can assist in providing a wanted abortion. Still I must reiterate, millions and millions of teenagers have been sexually active and for a great many it’s a healthy element of maturing, bonding and pleasure. From my personal experience and what I’ve observed in countless people over the decades, if I had children I would not hope for them that their sexual experiences begin in their twenties or later.
P.S. In the U.S. one out of three women will have one or more abortions before age 45, almost half of them will receive some sort of gov’t assistance. We are paying a high price for our oh so modern ‘culture.’
But what do we do about it?
Thanks Jay, you are far too kind.. I am so tired of the above subject I want to scream every time it comes up, all those crazy t.v. preachers and politicians have ruined a perfectly worthy debate.
Spot-on:
Oh no, not more troll-hunting. Ugh.
Zal, Re; your above remarks, I left a lengthy post about what IS being done about abortion, which is quite a lot, in my view…I have facts and numbers, maybe you could give it a glance.
Your remarks about teen sex may be valid, but in my experience with a houseful of daughters, there was more than enough drama without unwanted pregnancies, std’s, and broken hearts. .
I read what you wrote. Carefully.
Nowhere in there do you suggest what we should do about unwanted pregnancies in place of funding abortions. If we pull funding that doesn’t mean the pregnancies will stop. Should we, society, government, do nothing to help women in poverty who become pregnant and can’t afford or simply don’t want children?
Zal, I can’t believe you, of all people, have fallen for that old canard, Women’s Issues. That is what they drag out when there is nothing else to talk about.. There is no going back on those issues, despite what a few absurd and angry women would have you believe.
However, as WJC so eloquently pointed out, Medicaid funds nursing home care, and care for disabled adults and children. It is also the main HCP for millions of Americans..A free second or third termination in a year for a troubled teen is not cost effective or healthy.
Family planning classes should be mandatory and attended by both the woman and her partner, if the partner is unknown, psych therapy should be provided. . Tubal ligations and vasectomies should be low cost or free.
Eventually, a cap may have to be put on the no. of terminations one woman or girl can have at gov’t expense. As Clinton said, and it applies here, ‘”it’s arithmetic”.
Unless you have walked in my shoes, I don’t know how else to explain this, I give up.
Let’s talk about trillions in debt or drones or the price of gas..or even Joni, or Janis, there are so many more compelling issues on which we can at least support each other, if not agree.