Blog Archives

It looks like last night’s debate was Obama’s triumph…

Although I don’t think Mittens made any huge gaffes, he did tell a pile of obvious lies and Obama seemed to catch him on them.  I was reading Andrew Sullivan’s online live commentary as the debate went on, and his summations in the last few minutes pretty much made the event understood:

10.35 pm. After the first truly epic implosion in the first debate, Obama has clawed his way back in the following two, in my view. He has marshalled his arguments as potently as possible; he brought the themes of his candidacy together compellingly. His advantage on foreign policy will not, I think, diminish; it may well strengthen. And that is only just. After eight years of the most disastrous, misguided, immoral and a catastrophic foreign policy, Obama has brought the US back from the brink, presided over the decimation of al Qaeda, the liberation of Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, and restored America’s moral standing in the world.
For Romney, he made no massive mistakes. No Gerald Ford moments. And since the momentum of this race is now his, if now faltering a little, a defeat on points on foreign policy will be an acceptable result. But this was Obama’s debate; and he reminded me again of how extraordinarily lucky this country has been to have had him at the helm in this new millennium.
He’s flawed; he’s made mistakes; but who hasn’t? If this man, in these times, with this record, against this opposition, does not deserve re-election, then I am simply at a loss for words. I have to believe the American people will see that in time.
10.34 pm. Obama’s closing statement was his best few minutes in all three debates. Romney’s seems a little desperate and now he – the man whose running-mate is Paul Ryan – is saying he is more bipartisan than Obama.
10.30 pm. So Romney just blames the entire economy on Obama alone. This litany of “the economy sucks throw him out” is the crude but effective big lie.
10.27 pm. “Governor, the people in Detroit don’t forget.” The lies this man has said tonight have been more numerous than I can ever remember in any debate. The man does not have the moral character to be president, in my opinion.

I think Obama, aside from appearing presidential and in control of his information (and correct in presenting his record, as well.) Romney, as Obama said, tried to “Airbrush History.”  The best turnover Obama brought around was when Romney claimed Obama had made an “Apology Tour” of the middle east, and the president cleared up his trips and and made it clear that the charge Romney has made was his “biggest whopper.”

Romney has seemed to abandon neoconservatism by endorsing Obama’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and agreeing on many other of the president’s foreign policy actions.  Obama made sure to point this out. It seemed like Romney was congratulating the President of the United States.

Obama really came out as one who deserves a second term.He was clearly the Commander in Chief and Romney didn’t look like he would fill that role in the same way.

 

Foreign Policy is the debate subject tonight. What will be discussed?

Andrew Sullivan posted this earlier today – tonight’s moderator of the debate, Bob Schieffer‘s list of questions he wants to see covered:

* America’s role in the world
* Our longest war – Afghanistan and Pakistan
* Red Lines – Israel and Iran
* The Changing Middle East and the New Face of Terrorism – I
* The Changing Middle East and the New Face of Terrorism – II
* The Rise of China and Tomorrow’s World…

The one that will probably bring out a major Romney/Obama conflict is the Red Lines question since it deals with holding off nuclear weapons and brings the US into a war-support position with Israel. Since it works against Obama’s State Department‘s policy of negotiations over military imposition, I expect this will be Romney’s major moment. He has spent the last couple of months trying to describe Obama as being unfriendly with Benjamin Netanyahu and opposed to Israel’s rights – a major lie by the Republican, btw – and will most likely make this his position.

Since we haven’t really heard a foreign policy plan outlined by Romney, I expect Obama will keep bringing this lack of knowledge up to see if Romney crosses himself up.

Andrew Sullivan also listed the Foreign Policy subjects that most likely won’t be brought up:

1) The eurozone crisis

2) Latin America

3) Russia

4) Africa

5) Foreign economic policy

6) India

7) North Korea

From my point of you, the fact that Romney has publicly stated that Russia was our major enemy, I will be  surprised if Obama doesn’t use this to show Romney’s total lack of foreign policy knowledge.

Right Wing Now Saying Obama is Gay…

The Family Research Institute‘s Paul Cameron, really angry about President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage, denounced Obama’s stance on Crosstalk with Jim Schneider of VCY America (Voice of Christian Youth), suggesting that the president might be gay.

His words:

“Actually, while I’m not sure about the claims by the various people who have reported that Obama has at least participated at times with them in homosexual acts, this certainly lends some credence.

“The long term goal of the homosexual movement is to get every little boy to grab his ankles and every little girl to give it a try. They will not rest until every one of our children at least gets to try, has the opportunity and maybe is forced to at least once experience homosexual acts.”

Here’s the Video:

Cameron is a psychologist who has used his own studies to claim that homosexuals threaten public health, social order, and the well-being of children. His conclusions are generally at odds with other published research, and objective indices show that his work has had no apparent impact on scientific research on sexual orientation.

OK…the story about Romney Prep School harrassment of an apparantly gay student…

… which is all over the news this morning, brought this article in Andrew Sullivan’s blog:

Romney: A Gay-Basher In High School

Mitt Romney returned from a three-week spring break in 1965 to resume his studies as a high school senior at the prestigious Cranbrook School. Back on the handsome Screen shot 2012-05-10 at 12.01.28 PMcampus, studded with Tudor brick buildings and manicured fields, he spotted something he thought did not belong at a school where the boys wore ties and carried briefcases. John Lauber, a soft-spoken new student one year behind Romney, was perpetually teased for his nonconformity and presumed homosexuality. Now he was walking around the all-boys school with bleached-blond hair that draped over one eye, and Romney wasn’t having it.

“He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” an incensed Romney told Matthew Friedemann, his close friend in the Stevens Hall dorm, according to Friedemann’s recollection. Mitt, the teenaged son of Michigan Gov. George Romney, kept complaining about Lauber’s look, Friedemann recalled.

A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors.

That’s an assault on someone whose only crime was being gay. Then this:

In an English class, Gary Hummel, who was a closeted gay student at the time, recalled that his efforts to speak out in class were punctuated with Romney shouting, “Atta girl!” In the culture of that time and place, that was not entirely out of the norm. Hummel recalled some teachers using similar language.

Romney says he has no memory of this incident, although five others have not just memories but vivid, guilt-ridden recollections. As for the victim, he did not forget. How could he? Years and years later, one of the bullies Romney rounded up bumped into his victim at an airport and felt the need to apologize:

“I’m sorry that I didn’t do more to help in the situation,” he said.

Lauber paused, then responded, “It was horrible.” He went on to explain how frightened he was during the incident, and acknowledged to Seed, “It’s something I have thought about a lot since then.”

Lauber died in 2004, according to his three sisters.

Yesterday was a day for all those who didn’t live to see it. Including Romney’s young victim.

See… I don’t know if people 48 years after an incident are the same, but I am fascinated by Romney supporting the “historical” 3,000 years of history of one-man-one-woman marriage.

Perhaps he has forgotten that his own family were ardent polygamists only a century ago – and went to Mexican colonies to escape US federal oppression of their version of marriage.

Anyway, as a politician who recently rid his campaign of an openly gay associate to please his Party, Romney seems not to have quite changed his feelings. Or is this just more “hijinks and pranks?”

University of California’s FixUC proposes an investment plan to replace growing student loans.

This is a great idea… I got started reading it after a mention on Andrew Sullivan‘s site, and I went to the official FixUC proposal page: http://www.fixuc.org. Here is the basis of the proposal direclty from the FixUC presentation:

What is the UC Student Investment Proposal?

Within the past decade, UC students have suffered from egregious increases in tuition costs. In 2011, the State of California cut $650 million in UC system funding and decreased its total support to the system by 21.3 percent. These cuts were met, yet again, with tuition hikes by the UC, and tuition for the 2011-2012 school year rose nearly 18 percent from last year’s. UC tuition has nearly quadrupled over the last decade alone.

In an effort to combat the increasing financial burdens facing students of the University of California, Fix UC has designed a comprehensive plan for the restructuring of the system by which students pay for their education.  The UC Student Investment Plan will make it possible for students to attend the UC without paying any upfront costs whatsoever.

After they graduate and get jobs, UC alumni will pay a static percentage (based on 5%) of their salaries for 20 years of employment.  Because payments are based on salary, no UC graduate will have to reckon with fees that he or she cannot afford.  Students will no longer be held hostage by unmanageable loan payments with fluctuating interest rates and strict deadlines.

Under the Student Investment Plan, graduates will only ever have to pay a stable, predictable fraction of the money they make – that means no loans and no debt.  The plan will also garner the UC enough additional revenue to free it from complete dependence on state funding and make room for long-term institutional growth.

The purpose of the plan is to reestablish the UC as an affordable option for all qualified California students while gradually reducing its reliance on undependable state monies.

Got it? Some of us are still paying our own and family members’ funding for advanced education from all over the country and the concept of colleges “investing” in their students’ futures is a solid one to me. It not only will, eventually, bring in more money to the institutions it will serve to improve the education structure…better classes make better investments.

Fix UC President Chris LoCascio recently presented an update on Fix UC to the UC Board of Regents at their meeting at UC San Francisco. The next steps will involve working with the federal government and UCOP to explore a collection system through the IRS that the UC and other American institutions can use to collect funds from graduates in the United States and abroad. This seems to mean that they are hoping to go beyond UC to other Universities. This is a plan worth getting other schools interested in… however, it should begin with student involvement to make it realistic. Here’s their organizing statement:

Fix UC is a student-created and run organization dedicated to solving the University of California’s funding crisis.

Our goal is to identify root problems and provide long-term solutions to the UC regents, with the hope that they will not only consider, but implement the plan outlined in our UC Student Investment Proposal.

Quote for a Sunday (about Last Night’s Debate):

English: A photo of author and political comme...

“But the real lesson of this debate is that this crew is the worst assembled for the nomination of a major party that I can recall.”

 – Andrew Sullivan

So true, so true. And this debate was only topped by this morning’s update Debate – or Romney hunt – where the five other clowns got to continue sniping.

A noted Conservative rates the participants in last night’s Economics Debate…

I didn’t get to see the debate because we don’t get the Bloomberg Network… so I’ve been reviewing it on line in pieces. I’ve also looked at remarks around the web commenting on it. Andrew Sullivan, whose opinions I usually disagree with, made an interesting summary which the parts of the debate I have seen back up:

“Huntsman I can understand and appreciate. Perry is an empty bad suit. Romney lies with such facility it unnerves me. Bachmann is a fanatic, as, although I am extremely fond of him, is Ron Paul. Santorum just seems like a lost child from the 1950s, trying to have the campaign he dreamed about when he was ten. Cain is an egomaniac businessman with a talk show host patter and a mild wit. Gingrich is a giant, gaseous asshole.”

I especially agree with his view of Gingrich, who is still in the race because…?

Blogosphere News: Andrew Sullivan is Moving!

Wow! I wonder what the financial gain was for this event. Do Tina Brown and her buddies know about Andrew’s vacation habits?
clipped from www.huffingtonpost.com
Andrew Sullivan is leaving The Atlantic and taking his blog, The Daily Dish, with him. The blog will find a new home on The Daily Beast in April, and Sullivan will also become a contributor to Newsweek. His two destinations are really one — the media outlets are merging together under editor in chief Tina Brown.
In a post on his (soon-to-be) old site, Sullivan has a lot of nice things to say about his bosses — both old and new — and assures his readers not to expect changes in content:

I also want to assure you that, as for the past ten years, through andrewsullivan.com, Time and the Atlantic, I will retain total editorial responsibility for what appears in this column... You don’t even have to change your bookmark, since you’ll be automatically redirected, once April arrives. If you want to make sure you don’t lose track, bookmark us now and you will be automatically redirected when April 4 comes around.

blog it