I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

YramAL

I hate it when people come to my facebook and gripe at me that I post too much political stuff. My response? Then don't look at it! Block me, hide me if you feel the need. Other people can have what they want on THEIR wall. They can delete my responses to them if they don't like it.

Mary 

riley702

And if she responds in future to any of MY politcal posts on FB, I'll delete it and tell her that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

YramAL

Sounds good to me, Riley!

Mary 

RetiredLibby

HAHAHA, Mary!  HAHAHAHAH!  Nobody has complained that I post too much political stuff ... probably because I unfriended some hostiles, and I am quite sure that others have my stuff blocked.  That's OK -- I use FB to entertain myself and express myself, not to entertain other people. 

I view my page as my expression of what I think and feel ... if they don't like it, don't come there.  Block my newsfeed.  Unfriend me.  It's OK -- if someone is offended by my political posts and views, we probably aren't friends anyway.  And as far as commenting on people's posts -- I have blocked the newsfeeds of the people whose views with whom I disagree deeply but with whom I must remain friends (family members, mainly).  I generally don't post on others' walls or posts unless I know them well or I am responding to something they said to me.  As I told someone last night (a former high school classmate, as a matter of fact), I consider my FB page to be like my high school locker -- I can decorate it however I want!

Riley, I think her reaction is because cognitive dissonance is painful for some.  And they're losing -- that's gotta hurt. 

L

Anonymous

Ooops...just realize why Kam didn't get my pm

well, hope you have a GOOD TIME in Oregon...

1Athena1

Mr. No Empathy is taking off his mittens and, standing by his story, darnit! I suppose that is what twits like Rush and Trump consider manhood - just pound your chest with your fist like an orangutan and think that makes you stronger. But not all conservatives are happy. Some, like Rush, do believe the poor pay too few taxes and the rich too many (meaning, they must have his drug problem!) but others actually favor lowering taxes on the poor as a palliative measure. The New York Times explains all of this:

"Mr. Romney stood by his statement in an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox News on Tuesday. "I think a society based upon a government-centered nation where government plays a larger and larger role, redistributes money, that's the wrong course for America," he said, adding that he hoped to improve the economy enough that people would be able to get well-paying jobs and rejoin the tax rolls.

Mr. Romney's thinking on the matter has been shaped in part by Arthur C. Brooks, the president of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Brooks said that he had discussed his new book, "The Road to Freedom: How to Win the Fight for Free Enterprise," with Mr. Romney, who was particularly interested in whether redistribution would lead to a disengaged electorate - with the government paying for programs benefiting more people with dollars coming from fewer of them.

"It's not necessarily a good thing for the country that more people are pulling more benefits out of the system than they're paying in," Mr. Brooks said in an interview. "That's not a healthy thing for citizenship, and it's not good for these people themselves either, if they feel attenuated from their government."

The notion that too few Americans are paying income taxes has gained currency on the right in recent years. An influential 2002 Wall Street Journal editorial called the millions of American households that do not pay income tax "lucky duckies." Last year, Erick Erickson, the conservative firebrand, started a Web site called "We Are the 53 Percent," mocking the 99-percent theme of Occupy Wall Street and chiding Americans for failing to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

But other Republicans have argued that the focus on the people who do not pay taxes is a mistake.

Reihan Salam, a conservative author, wrote on National Review Online on Tuesday that "the version of conservative tax policy I favor might actually further reduce the share of tax units that pay federal income taxes, yet it would strengthen the work ethic, increase labor force participation, and discourage the kind of dependency that concerns Mitt Romney."

For a long time, cutting taxes for the poor was a major emphasis of the Republican Party. One reason that many poor people no longer pay federal income taxes is that they qualify for credits such as the earned-income tax credit, which has its roots in conservative thinking and has long been supported by members of both parties as a way to help the poor without increasing welfare payments or raising the minimum wage. The credit was added to the tax code when Gerald Ford was president, and was expanded by Republicans and Democrats, including President Ronald Reagan, who called it "one of the best anti-poverty programs this country has ever seen" in 1986.

President George W. Bush, for his part, doubled the child tax credit, and his tax cuts erased the federal income tax liability for millions of households."

I wonder if Mittens even believes in volunteering - as in "compassionate conservatism"? Technically, he has done that but, as far as I know, only in the context of his religion - meaning: "you'd better do this or you're going to hell" assuming Mormons have a Hell - don't know.

Wabbit

Well if that's what Willard thinks the cure would have to be to do things like start taxing Social Security benefits, and do away with the child exemptions and credits and EIC and mortgage deductions and medical expenses deductions and all those other credits and deductions that put working people and families below the threshold of taxable income.  No wonder they get all tight lipped and tongue tied when asked to give details of their 'plan'. 

I pay taxes every year.  I would not want to change places with the people who do not.  They have it hard enough already.  I swear it seems like there is a totally crazy 'jealousy' of people who are struggling to survive ... as though they have some really good deal going.  I do.not.understand that thinking.

1Athena1

Wabbit: I really do think there are factions of people in this country who actively hate the poor. (One of them is running for president. )

RetiredLibby

Wow -- the Guardian nails it:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/18/mitt-romney-47-unsuitable-president 

Bren-2007

Hi Everyone!

I've had a great day ... had lunch at a fabulous Japanese restaurant in Roanoke with my sis today.  The weather is absolutely perfect.

I saw on article on Romney standing by his words this morning.  Bless his heart ... he doesn't have the sense to be ashamed of himself.  "Bless his heart" means he's really stupid in Southern speak.

Kam ... Hope all goes well with your appointment in Portland today.

Hugs,

Bren

gardengumby

I get sad when I can really see just how far apart the Democrats and Republicans are.  I've never thought of Republicans as bad people, but I see that many Republicans do think of me as bad.  They don't know me, but because of the fact that I support Obama, that turns me into someone who is easily hatable - me, a fellow American - not because I have hurt them, as I have not.  Not because I have broken laws, as I have not.  Not because I am "morally bankrupt" as I am not.  Not because I am receiving "government handouts", as I am not.  No, they hate me because they don't agree with me.  They hate me because they've been told to hate me, and others like me. 

I am sad to say that I am depressingly reminded of the greatest generation and the fight they fought for freedom. The true American value that we have always fought for is for freedom.  I am sad to say that I believe this is the fight we must again face.  The fight for freedom.  Freedom to believe what we want.  Freedom to think the way we want.  Freedom to dress as we want.  Freedom to be who we want.  I am not a carbon copy of anyone.  My mind is my own and I am not willing to read or watch a small slice of the media and walk in lockstep with anyone.  That is my choice and I own it. 

When I hear conservatives say they are fighting for American values or moral values I almost get ill, as their values are not my values, but I am American.  I was born here.  I love this country.  I spent half my life in an extreme religion, and fought with all my soul to remove myself from it and its tentacles.  I will not spend another second of my life having someone tell me that I am a bad person simply because I do not agree with their view of our world.

OK.  Rant over.

Anonymous

HL

WOW. Just WOW.  I read the Guardian every day - but somehow missed this one.  Just. WOW.

"But on Monday night, we learned something new – and profoundly unsettling – about him: he may very well also be a bad person.

I don't use those words lightly, but I'm not sure how else to interpret the comments he made at a closed-door fundraiser that were posted online by Mother Jones. They are devastating. They suggest a level of meanness and divisiveness in Romney's personal character that is disturbing – even disqualifying for the nation's highest office. "

CLC

Well, then, Bren, all I can say is "BLESS HIS HEART!"  I don't know if he has one.  I am fairly convinced he has no soul, though.

Anonymous

"bless his heart" - oh, thank you Bren, I haven't heard that one in a long, long time.... dear friend in GA told me about that one years ago....

1Athena1

Excellent Guardian piece.

CLC

This from NPR regarding Romney...from the president of Pew Research Center about the most recent polling that puts Obama 8 points ahead:

"His sense of connecting with ordinary people is not very good," Kohut said, noting that Romney's low credibility numbers drove down his net personable favorability rating to below 50 percent.

"No previous presidential candidate," Kohut wrote in his analysis, "has been viewed so unfavorably at this point in a presidential campaign in Pew Research or Gallup September surveys going back to 1988."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/19/161424581/obama-opens-8-point-lead-in-pew-poll-big-advantage-with-women-blacks-young-voter

CLC

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/19/161409916/welfare-wasnt-always-a-dirty-word-in-the-romney-family

This article explains how George Romney started life out with welfare assistance...lol...man is Romney a fool.

bluedahlia

Shemonito!

CLC

gesundheit, Blue.

And I love your Dad's word.  Where does it come from?

bluedahlia

Our dialect from Southern Italy.

1Athena1

Early day from work....

The Wabbit's comment about jealousy and mine about hate makes me think of the ways in which vulnerable groups have been scapegoated in history when the person doing the scapegoating wishes to use a simple formula to explain a coutry's real or perceived ills. It has been the plight of the Jews and the Roma (since the Middle Ages), Armenians, by Turks, gays and liberals by some evangelicals, etc....

The latest scapegoats: the poor. The rationale of the scapegoaters goes like this: 'All of our country's problems are due to the "takers" and the burden they represent.'

Right wingers who defend Romney's comments WANT that conversation to begin in earnest. It is one they have been having quietly for a long time. That is why they are telling him to not back down. One of these voices is Erik Erickson, the blogger, who was interviewed on NPR this morning.

Translated into policy, this is what that scapegoat-the-poor argument would look like: 'If we can somehow cut down this wasteful system of entitlements, which breeds laziness and dependency, then we could solve the budget deficit. Let's gut Social Security and Medicare,' goes the argument, 'and other programs. That way we can save money, give the high income earners even more tax cuts and loopholes and STILL have enough money to subsidize Wall Street, keep corporations on welfare, and wage war wherever the heck we please! If people go hungry, let them die- we'll get rid of all the lazy folks. Or, they can always go to Mexico.'

Ideologically, in a nutshell, that is what I think this is all about. There IS both jealousy and hatred of the poor because, the argument insists but does not confess in public, 'what is being spent on the poor cannot be spent on Wall Street the military and the national debt' (never mind that Medicare and Social Security have their own trust funds and are not part of the main budget - these people never let facts get in the way). 'Let's start class warfare, fabricate a debate about givers vs. takers, accuse the other side of doing it, and then we will finally convince 50 percent of the electorate plus one to vote for us.'

You heard it here first!

BCO B&G is open!

pip57

Gardengumby....Your 'rant' was very enlightening and moving.  The divide in America is clearly visible to those of us looking in from the outside.  Sometimes we wonder if it is as obvious to those who live there.  Clearly, it is.

bluedahlia

OMG!  Some lie so sweetly amd twist things to the point of being insulting to the intelligence. Excuse me while I...........

1Athena1

Blue, I'm in line to use that latrine - lol! What an adorable picture.

IllinoisLady

Starting with HL and going all the way down.  All of you just make sense. I am so glad I can come here and reaffirm the things I feel but seldom can express very well.  Very touched by what you said Garden Gumby.

Hr....the Guardian piece....so right on it is almost scary. The end .

Jackie 

River_Rat

Gardengumby, loved your rant.  Right there with you.

1Athena1

Garden - you probably know this a million times, but never let yourself take the opinion strangers have of "you" seriously. Strangers to you are ignorant of you. 

I can't help but think of lions. "We" have an awful "rep" - everybody on the savannah hates us, eiher because we are a predator or because we are a rival. But we have to eat to survive and feed our cubs, so we must continue to hunt as we do, and the truth is, we are not cruel murderers but hard-working, vunerable, capable of great love and tenderness, and under immense pressure because we need meat to live. Contrary to appearances, our life is no song and dance. "We" work hard for ourselves and our loved ones (cubs and pride mates). Not even most humans have a clue. We are grossly misunderstood. Luckily, we are still here.

I find so many parallels with lions that are helpful to me when I face these existential conundrums. Hope this helps.

 

1Athena1

Watching Rachel Maddow....Mitt doing a mega-pivot in front of Latinos in Florida and telling the crowd that his father was on welfare assistance for a while and that the US is a country that "helps" people (albeit not "permanently").

Just hours earlier, he was "doubling down" on his video stance.

This is a looooong play.

1Athena1

Very quiet here since last night...

Two things this morning.

1) From Politico: Ten men were sitting at a table at a Romney fundraiser. Each had donated about $2,500 to attend the event, and a few had raised up to $50,000 for the cnadidate. They conducted a straw poll amongst themselves. The question was "Will Mitt Win?" All ten voted "no."

2) It appears that the Romney campaign has less cash on hand than was initially thought, as the figures he has reported include money which has to go to the RNC and the different campaigns, etc...  See excerpts from this New York Times piece:

"Despite what appears to be a plump bank account and an in-house production studio that cranks out multiple commercials a day, Mr. Romney's campaign has been tightfisted with its advertising budget, leaving him at a disadvantage in several crucial states as President Obama blankets them with ads.

One major reason appears to be that Mr. Romney's campaign finances have been significantly less robust than recent headlines would suggest. Much of the more than $300 million the campaign reported raising this summer is earmarked for the Republican National Committee, state Republican organizations and Congressional races, limiting the money Mr. Romney's own campaign has to spend.

With polls showing President Obama widening his lead in some of these states and the race a dead heat in others, Mr. Romney's lack of a full-throttle media campaign is risky, especially as he struggles to get his message out over the din of news about his campaign's recent setbacks.

In some states the disparity is striking. Mr. Obama and his allies are handily outspending Mr. Romney and the conservative "super PACs" working on his behalf in Colorado, Ohio and New Hampshire.

And in states like Florida, Iowa, Nevada and Virginia, where the Romney and Obama forces are roughly matching their spending dollar for dollar, the super PACs are responsible for nearly half the advertising that is benefiting the Republican nominee.

.....

Romney aides released informal dollar figures that lumped several pools of money - some available for his use, others not - into a single figure, providing a perception greater than reality: $106 million in June and $101 million in July, far more than Mr. Obama and the Democrats.

Yet those figures obscured the fact that most of the money Mr. Romney was raising was reserved for those other political entities like the Republican National Committee.

And the party committee, which Mr. Romney helped propel to record-breaking receipts in July, is allowed to spend only about $22 million on advertising that is coordinated with Mr. Romney.

Even now, a large though unknown portion of Mr. Romney's fund-raising is not going directly into his campaign account.

A closer look at Mr. Romney's own filings revealed that Mr. Obama, while trailing in overall party fund-raising, was pulling far more money than Mr. Romney into his campaign account, the most useful and flexible dollars a candidate has to spend, in part because of strong collection from small donors who could give again and again without hitting federal limits."

More here:  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/us/politics/romney-campaign-cautious-with-ad-budget-even-in-key-states.html

What is incredible, too, is that his campaign schedule is relatively thin. He has relatively few public events, relatively few trips to swing states and lots of private fundraisers. I think he must really think money buys it all.

alexandria58

I think the thin campaign schedule reflects the knowledge that he is not that good in unscripted circumstances. 

Just back from Vermont.   No news on the interview.  They said they'd get back in a week.  I think this is confirming my bad feeling.  So I am going to do some writing today and consider other options.