No…..I’m not talking about “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” The Republican Golden rule is more straight forward and to the point “The men with the gold make the rules!”
Mitt Romney and his supporters are the men with the gold and if they get voted into office they will be ones that will make the rules. I say “they” because the rich supporters of Mitt Romney (the 1%) are not donating the outrageous sums of money (come on $20,000,000 from one man alone!) shown below out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing so they can be the ones (i.e. the 1%) making the rules that that the remainder of us (the 99%) have to abide by. I guarantee you that these rules will help the 1% at the expense of the 99%.
Checkout the following information I extracted from an article on today’s Huffington Post to see what I mean. After that, you have all you need to know about voting.
Full list of Forbes 400 donors to Romney, the RNC and Restore Our Future (a Republican super PAC).
|Name||Net Worth||Source||Romney for President||RNC||Restore Our Future|
|David Koch||$31 B||diversified||$5,000||$4,200|
|Charles Koch||$31 B||diversified||$30,800|
|Jim Walton||$26.8 B||Wal-Mart||$5,000||$200,000|
|Alice Walton||$26.3 B||Wal-Mart||$2,500||$200,000|
|Sheldon Adelson||$20.5 B||casinos||$5,000||$30,800||$20,000,000|
|Jacqueline Mars||$17 B||candy||$5,000||$23,500|
|Steve Ballmer||$15.9 B||Microsoft||$15,000|
|Carl Icahn||$14.8 B||leveraged buyouts||$2,500|
|Phil Knight||$13.1 B||Nike||$5,000||$30,800|
|Donald Bren||$13 B||real estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Len Blavatnik||$12.5 B||diversified||$2,500|
|Ronald Perelman||$12 B||leveraged buyouts||$3,000|
|Abigail Johnson||$11.8 B||money management||$5,000||$30,800|
|John Paulson||$11 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800||$1,000,000|
|Jack Taylor||$11 B||Enterprise Rent-A-Car||$5,000||$10,000|
|Harold Hamm||$9.7 B||oil & gas||$2,500||$30,800||$985,000|
|Richard Kinder||$9.4 B||pipelines||$5,000||$6,700|
|Andrew Beal||$8.4 B||banks, real estate||$200,000|
|Philip Anschutz||$7.6 B||investments||$30,800|
|James Goodnight||$7.3 B||software||$5,000||$30,800|
|Harold Simmons||$7.1 B||investments||$2,500||$1,200,000|
|Ira Rennert||$6.5 B||investments||$5,000||$20,000||$1,000,000|
|John Malone||$5.6 B||cable television||$5,000||$30,800|
|David Tepper||$5.5 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800||$375,000|
|Jeffrey Hildebrand||$5.5 B||oil||$2,500||$200,000|
|Jim Kennedy||$5.4 B||media||$5,000||$30,800|
|Stephen Schwarzman||$5.2 B||private equity||$5,000||$30,800|
|Dennis Washington||$5.2 B||construction, mining||$5,000||$50,000|
|Ray Lee Hunt||$5.2 B||oil, real estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Richard LeFrak||$5.2 B||real estate||$5,000||$25,000|
|Richard DeVos||$5.1 B||Amway||$5,000||$30,800|
|Robert Rowling||$4.9 B||investments||$5,000||$24,200||$100,000|
|Hank Meijer||$4.9 B||supermarkets||$5,000||$28,300|
|Charles Johnson||$4.7 B||Money Management||$5,000||$30,800||$50,000|
|Scott Duncan||$4.7 B||pipelines||$2,250|
|Rupert Johnson Jr.||$4.6 B||money management||$5,000||$20,000|
|Thomas Peterffy||$4.6 B||discount brokerage||$5,000||$30,800|
|Trevor Rees-Jones||$4.5 B||oil & Gas||$5,000||$30,800||$100,000|
|Stephen Ross||$4.4 B||real estate||$5,000||$20,800||$100,000|
|Leslie Wexner||$4.4 B||retail||$5,000||$250,000|
|Bruce Kovner||$4.3 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$23,300||$1,000,000|
|Leonard Stern||$4.2 B||real estate||$2,500|
|S. Truett Cathy||$4.2 B||Chick-fil-A||$2,500|
|Henry Kravis||$4 B||leveraged buyouts||$5,000||$30,800||$200,000|
|Thomas Frist Jr.||$4 B||health care||$2,500|
|Barbara Gage||$4 B||hotels, restaurants||$500|
|William Koch||$4 B||oil, investments||$4,000,000|
|Sam Zell||$3.8 B||real estate, private equity||$2,500||$9,800||$180,000|
|Charles Schwab||$3.7 B||discount brokerage||$5,000||$30,800||$125,000|
|George Roberts||$3.7 B||leveraged buyouts||$5,000||$30,800|
|Edward Roski Jr.||$3.7 B||real estate||$3,700||$30,800|
|Leon Black||$3.5 B||private equity||$5,000||$30,800|
|Tom Love||$3.5 B||retail & gas stations||$5,000||$7,500|
|Judy Love||$3.5 B||retail & gas stations||$5,000||$7,500|
|Edward Lampert||$3.2 B||hedge funds||$2,500|
|Ken Griffin||$3.1 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800||$1,550,000|
|Donald Trump||$3.1 B||Television, Real Estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Whitney MacMillan||$3 B||Cargill Inc.||$3,000|
|Charles Dolan||$3 B||cable television||$5,000||$20,800|
|John Catsimatidis||$3 B||oil, real estate, supermarkets||$5,000||$30,800|
|Terrence Pegula||$3 B||natural gas||$5,000||$30,800|
|Jerry Speyer||$3 B||real estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Archie Emmerson||$3 B||timberland, lumber mills||$5,000||$30,000|
|Riley Bechtel||$2.9 B||engineering, construction||$5,000||$7,500|
|Stephen Bechtel Jr.||$2.9 B||engineering, construction||$5,000||$30,000|
|Diane Hendricks||$2.9 B||roofing||$5,000||$30,800|
|Doris Fisher||$2.9 B||Gap||$2,500|
|Warren Stephens||$2.7 B||investment banking||$2,500||$25,500||$500,000|
|Stanley Druckenmiller||$2.7 B||hedge funds||$5,000|
|Bernard Marcus||$2.7 B||Home Depot||$5,000||$30,800||$20,000|
|Helen Johnson-Leipold||$2.7 B||SC Johnson & Sons||$2,500|
|Michael Ilitch||$2.7 B||pizza||$5,000||$30,800|
|Marian Ilitch||$2.7 B||pizza||$5,000||$30,800|
|Jeremy Jacobs Sr.||$2.7 B||sports concessions||$5,000||$30,800|
|Jerry Jones||$2.7 B||Dallas Cowboys||$2,500|
|Julian Robertson Jr.||$2.6 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800||$2,250,000|
|Herbert Kohler Jr.||$2.6 B||plumbing fixtures||$5,000||$30,800|
|David Sun||$2.6 B||computer hardware||$2,500|
|Phillip Ruffin||$2.5 B||casinos, real estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Anthony Pritzker||$2.5 B||hotels, investments||$5,000||$30,800|
|Shahid Khan||$2.5 B||auto parts||$5,000||$30,800|
|Randal Kirk||$2.4 B||pharmaceuticals||$5,000||$25,600|
|Phillip Frost||$2.4 B||pharmaceuticals||$5,000||$30,800|
|H. Wayne Huizenga||$2.4 B||investments||$2,500||$30,800|
|A. Jerrold Perenchio||$2.4 B||television||$5,000||$1,500,000|
|Igor Olenicoff||$2.4 B||real estate||$1,000|
|Mary Malone||$2.4 B||Campbell Soup||$1,000|
|Daniel Och||$2.3 B||hedge funds||$2,500|
|Wilbur Ross Jr.||$2.3 B||investments||$5,000||$30,800||$100,000|
|John Fisher||$2.3 B||Gap||$5,000|
|Stewart Resnick||$2.2 B||agriculture, water||$5,000||$30,800|
|Leon Cooperman||$2.2 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800|
|Thomas Pritzker||$2.2 B||hotels, investments||$2,500|
|Henry Hillman||$2.2 B||investments||$5,000||$30,800|
|Herbert Simon||$2.2 B||real estate||$5,000||$22,500|
|William Wrigley Jr.||$2.2 B||chewing gum||$2,500|
|Anita Zucker||$2.1 B||chemicals||$5,000||$5,000|
|Walter Scott Jr.||$2.1 B||construction, telecom||$5,000||$30,800|
|Stanley Hubbard||$2.1 B||DirecTV||$2,500||$30,800|
|Jim Davis||$2.1 B||New Balance||$5,000||$1,000,000|
|Herbert Allen Jr.||$2 B||investment banking||$5,000|
|J. Christopher Reyes||$2 B||food distribution||$2,500||$100,000|
|Edward Bass||$2 B||oil, investments||$5,000||$30,000|
|Lee Bass||$2 B||oil, investments||$5,000|
|Richard Peery||$2 B||real estate||$5,000||$30,800|
|Andrew Cherng||$2 B||Panda Restaurant Group||$3,750|
|Peggy Cherng||$2 B||Panda Restaurant Group||$3,750|
|Daniel D’Aniello||$1.9 B||leveraged buyouts||$2,500|
|Daniel Gilbert||$1.9 B||Quicken Loans||$5,000||$6,700|
|Alec Gores||$1.9 B||private equity||$5,000|
|Michael Jaharis||$1.9 B||pharmaceuticals||$2,500||$30,800|
|Richard Marriott||$1.9 B||hotels||$5,000||$28,800||$1,000,000|
|George Argyros||$1.9 B||real estate, investments||$5,000||$30,800|
|Clayton Mathile||$1.9 B||pet food||$2,500||$30,800|
|Bennett Dorrance||$1.9 B||Campbell Soup||$5,000||$5,000|
|B. Wayne Hughes||$1.9 B||self storage||$2,500|
|Dean White||$1.8 B||billboards, hotels||$5,000||$30,800|
|Ken Fisher||$1.8 B||money management||$2,500|
|Robert McNair||$1.8 B||energy, sports||$5,000||$1,000,000|
|Drayton McLane Jr.||$1.8 B||Wal-Mart, logistics||$250,000|
|Leandro Rizzuto||$1.8 B||consumer products||$2,500|
|Frederick Smith||$1.8 B||FedEx||$5,000|
|Thomas Siebel||$1.8 B||business software||$5,000||$25,800|
|Jonathan Nelson||$1.7 B||leveraged buyouts||$2,500|
|Glenn Dubin||$1.7 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$2,500|
|Meg Whitman||$1.7 B||eBay||$100,000|
|Joshua Harris||$1.6 B||private equity||$5,000||$30,800|
|Stewart Rahr||$1.6 B||drug distribution||$1,000|
|Bill Marriott Jr.||$1.6 B||hotels||$4,100||$30,800||$1,000,000|
|Kenneth Langone||$1.6 B||investments||$2,500|
|Norman Braman||$1.6 B||art, car dealerships||$5,000||$25,800|
|Marc Rowan||$1.5 B||private equity||$2,500||$220,000|
|Thomas Kaplan||$1.5 B||Investments||$5,000||$30,800||$100,000|
|James Pritzker||$1.5 B||hotels, investments||$4,900||$30,800|
|Richard Schulze||$1.5 B||Best Buy||$2,500||$30,800|
|Bob Parsons||$1.5 B||web hosting||$1,000,000|
|Craig McCaw||$1.5 B||telecom||$5,000||$5,000|
|James Dinan||$1.4 B||hedge funds||$2,500|
|Michael Price||$1.4 B||investments||$5,000||$20,000|
|Farris Wilks||$1.4 B||natural gas||$5,000||$20,000|
|Henry Ross Perot Jr.||$1.4 B||computer services, real estate||$3,200|
|Richard Hayne||$1.4 B||Urban Outfitters||$5,000||$30,800|
|Scott Cook||$1.4 B||Intuit||$5,000||$30,800|
|Louis Bacon||$1.3 B||hedge funds||$500,000|
|Daniel Loeb||$1.3 B||hedge Funds||$2,500||$30,800|
|Richard Scaife||$1.3 B||investments||$5,000||$30,800||$82,500|
|Billy Joe McCombs||$1.3 B||real estate, oil, cars||$5,000||$50,000|
|Mark Stevens||$1.2 B||venture capital||$2,500||$30,800|
|Henry Swieca||$1.2 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$22,500|
|Richard Chilton Jr||$1.2 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800|
|Patrick Ryan||$1.2 B||insurance||$5,000||$30,800|
|Nelson Peltz||$1.2 B||investments||$5,000||$30,800||$50,000|
|C. Dean Metropoulos||$1.2 B||investments||$30,800|
|Christopher Cline||$1.2 B||coal||$5,000||$30,800|
|T. Boone Pickens||$1.2 B||oil & gas, investments||$5,000||$30,800|
|Jimmy Haslam||$1.2 B||retail||$5,000||$30,000|
|Bruce Nordstrom||$1.2 B||Retailing||$5,000|
|Tom Benson||$1.2 B||New Orleans Saints||$5,000||$30,800|
|James Clark||$1.2 B||Netscape||$5,000||$3,000|
|Kenny Troutt||$1.2 B||telecommunications||$5,000||$30,800|
|Alexander Rovt||$1.15 B||fertilizer, real estate||$500|
|Paul Singer||$1.1 B||hedge funds||$5,000||$30,800||$1,000,000|
|George Joseph||$1.1 B||insurance||$2,500|
|Dan Snyder||$1.1 B||Washington Redskins||$5,000||$30,800|
(Sources: Forbes.com and Federal Election Commission.)
If their man [i.e Mitt Romney] wins election next Tuesday, these wealthy contributors are poised to have his ear.
Much of Romney’s platform caters directly to the policies they desire. Further tax cuts for upper incomes, capital gains, interest and dividends; the elimination of taxes on estate transfers; lower corporate tax rates; and the implementation of a territorial tax system all favor the wealthy over the working and middle classes.
“The initial effect would be to give very large tax cuts to wealthy people — and that’s clear — and to corporations which they own,” said Bob McIntyre, president of Citizens for Tax Justice.
The Romney policies would disproportionately aid financial-sector billionaires, who make most of their money through capital gains and carried interest. Fifty-eight members of the Forbes 400 who have supported Romney hail from the financial and investments industries. They have given a total of $12.9 million to help the Republican candidate.
Romney’s policies are also very favorable to the fossil fuel industry, including reduced regulation, cuts in the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget and more areas open to drilling. Oil billionaire Harold Hamm, one of Romney’s top energy advisers and a major donor to both the Romney campaign and Restore Our Future, would profit handsomely from Romney’s energy agenda.
Then there’s casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the largest donor to Romney’s efforts. Adelson, who has given $20 million to Restore Our Future and $35,800 to Romney and the RNC, has made it clear that he opposes unions, supports lower taxes and Israel’s right-wing government, and wants an investigation into his company’s China business to be quashed.
In this, the last post in this series, I had planned to take Mr. Mourdock’s position to its logical extreme (as distasteful as it is to me) as follows:
- If it was God’s will for a woman who was raped to become pregnant (this was the gist of Mr. Mourdock’s original statement) then
- It follows that it was God’s will for the woman to be raped then
- It follows that the rapist was doing God’s will so it does not seem fair that they should be punished (hey they were only doing God’s will)
I was planning to do this to show the ABSURDITY of the original statement but I have decided it is a waste my time because none of the people that are supporting Mr. Mourdock (the ones that I would be trying to influence) would be able to follow any logical train of thought.
So let’s end it this way. Mitt Romney selected Richard Mourdock as the only Senate Candidate that he made an ad for. When Mr. Mourdock made his outrageous statement, Mitt continued to back him and did not pull his ad. I think about this says more about Mitt Romney than Mr. Mourdock’s statement says about him. Think about this if you are even considering a vote for Mitt.
I am so glad this series of posts is over. Writing about people like Mr. Mourdock makes me so angry that I can barely contain myself. I look forward to celebrating his defeat on Tuesday (along with the defeat of his best buddy Mitt Romney).
President Obama has spent the last four years working to getting us out of two wars started by the previous Republican administration. We are now out of Iraq and on the way out of Afghanistan thanks to him. We could probably end our post at that and make the point that we do not want another Republican at the helm of US foreign policy. But, for completeness, let’s zero in on what we could expect with regards to foreign policy from a Romney administration.
Mitt Romney’s first chance to show what he can do from a foreign policy perspective came with his trip to London this summer. You probably remember what an EPIC FAIL it was but just to remind you, here is a great video about it.
His second chance to show what kind of president he would be from a foreign policy perspective came with the tragic attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Rather than waiting for the facts and giving a measured response he saw an opportunity for cheap political benefit and jumped at it. I think the Obama campaign characterized it correctly
When our U.S. diplomats were attacked in Libya, The New York Times said Romney’s knee-jerk response ‘showed an extraordinary lack of presidential character, and even Republican experts said Romney’s remarks were ‘the worst possible reaction to what happened.’
That about sums it up for me!
Not the kind of person that I want handling foreign policy for the US.
Here is a great post from the-reaction.blogspot.com on this topic.
Obama on Romney: Ready, Fire, Aim!
|You didn’t realize I was quite this clueless, did you?|
According to CBS News, President Obama used some gentle humour to address Mitt Romney’s widely lambasted criticism of Obama’s handling of recent violence in Egypt and Libya:
“There’s a broader lesson to be learned here,” Mr. Obama told “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft at the White House. “And I — you know, Governor Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later. And as president, one of the things I’ve learned is you can’t do that. That, you know, it’s important for you to make sure that the statements that you make are backed up by the facts. And that you’ve thought through the ramifications before you make ’em.”
Asked if Romney’s attacks were irresponsible, the president replied, “I’ll let the American people judge that.”
You see, Mitt, that’s what a measured response sounds like.
On this, it was easy to think of the proverbial “3:00 a.m. phone call” and who would handle a national crisis better.
James Fallows made the point as comparative responses were unfolding earlier in the day:
On the longer-term temperamental politics, this is a very vivid example of what people mean when they talk about “the 3 a.m. phone call.” In these next few hours let us look very carefully at the first-reaction quick responses, and then the considered second-take positions, by the two candidates.* One or the other of them will be in charge of U.S. response to similar inevitable-surprise episodes in the next four years.
And just one more comment, this time from Josh Marshall at TPM:
Some moments show you when a candidate is ready or not to become President of the United States. I suspect last night will become one of those moments for Mitt Romney. The verdict will not be positive.
As it turns out, Mitt Romney isn’t the only friend of Richard “Rape Is God’s Will”. Even though Mitt is his biggest supporter (having not pulled the ad that he made for Richard “Rape Is God’s Will” Mourdock) the whole Republican Party is lining up behind him to save him from himself. As I have pointed out before the “Rape Issue” is a systemic issue across the Republican Party and not isolated to a few isolated kooks like Todd Akins and Richard “Rape Is God’s Will” Mourdock.
To learn more about how the whole Republican Party is lining up to support Richard “Rape Is God’s Will” Mourdock, read the following article from Portico.com.
Stay tuned tomorrow for the final post in this series before the election. in that post we will explore what “Rape Is God’s Will” implies if you think about it a little deeper. Trust me, it is pretty troubling.
|GOP spends big to save Richard Mourdock
By: Manu Raju
November 1, 2012 06:25 PM EDT
|Republicans are spending big to salvage Richard Mourdock’s candidacy in the aftermath of his comments on rape and pregnancy that have imperiled GOP hopes of taking back the Senate majority.About $4 million is being spent across the airwaves in the final week of the campaign to bolster Mourdock, from the likes of well-known Republican groups like American Crossroads, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Club for Growth. And that comes as both sides acknowledge that Mourdock has taken a hit in the polls since his comments. Democrats are now more confident than ever that their candidate, Rep. Joe Donnelly, is poised to pull off one of the biggest upsets of the cycle.
Unlike the Todd Akin situation, the influx of outside money shows how quickly Republicans nationally have rallied behind Mourdock after he roiled the political world by saying God intended for pregnancies to occur from rape. Facing a steep climb to net the four seats needed to win the majority — or three if Mitt Romney wins the White House — Republicans must hold the Indiana seat, which had been occupied by veteran Sen. Richard Lugar since 1977 until Mourdock won the GOP primary earlier this year.
“It’s a coin flip,” one Republican involved in the race acknowledged.
Sensing fresh opportunity, Democrats have hardly been sitting on their wallets. Outside groups — including the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Majority PAC — are spending about $3 million in the campaign’s final week to boost Donnelly, a three-term congressman from South Bend. And with Republicans poised to make gains up-and-down the ticket in the state, Indiana Democratic candidates from governor down to the House are trying to tie Mourdock’s growing unpopularity to their opponents in the final push for voters.
“Richard Mourdock shocked and embarrassed Hoosiers,” said Dan Parker, the Indiana Democratic Party chairman. “It’s no wonder he’s become toxic on the campaign trail.”
Democrats circulated a poll Wednesday that showed a 9-point uptick in Mourdock’s unfavorability rating, with 49 percent of Hoosier voters holding a negative view of the state treasurer. It also found Donnelly up 7 points in a three-way race that also includes Libertarian candidate Andrew Horning, a stark reversal in a race long seen as a sure GOP win.
But Brose McVey, a senior official at the Mourdock campaign, dismissed the Donnelly poll, calling it “out of whack” with all the other polls that showed the race was “roughly tied.”
“Yes we’ve got an increase in unfavorable, but we’ve seen improvement in that in recent days,” McVey said. “We’re very, very pleased with the numbers we’re getting lately. We sense a little bit of a nice trend line forming since about Sunday. To be honest with you, we know we’re going to have a favorable turnout.”
Republicans believe Mourdock will ride the coattails of Mitt Romney and GOP Rep. Mike Pence, who is running for governor. And they note that there’s been a sharp decrease in the early vote in the Democratic stronghold of Indianapolis, which may bode well for the embattled GOP candidate.
Still, there’s no dispute that Mourdock’s rocky 10 days has made the race much tighter than Republicans had anticipated in a state President Barack Obama has effectively conceded. Both sides are now eagerly awaiting a non-partisan Howey-DePauw Battleground Poll to be released Friday.
In the interim, Democrats believe Mourdock remains a major drag to Republicans throughout Indiana. The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, John Gregg, and an outside group have released campaign ads likening Mourdock’s hard-edged politics to Pence, the favorite in the governor’s race. And Gregg’s campaign claims it has cut into Pence’s double-digit lead and narrowed it to within 3 points in the aftermath of the Mourdock fallout.
“Now Richard Mourdock says pregnancy from rape is ‘something God intended,” said an ad from a Democratic-allied outside group called Believe in Indiana. “He’s just like Mike Pence.”
It’s little surprise that Democrats are training their fire on Mourdock. Internal Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee polls conducted in late September in Donnelly’s House district found just 32 percent of voters viewed the Republican favorably. Fresher polling even before the rape comments found Mourdock’s unfavorability numbers growing to 40 percent, according to a Democratic campaign operative.
The GOP candidate in that district, Jackie Walorski, has faced an attack ad from the Democratic-aligned House Majority PAC, calling her a “tea party extremist just like Richard Mourdock.”
Republicans dismissed the attacks.
“Jackie Walorski is an independent voice for Hoosiers and anybody that wants to paint a different picture is wasting their time,” said Katie Prill, spokeswoman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.
In a recent interview, Mourdock cited the negative attacks as a prime reason for the Senate race being so tight, calling himself a “punching bag” for Democrats.
But Republicans have punched back at Donnelly, trying to undercut his efforts to sell himself as a bipartisan moderate. Including $500,000 spent by Mourdock, about $4.1 million in ads are reserved from Oct. 30-Nov. 6 to bolster the GOP candidate. Of that total, about $1.5 million is from Crossroads and $1.4 million from the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Groups tied to Sen. Rand Paul and the billionaire Joe Ricketts are also engaged in the race.
“What would a vote for Joe Donnelly really mean?” said a 30-second ad by the Club for Growth. “It would mean a U.S. Senate controlled by liberals.”
Do you believe in Karma? I do……and now even more so.
Richard “Rape is God’s will” Mourdock, and his biggest supporter Mitt Romney appear to have jointly eliminated any hope the Republicans have of capturing a majority in the Senate.
- Mitt could have done the right thing.
- Mitt could have rejected the religious extremist view of Richard “Rape is God’s will” Mourdock and withdrawn his support.
- Mitt could have cut his losses and admitted that he made made a mistake but Mitt has proven that he is not that kind of guy which is quite troubling.
Ask yourself…..is this the kind of man I want running the United States.
Think about Mitt and his best buddy Bibi and ask yourself when (notice I didn’t say if) they get us involved in a major war in the Middle East will Mitt do the right thing once it is clear it is a mistake. Will he admit it and get us out or will he follow the same strategy he followed with his support for Richard “Rape is God’s will” Mourdock and double down no matter what the cost in American lives. Are you willing to take that chance? I can tell you that I’m not…….
IF there is a God I am pretty sure that he does not cause women to be be raped no matter what Richard “Rape is God’s will” Mourdock says. IF there is a God I imagine that he is somewhere laughing his/her ass off as he manipulates the electorate to make sure that Mitt and his best buddy Richard “Rape is God’s will” Mourdock go down in flames with the rest of the Republican Party.
If you are interested in the polling numbers that caused me to write this post, take a look at the following article from Huffington Post.
2012 Senate Race Polls:
Richard Mourdock’s Plunge
Dampens GOP’s Majority Hopes
Two new independent polls of the Indiana Senate race show Richard Mourdock (R) losing significant ground to his opponent, Rep. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), in the wake of his statement claiming that pregnancies from rape are “something God intended to happen.”
A Howey/DePauw University Battleground poll released Friday morning found Donnelly leading Mourdock 47 percent to 36 percent, up from a 2 point lead in September. Meanwhile, a new automated Rasmussen poll found Donnelly leading Mourdock by 3 points, up from a 5 point deficit just three weeks earlier.
Donnelly now leads Mourdock by 3.5 points in the HuffPost Pollster estimate, which is based on all available public polling, including internal polls from Mourdock’s campaign that continue to show him with a narrow lead.
With all partisan polls filtered out of that estimate, Donnelly’s lead expands to 5 points. HuffPost Pollster has officially shifted the rating of this race from “tossup” to “leaning Democratic.”
If Donnelly goes on to win in Indiana, the Republicans’ chances of winning a majority in the Senate are very low, as indicated by HuffPost Pollster Senate Outlook. Assuming that independent former Gov. Angus King of Maine — who continues to lead in the polls — caucuses with Democrats as expected, Republicans would need to win eight more competitive races to get to 50 seats, which would amount to a majority if Mitt Romney wins the presidency, with Paul Ryan casting the tie-breaking vote as vice president.
The Senate races in Nebraska, Nevada, Arizona, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Virginia, Montana and Massachusetts present them with their best opportunity to reach that number. However, Democratic candidates currently lead in five of those eight races, according to the most recent HuffPost Pollster estimates.
The GOP’s more unlikely prospects lie in Senate races such as those in Connecticut, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri and Florida, all of which feature Democratic candidates leading by at least 5 points.
However, if the Democrats manage to win all six races currently rated as “tossups” and all of the seats “leaning” their way, they could actually expand their majority by as many as four seats.
Here are the significant developments in other Senate races since Monday.
Elizabeth Warren (D) got a strong result from a new Suffolk University poll in Massachusetts, which shows her leading Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) by 7 points, with only 1 percent of voters still undecided. Meanwhile, Republican-leaning Kimball Political Consulting found Brown ahead by 2 points. The two candidates agreed to cancel their final debate, scheduled for Oct. 30, due to damage caused by Hurricane Sandy, and Brown refused to reschedule the debate for Thursday. With no other major public events scheduled between now and Election Day, the focus turns to the two campaigns’ highly touted turnout operations, especially in the aftermath of the storm. Warren currently leads Brown by 4.2 points in the HuffPost Pollster estimate and this race is still rated as “leaning Democratic.”
Former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R) has pulled nearly even with Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) in the open Wisconsin Senate race, according to recent polls. Baldwin’s lead has shrunk to just 1 point in the current HuffPost Pollster estimate, and this race rating has shifted from “leaning Democratic” to “tossup.” Of the five polls taken of both the state’s presidential and Senate races over the last week, Thompson has outperformed Mitt Romney by an average of exactly 5 points. If Romney even comes within a few points of winning Wisconsin, it significantly boosts Thompson’s chances. If Romney wins the state, it’s hard to see how Thompson loses.
Polls also show the open Virginia Senate race as having tightened over the past few weeks. Former Gov. Tim Kaine (D) now leads former Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) by1.4 points in the HuffPost Pollster estimate, but his fate now appears to be tied to President Barack Obama’s performance, who currently leads Romney by a similarly slim margin in the state.
The Senate race in Montana continues to be one of the closest races in the country. Since September, neither Sen. Jon Tester (D) nor Rep. Denny Rehberg (R) has led by more than a 3 point margin in any publicly released poll. This past week, two independent polls, from Pharos Research Group and Rasmussen, both found Tester leading Rehberg by just 1 point. Tester holds a statistically insignificant 1.9 point lead in the current HuffPost Pollster estimate of the race.
While former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D) saw some encouraging polling numbers last week in Nebraska, a new automated We Ask America poll found him trailing state Sen. Deb Fischer (R) by 13 points — similar to the margins she enjoyed over the summer. Since this race has been so sparsely polled, this result was enough to shift Fischer’s advantage up to 10 points in the HuffPost Pollster estimate and keep this race rated as “strong Republican.”
HuffPost Pollster rates a race as a “tossup” if the polling margin separating two candidates is less than 3 percentage points in the Pollster estimate and there have been at least five polls in that state in the last three weeks. A race is designated as “leaning” toward one party if a candidate is leading by 3 to 6 percentage points in that estimate. If a candidate is leading by more than 6 percentage points, it is rated as “strong” Democrat or Republican.
If there have been fewer than five polls in the last three weeks in any given race, composite ratings are used from three respected election handicappers: the Cook Political Report, the Rothenberg Political Report and Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball.
Here is a greatest hits from Richard Mourdock, and by association, from his biggest supporter Mitt Romney. Mitt still stands behind this man’s campaign for the US Senate…..Is this really what you want as your next President?
Here is a great post from liberalvaluesblog.com to make my closing argument on this Republican Commandment. The post is based on comments made during the Republican primaries.
I have made it a point to try to keep religion out of political posts on this blog. I don’t care about anyone’s religion, including Mitt Romney’s! Religious freedom is why this country was founded and I ask you to think about that as you read the article below.
Santorum Upset That Obama Agenda Not Based On Bible
February 19, 2012 — Ron Chusid
In a post yesterday I contrasted the false conservative narrative that liberals support a big government to impose their views upon others with the actual fact that a large segment of the conservative movement actually does see the role of government as imposing their religious views on the country. Rick Santorum repeatedly demonstrates this, doing so again yesterday in attacking Obama for having an agenda which is not “based on Bible.”
Newt Gingrich has made similar arguments with his attacks on Obama as a “secular socialist.” (Besides being wrong in seeing secular as undesirable, he is wrong in calling Obama a socialist. Gingrich is using the new conservative definition of socialism as supporting a few percentage point increase in the marginal tax rate of multimillionaires and lower tax rates on the middle class, which has nothing to do with any conventional definition of the term.) Ron Paul has also shown a preference for theocracy, while Mitt Romney is willing to take multiple positions on the issue.
Contrast Santorum and Gingrich with a previous Catholic candidate for president, John F. Kennedy:
I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish, where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.
John Kennedy and Barack Obama are both following in the tradition of the Founding Fathers who understood the importance of creating a secular republic with separation of church and state. Nobody should be able to use the powers of government to impose their religious views upon others.
Thanks to the Huffington Post for this article……
John Koster, GOP House Candidate:
‘The Rape Thing’ Does Not Excuse Abortions
Asked at a campaign fundraiser whether he supports abortion rights in some situations, Koster replied that he only supports abortion in cases where a woman’s life is in danger.
“Incest is so rare, I mean, it’s so rare,” he said. “But the rape thing– you know, I know a woman who was raped and kept the child, gave it up for adoption, and she doesn’t regret it.”
He added, “On the rape thing, it’s like, how does putting more violence onto a woman’s body and taking the life of an innocent child that’s a consequence of this crime — how does that make it better? You know what I mean?”
His Democratic opponent, Suzan DelBene, supports abortion rights. Her campaign criticized Koster for trivializing rape.
“Dismissing it as a ‘thing’ is an awfully casual way for him to talk about it, and I think it highlights how little he understands the ramifications and the seriousness of the issue. So that’s very problematic,” DelBene spokesperson Viet Shelton told TPM. “And the way he approaches the issue and the policy conclusions he comes to, it just highlights the serious problem we have when politicians are trying to dictate women’s health care decisions.”
In response to the controversy over his comments, Koster campaign manager Larry Stickney told the AP that Koster clearly takes rape seriously because he has strongly advocated cracking down on sex offenders.
Republican lawmakers and congressional candidates have made headlines several times over the past few months for their comments about rape and abortion. Indiana GOP Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said that pregnancy from rape is “something God intended,” Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) said victims of “legitimate rape” almost never become pregnant, and Rep. Tom Smith (R-Pa.) compared pregnancy as a result of rape to “having a baby out of wedlock.”
Mitt is still supporting his buddy Richard “rape is God’s will” Mourdock.
Have you decided how you feel about this?
Have you decided whether when a woman gets raped she should be forced to have the baby?
Here is a great article from Huffington Post about how the majority of the Americans feel about that topic. See which side you are on?
Vast Majority Support Legal Abortion
For Rape Victims
According to the survey, at least 70 percent of respondents support keeping abortion legal for all of the three scenarios. In the individual cases, 74 percent said abortion should be legal in cases where the mother’s life is endangered by pregnancy, 70 percent said it should be legal when the mother’s health is endangered, and 74 percent said it should be legal when a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape or incest. No more than 14 percent of respondents said that abortion should be illegal in all cases.
Those findings are similar to those of a CNN survey conducted in August, which found even higher percentages saying abortion should be legal in cases when a woman’s life was in danger (88 percent), when her health was in danger (83 percent) or when she was a victim of rape or incest (83 percent). A higher percentage of respondents to the HuffPost/YouGov poll said they were not sure, and similarly small percentage of respondents to the CNN polls said abortion should be illegal in all cases.
In the HuffPost/YouGov poll, a separate sampling found 27 percent of respondents said they believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances, 22 percent said that it should generally be legal but with some restrictions, and 30 percent said it should be illegal except in special circumstances. Fifteen percent said it should always be illegal — similar to the percentage who said abortion should be illegal even when a woman’s life or health was in danger or when she was the victim of rape or incest.
Women in the sample which asked the more general question were more likely than men to say that abortion should be legal in most or all cases — 52 percent for women versus 44 percent for men. But women asked the three questions about abortion in certain cases were less likely than men to say that abortion should be legal in those cases.
Because these questions were asked of different sets of respondents, this discrepancy could be a result of variation between the two samples, or it could be that women who oppose abortion are less likely than men to support exceptions. Women in the sample asked the more general question were more likely than men to believe abortion should be legal in all cases, but only by a one percentage point margin, which is not a large enough margin to say with certainty that this would be true of the general population, because of sampling error.
Respondents to the poll were also more likely to oppose another key aspect of social conservatives’ agenda: defunding Planned Parenthood. A 48 percent to 32 percent plurality of respondents opposed cutting federal government funding for Planned Parenthood clinics. Female respondents were more likely to oppose cutting off Planned Parenthood funding by a 27 percentage point margin, whereas for men the margin was only 5 percentage points. The survey found that more than a quarter of women (28 percent) and 10 percent of men say they’ve visited a Planned Parenthood clinic personally for health care services.
The HuffPost/YouGov poll was conducted from Oct. 26-28 among 2,000 U.S. adults using a sample drawn from YouGov’s opt-in online panel that was selected to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population. Factors considered include age, race, gender, education, employment, income, marital status, number of children, voter registration, time and location of Internet access, interest in politics, religion, and church attendance. The margin of error for the complete sample was 2.8 percentage points.
The questions about legality of abortion were each asked of half the sample: 999 respondents in sample A saw the question about whether abortion should generally be legal, and 1,001 respondents in sample B saw the three questions about whether abortion should be legal under specific circumstances.