Tag Archives: Willard Mitt Romney

Ready for Romney to be Ready for Hillary

As the list of Republicans who are officially With Her seems to lengthen daily, the world awaits word from Donald Trump’s immediate predecessor as Republican candidate for President.

Back when it still appeared Trump might be stopped, Mitt Romney famously dedicated an entire speech to encouraging other Republicans to oppose him. At the time he gave that speech, Romney was not willing to endorse Hillary Clinton:

Continue reading Ready for Romney to be Ready for Hillary


Careful what you call Chris Christie’s endorsement of Donald Trump

Conservatives and other media types are tripping over themselves to point out the absurdity inherent in Chris Christie’s recent endorsement of Donald Trump. And they’re right to do so. Whether he made the move out of spite for Marco Rubio or simply because he is angling for a cabinet position in the seemingly-inevitable Trump administration, Christie clearly has some ulterior motive.

But there’s no need to point to Christie’s past comments on the Donald as evidence for his sincerity deficit. Indeed, to prove his decision to back Trump falls somewhere short of wholehearted, one needn’t look past the Wall Street Journal’s coverage:*

Continue reading Careful what you call Chris Christie’s endorsement of Donald Trump

Who exactly did Stephen Colbert just accuse of being Michael Medved?

Late night TV hosts sometimes understandably like to make sure their viewers are still awake. John Oliver, for instance, delights in mislabeling his maps just to keep you on your toes:

Continue reading Who exactly did Stephen Colbert just accuse of being Michael Medved?

How in the world did the Pentagon spend $300,000 studying Putin’s body language? I’ve got answers

Jon Stewart last night made hay with the revelation that the Pentagon has spent $300,000 studying Vladimir Putin’s body language while trying to resolve the ongoing situation in Crimea.

But how in the world did they spend all that money? Part of the answer can probably be determined by reading past the headline and checking the details of the story — that $300,000 was spent over five years, and analyzed the body language of numerous world leaders other than Putin. Imagine one low-level analyst employed full-time just to do that, and the amount begins to sound slightly less ridiculous. At least, government has come up with more absurd ways to waste money.

But I prefer a different theory. Here’s where I like to think that $300,000 for studying body language ended up:

Continue reading How in the world did the Pentagon spend $300,000 studying Putin’s body language? I’ve got answers

Obama finally goes on that apology tour

When your party’s recent foreign policy track record consists of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the obvious move is to draw attention to your opponent’s shortcomings — and away from your own diplomatic inadequacy.

Which explains why Republicans have spent so much time blasting Obama for the “apology tour” on which he embarked soon after taking office. Here are a few choice quotes:

“I think he had made a practice of trying to apologize for America. I personally am proud of America.” – Donald Rumseld

“Mr. President, stop apologizing for our country.” – Tim Pawlenty

There is also a Heritage Foundation list entitled, “Barack Obama’s Top 10 Apologies: How the President Has Humiliated a Superpower”, and Karl Rove published an article in the Wall Street Journal, “The President’s Apology Tour”.

And since Mitt Romney doesn’t know when to stop, here are a few he put together himself:

“I will begin my presidency with the jobs tour. President Obama began his with an apology tour. America, he said, had dictated to other nations. No, Mr. President America has freed other nations from dictators.” – acceptance speech during the Republican National Convention

“The president began what I have called an apology tour, of going to various nations in the Middle East and criticizing America.” – during the first debacleate

“The president’s policies throughout the Middle East began with an apology tour and pursue a strategy of leading from behind, and this strategy is unraveling before our very eyes.” – during the second debate

Mitt even named his damn book No Apology, and wrote in it, “I will not and I will never apologize for America. I don’t apologize for America, because I believe in America.”

Here’s the problem: that apology tour never happened. NO ONE DENIES THIS.

FactCheck.org disagrees using mild language. CNN simply called the allegation false. Fact Checker at the Washington Post gave the allegations “four Pinnochios”. Politifact rated the “apology tour” canard “Pants-on-fire”. I hope Mitt can afford a replacement pair of pants.

But thanks to Obama’s recent visit to Israel, fresh evidence that Goebbels’ old adage still rings true: if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth – in this case, Obama finally did go on an apology tour:

Continue reading Obama finally goes on that apology tour

So, how many states actually voted for Mitt Romney?

In the weeks and months leading up to November’s Presidential election, I was quite vocal about the electoral outcome I preferred.* But since the election ended, I’ve given in to the temptation to gloat only once — and even then, only sort of, and in passing.

*I would have linked to more articles but I ran out of words. OK, here’s one more.

The point of this post is not to gloat. The election is now last year’s news and Barack Obama has been sworn in as the 44 and 1/2th President of the United States of America, so I’m hoping people are not sensitive about the election anymore. Which is good, because that means I’m cleared to write about how Mitt Romney actually did worse against Obama than you thought: he won exactly four states.

Immediately after the election, there was a brief flurry of map-making. People compared the electoral map to other state-by-state breakdowns. Some of those parallels may have had something to them —

Continue reading So, how many states actually voted for Mitt Romney?

My favorite feature on IMDB — and why it’s so silly

I find IMDB useful for two reasons. The first — figuring out who played what and when — has been almost-perfectly co-opted by Wikipedia (which has the additional benefit of including full plot summaries/reviews). The second has not — and that function is the subject of this post.

I’ve wanted to watch Iron Sky since I first saw the trailer [and if you haven’t seen the trailer — even if you have no plans to read the rest of this post — watch and become enlightened]:

Continue reading My favorite feature on IMDB — and why it’s so silly

It appears Don Draper felt left out of Doppelganger Week celebrations

Last week, YLS hosted a screening of Prosecutor, a documentary about Luis Moreno Ocampo, chief (what else?) prosecutor at the International Criminal Court. This post is not about the substance of that movie. Suffice to say that the documentary did not inspire me to go hear Ocampo speak live when he subsequently turned up in person on Monday.

Instead, I’m hear to tell you of a discovery I made in the course of the film. As you may have surmised from the title of this post, it included a cameo by Don Draper’s long-lost (perhaps slightly-nebbier) brother — and I’m not talking about Jon Hamm [start watching at 1:13 – bonus cameo by Tom Hanks at 1:36]:

Continue reading It appears Don Draper felt left out of Doppelganger Week celebrations

Turns out, FOX was right all along

Hearken back, if you can, to the early days of October – or as I call it, Funkyzeit mit Romney.

Barack Obama was coming off a lackluster first debate that let Mitt Romney back into a race he’d seemingly dropped out of. Romney’s post-debate ‘bounce’ was just beginning to show up in the polls. The president was desperate for some good news.

And on October 5, he got some: the Labor Department announced a drop in the jobless rate from 8.1 to 7.8 in September. The drop below the 8% threshold was significant, and provided a shot of energy to the Obama campaign. As the New York Times put it:

Mr. Romney was deprived of a favorite line of attack, mocking the president for “43 straight months with unemployment above 8 percent.”

Of course, you probably remember the response on the right.

And it wasn’t just Jack Welch with his crazy conspiracy theory. Chances are you won’t click on that tweet (why would you?), so I’ll tell you: it was retweeted over 5,000 times. The Huffington Post compiled some of the other responses (you can skim this huge block of text to get the idea, or just take my word for it):

Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) joined the trutherism on his Facebook page. “I agree with former GE CEO Jack Welch, Chicago style politics is at work here. Somehow by manipulation of data we are all of a sudden below 8 percent unemployment, a month from the Presidential election. This is Orwellian to say the least and representative of Saul Alinsky tactics from the book “Rules for Radicals”- a must read for all who want to know how the left strategize.”

The right-leaning Americans for Limited Government released a statement saying, “Either the Federal Reserve, which has its fingers on the pulse of every element of the economy, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics manufacturing survey report are grievously wrong or the number used to calculate the unemployment rate are wrong, or worse manipulated. Given that these numbers conveniently meet Obama’s campaign promises one month before the election, the conclusions are obvious.”

Economic journalist Stuart Varney said on Fox News, “There is widespread distrust of this report.”

Conn Carroll, of the Washington Examiner, tweeted, “I don’t think BLS cooked numbers. I think a bunch of Dems lied about getting jobs. That would have same effect.”

Rick Santelli, the CNBC media personality, yelled, “I told you they’d get it under 8 percent — they did! You can let America decide how they got there!”

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC primarily backed by GOP mega-donor Sheldon Adelson, launched a robocall attacking vulnerable House Democrats over the figures.

And while many of  these sources are hardly mainstream conservative voices, the Wall Street Journal did publish a Jack Welch editorial even after he admitted on-air to Chris Matthews that he had absolutely no evidence for his allegations:

Unfortunately for those who would like me to pipe down, the 7.8% unemployment figure released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) last week is downright implausible. And that’s why I made a stink about it.

And the front page of FOXNews.com briefly looked like this:

Continue reading Turns out, FOX was right all along

The War on Men comes to – where else? – Queens

This is the first in a series of posts building off Something got you down, FOX News?* Specifically, it explores another article trending on FOX at the time that post was written — The war on men — which a number of my friends posted on Facebook. (This is actually how I came across Practical suggestions for handling the great sadness, but that’s neither here nor there.) This series may grow to as many as two posts.

In The war on men, Suzanne Venker argues that women are at fault for the shidduch crisis:

So if men today are slackers, and if they’re retreating from marriage en masse, women should look in the mirror and ask themselves what role they’ve played to bring about this transformation.

I don’t really care about Venker’s argument or dissecting it or refuting it or whatever. The important takeaway is this: the war on men — waged by women — is actually a war on women. Women take jobs, take away incentives for men to work, and men are too tired to get married. And the solution is simple: women should “surrender to their nature – their femininity – and let men surrender to theirs.”

And leaves me to point out that Venker’s got a steep climb ahead of her. Even within her target audience (readers of FOX News), there doesn’t seem to be a consensus that men should work and women should not. This shouldn’t be controversial. After all, if her readers already agreed, she wouldn’t have had to write the article.

But I think my illustrative story on this point is humorous, so I’m going to go ahead and share it anyway.

I spent Thanksgiving with my brothers in Kew Garden Hills, certifiably one of the Romney-est places in New York City.** (Queens qualifies as New York City, right? Or is that only Manhattan? New Yorkers, please clarify.) There, I noticed a local restaurant had taped this ‘Help Wanted’ sign to inside of the window:

Continue reading The War on Men comes to – where else? – Queens