Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Friday, April 27, 2012 11:59 pm

I’m starting to think that Obama might not actually have to run a campaign

Filed under: Aiee! Teh stoopid! It burns! — Lex @ 11:59 pm
Tags: ,

I say that because one of the first rules of politics is that when the other guy is destroying himself, don’t interrupt him. And Mitt Romney? Is destroying himself:

Yeah, all you folks who lost your jobs, got bankrupted by your medical bills, whatever, just do what this guy did and borrow twenty thousand bucks from your parents and start a fast food chain.

(And why am I not surprised that the chain in question, Jimmy John’s (at which, by the way, I will never eat again), got busted for illegally firing workers for union activity?)

I thought we’d seen it all when Bush 41 went speedboating in 1990 while U.S. troops were packing up to head for the Middle East and gas prices were shooting up. Then I thought we’d seen it all when Bush 43 ignored New Orleans and told the guy who was trying to warn him about al-Qaeda, “OK, you’ve covered your ass.” But holy crow. It’s not just that R-money doesn’t have a clue. It’s that he doesn’t have a clue which universe to find one in.

(h/t: Angry Black Lady)



  1. I’m sorry, but when, exactly, did he try to prosecute KSM’s torturers?

    Comment by Lex — Saturday, April 28, 2012 1:00 am @ 1:00 am

  2. Holder=Obama . Two worms in a cocoon.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, April 28, 2012 1:37 am @ 1:37 am

  3. First, this is almost a year old. Second, Obama NOT SAYING PUBLICLY NOT to prosecute is not the same thing as ordering up a prosecution. So far as I know, he hasn’t ordered up so much as a real investigation; certainly no one in a position of real responsibility has even been charged, let alone tried, convicted and punished.

    Second, what in the pluperfect hell does this have to do with Mitt Romney’s utter unfamiliarity with this dimension, which was, you know, the point of the original post?

    Comment by Lex — Saturday, April 28, 2012 1:47 am @ 1:47 am

  4. Obama might not have to wage a campaign? Sheesh. You are not serious. He has already started dirty, below the belt mud slinging , personal and mendacious attacks against the presumptive GOP nominee. This campaign will be about Obama’s awful record.

    Let’s see where to start:

    Is the taxpayer funding Obama’s re-election campaign? Republican fury as President uses $180,000-an-HOUR Air Force One to fly to fundraisers

    Obama speaks with a group of students at the University of Iowa: He is being accused of wasteful spending because he has held more than twice as many events than Bush did in 2004
    The Obama campaign dismissed the complaint as a ‘stunt’ and the White House said that it would follow the same rules as previous administrations and refund the appropriate amounts.

    According to the Pentagon, the Boeing 747 that normally serves as Air Force One costs $179,750 an hour to operate.

    RNC Chairman: Reince Priebus accused the Obama campaign of manufacturing a phony fight about student loans and then using Air Force One to hold what amounted to re-election rallies in swing states
    In the complaint, Reince Priebus, RNC chairman, wrote: ‘Throughout his administration, but particularly in recent weeks, President Obama has been passing off campaign travel as “official events”, thereby allowing taxpayers, rather than his campaign, to pay for his re-election efforts.’

    John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Representatives, today demanded that Barack Obama ‘pony up and reimburse the Treasury’ for what he said were are campaign trips to battleground states dressed up as presidential travel.

    He accused the Obama campaign of manufacturing a phony fight about student loans and then using Air Force One to hold what amounted to re-election rallies in swing states.

    ‘Frankly, I think this is beneath the dignity of the White House … for the president to make a campaign issue about it and then travel to three battleground states,’ he said.

    ‘This one does not pass the straight-face test. You know it, and I know it. It’s time for the Obama campaign to pony up and reimburse the Treasury.’

    Then there is this drive by cheap shot by DNC surrogate slut at Ann Romney who is fighting breast cancer and MS.

    From Politico ” During an appearance on CNN Wednesday night, Democratic commentator Hilary Rosen questioned whether Ann Romney was qualified to be talking about women’s economic issues since she’s “never worked a day in her life.” On Twitter @AnnDRomney responded: “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”

    Do Rosen’s comments advance the Democratic narrative of a GOP “war on women”? Or is it a mean-spirited attack on Mitt Romney’s wife of 42 years that’s like to backfire on the Obama campaign and fellow Democrats?”


    More later

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, April 28, 2012 7:09 pm @ 7:09 pm

  5. A portion of a WSJ opinion column: The President has a list.

    Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.

    Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

    Are you worried?

    .Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” appalled the country for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers—to jail, to fine, to bankrupt—are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

    Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.

    The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.!!!!!!

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:28 pm @ 8:28 pm

  6. Well, no, I did not literally mean Obama will not have to campaign, Fred. But I’m pretty sure you knew that. Romney is not speaking and acting in ways that are going to win the confidence of people who are struggling economically, however, and I’m pretty sure you knew that, too.

    Obama’s “awful record”? Well, let’s see. The Dow is up a few thousand. Private-sector employment has risen for 24 consecutive months. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act got passed. The ACA got passed; it isn’t what I would have chosen, but it insures 30 million people who didn’t have insurance before, so I’m good with it for now. GM’s still alive. Osama bin Laden is still dead. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is history. Yeah, that all really sucks. Oh, and try going on national television and claiming that killing Osama wasn’t all that big a deal. I dare you.

    As for AF1, you and I both know that presidents of both parties combine official business with campaign trips, and the out-of-power party throws a hissy fit every time. Ho-hum.

    As for trashing Romney donors, when the Democrats ever get half as sleazy as the K Street project, which met the literal legal definition of extortion, you can wake me up.

    Comment by Lex — Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:55 pm @ 9:55 pm

  7. Oh, two other things: 1) After Nixon, Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43, I’m entitled to laugh out loud at any Republican who wants to claim that the presidency is a “sacred trust.” 2) Calling a political consultant a “surrogate slut” is not a real good way to enhance your credibility … on ANY issue.

    Obama should be hanging for assassinating a U.S. citizen without charge or trial. But at least he won’t crash the economy again (not that House Republicans aren’t trying). Romney will, AND he’d assassinate U.S. citizens without charge or trial. It’s a lousy choice, but it is not a difficult one.

    Comment by Lex — Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:58 pm @ 9:58 pm

  8. Calling Rosen a slut was calculated to get a response. It did. Now let’s look at the fusillade of insults that have been levied against conservative women by liberal media and entertainment types like Bill Maher

    David Letterman, an openly enthusiastic supporter of Obama, joked” that Sarah Palin bought makeup at Bloomingdale’s to update her slutty flight-attendant look.

    “When liberal talker Ed Schultz called conservative Laura Ingraham a “slut,” not only was there no negative fallout, but participants on “The View” laughed it off. And note that “Michele Bachmann slut” yields 3,770,000 hits on Google, while “Michele Bachmann whore” yields 6,430,000. And when Congresswoman Bachman was introduced on “Late Night,” Jimmy Fallon’s band played “Lyin’ Ass Bitch.” Nice touch.

    Meanwhile, conservative columnist Michele Malkin was called a “Manila whore,” insulting both her gender and her ethnic background. Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was called a “female impersonator,” as was commentator Ann Coulter. And what did gay activists say about these insults? Perhaps I missed it.

    We define ourselves by what we tolerate − and what we don’t”

    It is nothing short of a
    War on Conservative Women. We hear worse than slut every day

    Well Malkin is not , pardon the pun, taking it laying down.

    “I’m sorry Rush Limbaugh called 30-year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a “slut.” She’s really just another professional femme-a-gogue helping to manufacture a false narrative about the GOP “war on women.” I’m sorry the civility police now have an opening to demonize the entire Right based on one radio comment — because it’s the progressive Left in this country that has viciously and systematically slimed female conservatives for their beliefs.

    We have the well-worn battle scars to prove it. And no, we don’t need coddling phone calls from the pandering president of the United States to convince us to stand up and fight.

    At his first press conference of the year on Tuesday, the nation’s concern troll explained that he phoned Fluke to send a message to his daughters and all women that they shouldn’t be “attacked or called horrible names because they are being good citizens.” After inserting himself into the fray and dragging Sasha and Malia into the debate, Obama then told a reporter he “didn’t want to get into the business of arbitrating” language and civility. Too late, pal.

    The fact is, “slut” is one of the nicer things I’ve been called over 20 years of public life. In college during called over 20 years of public life. After my first book, Invasion, came out in 2001, it was “immigrant-hater,” the “Radical Right’s Asian Pitbull,” “Tokyo Rose,” and “Aunt Tomasina.” In my third book, 2005’s Unhinged, I published entire chapters of hate mail rife with degrading sexual epithets and mockery of my Filipino heritage. If I had a dollar for every time libs have called me a “Manila whore” and “Subic Bay bar girl,” I’d be able to pay for a ticket to a Hollywood-for-Obama fundraiser.”….. RTWT

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Sunday, April 29, 2012 3:19 pm @ 3:19 pm

  9. It is to an awful record despite what you and NPR say

    Twitterverse Mocks NPR Over Shameless, Obama Boot-Licking Headlines

    “NPR has no shame. None. But, apparently, they have embarrassment.

    The headline “Is Slow Growth Actually Good for the Economy?” topped NPR’s brazen spin that a stagnant U.S. economy floundering in the tank is actually “good for us”. Gabriel Malor and Michelle Malkin Tweeted the asinine headline, starting a humorous campaign of NPR ridicule…“Let the NPR headline games begin”. After funny headlines, like “Was the Titanic sinking actually good for swimming skills?”, hit Twitter NPR was embarrassed into changing their own absurd one.

    Only Liberals can take a pile of trash, put a bow on it, and believe we’ll think it’s pretty. Obama’s failed Keynesian economics of “tax and spend” would spread Detroit’s plight to the rest of the country. And NPR would redefine it as “good for us”.

    Keynes is dead. Get over it.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Sunday, April 29, 2012 6:33 pm @ 6:33 pm

  10. Don’t always agree with McCain but he has got this spot on

    McCain: ‘Shame on Barack Obama’
    5:47 PM, Apr 27, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPER

    Arizona senator John McCain just released the following statement on the Obama campaign’s Osama bin Laden campaign ad:

    “Shame on Barack Obama for diminishing the memory of September 11th and the killing of Osama bin Laden by turning it into a cheap political attack ad. This is the same President who once criticized Hillary Clinton for invoking bin Laden ‘to score political points.’

    “This is the same President who said, after bin Laden was dead, that we shouldn’t ‘spike the ball’ after the touchdown. And now Barack Obama is not only trying to score political points by invoking Osama bin Laden, he is doing a shameless end-zone dance to help himself get reelected.

    “No one disputes that the President deserves credit for ordering the raid, but to politicize it in this way is the height of hypocrisy.”

    A camapaign runing scared and resorting to this kind of crap.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Sunday, April 29, 2012 6:42 pm @ 6:42 pm

  11. Keynes is dead? Anti-Keynesian is flopping in Britain, Spain and, now, Romania. Free-market economics are being clung to now for much the same reason that creationism is clung to: It nicely papers over some ugly and inconvenient truths, not the least of which is that a few fractions of 1 percent of the world’s economy are, at the moment, robbing the rest of us blind.

    Re 9/11: Oh, boo hoo. Because George W. Bush never once politicized 9/11 or terror. Nope. Not him. Sorry, but this is just another example of the Roveian tactic of going after someone’s strengths. Bush made a calculated PR decision that bin Laden didn’t matter to Americans anymore, so now it sucks to be Romney. That’s hardly Obama’s fault. If you’re having trouble wrapping your head around this, tell me what W would have done in 2004 if bin Laden had been killed or captured at Tora Bora instead of allowed to get away.

    As for Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin getting all butthurt because someone called them bad names, well, if I were a millionaire like they are, I’d get over it. No, no one should call anyone a bad name, but 1) the fact that sexists come in all political flavors doesn’t make all Democrats sexists (or hypocrites) and 2) don’t insult my intelligence by pretending that doing so is on the same level as killing someone’s primary health care and using the proceeds to give yourself a tax cut, which is what they’re doing. They get paid a lot of money to be OK with banning abortion because they know that if they or anyone they’re close to ever needs one, they can afford to travel to Canada or wherever.

    And, once again, what does any of this have to do with the fact that Romney is, to borrow from a book title, a Terrible, Horrible, No-Good, Very Bad Campaigner? Because he is. He just is. We both know that ability to campaign and ability to govern have little, at best, to do with one another, but don’t try to polish a turd here.

    Comment by Lex — Sunday, April 29, 2012 8:01 pm @ 8:01 pm

  12. The ad was a cheap shot. Low blow. Beneath dignity .Watch the video to see thye most approriate adjective. Charley Rose’s co-host hack attempts vainly to defend it. Sigh .


    “I agree with the Romney campaign, that using the Osama bin Laden assassination killing the great news that we had a year ago, in order to say basically that Obama did it and Romney may not have done it . . . to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do.” – Ariana Huffington criticizes Obama’s latest ad featuring Osama bin Laden

    Not much hope for the humanity anyone who disagrees.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, April 30, 2012 9:00 pm @ 9:00 pm

  13. OK, if you’re now approvingly quoting Arianna Huffington, I think I win.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, April 30, 2012 9:21 pm @ 9:21 pm

  14. Not as long as you rely on Media Matters for most of your material

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, April 30, 2012 11:23 pm @ 11:23 pm

  15. I rely on MM for almost none of my claims. But at least they draw a fairly clear distinction between fact and opinion most (not all) of the time and do a reasonably good job of documenting their factual assertions unlike Arianna, or, for that matter, almost the entire Fox stable and at least half of CNN. (Where MM goes awry is writing some of their takedowns of wingnuts as if everyone already agreed with them, which, of course, not everyone does.)

    Comment by Lex — Monday, April 30, 2012 11:33 pm @ 11:33 pm

  16. You are noted for reliance on left wing blogs. That’s ok. Everybody knows where you are coming from.At least you don’t, and can’t argue, that the ad isn’t disgustinly despicable. It is Lex , the convention wisdom.. Get used to it

    Me on this ad , I’ll go with the guys who took him out.

    SEALs slam Obama for using as ammunition, credit for bin Laden killing in election campaign ad

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, April 30, 2012 11:57 pm @ 11:57 pm

  17. I frequently quote left-wing blogs, yes, just not that one very much. More to the point, a lot of what I post is my own reflections on news stories to which I link and not the musings of others of whatever political persuasion.

    Is the ad despicable? No. It’s in poor taste, but it’s not despicable.

    Jose Rodriguez going on “60 Minutes” and lying to Leslie Stahl that torture saved U.S. lives is despicable. Screwing poor women out of primary medical care so that you can have a tax cut is despicable. Calling yourself a Christian while drawing all your theology from Leviticus, the Epistles and Revelation and ignoring the red letters is despicable.

    And I’ll ask again: What do you think George W. Bush would have done in 2004 if HE had been the one who got bin Laden? Bush, who landed an airplane on a carrier to announce the end of “major hostilities” in Iraq? Sheeyit, Fred, you and I both know the answer to that one.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, May 1, 2012 12:06 am @ 12:06 am

  18. Weak !

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, May 1, 2012 12:13 am @ 12:13 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: