Hope you enjoy!
The term “flip flopper” has been attributed to Mitt Romney since the beginning of his campaign. Here is a reminder of the many flips and flops of Mitt Romney.
1. Constitutional Amendment to Define Life
2. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
3. Abortion
4. Health Care
5. Flat Tax
6. Minimum Wage
7. Immigration
8. Bush Tax Cuts
9. Anti-Reagan
10. Gun Laws
11. Global Warming
12. Same Sex Marriage
13. Stem Cell Research
14. Favorite Book
15. Own Gun
16. Morning After Pill for Rape Victims
17. Stimulus
18. Auto Industry Bail Out
19. Embracing gay men in his administration
20. Housing forclosures
21. Law in Ohio barring collective bargaining
Romney has flip and flopped so many times that even Conservatives4Palin recognized how weak Romney would appear if he were to win the Republican nomination. They described his nomination as “Devastating.
Politico has described this problem as a man in search of a “vision.” Instead of simply criticizing President Obama, Politico identifies the need for Romney to actually put forth actual ideas about how he would fix our many challenges. Politico said:
“But at some point he has to show that he has a vision of a better way. He can’t just say ‘The future is bleak, follow me.’ Because no one will.”
“But the GOP standard-bearer has been extraordinarily light on specifics, even on the economy, which he bills as his trademark issue. He touts the fact that he was a successful businessman and knows how to create jobs, but has to be pressed to outline specific ways he will transfer that know-how to the U.S. economy.”
The combination of Romney’s flip flopps, and his “lack of vision” tells us that he has only one goal. He wants to be elected President. If he had a solution to even one problem, we would already know about it. The reality is that to solve any economic problem facing the country he would necessarily have to take an unpopular position with some group of voters. If he were to cut social security and medicare people who rely on those subsidies would be opposed to Romney. If he were to advocate raising taxes, those tax payers would oppose him. If he were to advocate gay marriage, the conservative right would opposed him. The inherit problem is that to be President of the United States, leadership requires taking positions that are not always popular, but necessary. Romney is unwilling or unable to take a position on anything contrary to his audience at the time. The problem with Willard is that he isn’t even looking for a vision. He’s blind, and seems to be trying to travel this road without even a dog to lead him.
Best Emmy Moment 2007 Stephen Colbert and John Stewart
Prunes at the 2008 Emmys
2008 Emmy performance
Stephen Colbert on O’Reilly
Thirty years and $1.5 Million Dollars in fines are the potential penalties John Edwards faces if convicted of the crimes charged. He is on trial for his life. At 59 years old, if determined to be guilty, and if he received the maximum sentence, he would be 90 years old when released from prison. His life expectancy is only 75.6 years. Prison environment is not generally associated with enhancement of life expectancy.
In spite of the seriousness of the charges, one of the alternate jurors has been reported to be openly flirting with the Defendant. Wearing a red blouse with a single stap the juror’s right shoulder was uncovered; not the type of attire to inspire confidence in the legal system. This woman in red, who could potentially be required to determine the fate of Mr. Edwards, was smiling and giggling at him. She appears to be more interested in Mr. Edwards as a potential bed-fellow than as a criminal defendant. Even more absurd is the fact that the three other alternate jurors, all women, seem to think of the proceedings as a circus, rather than a court of law. On Thursday, they all dressed in Yellow, and on Friday they all dressed in Red. The jury has been deliberating for 6 days and is scheduled to return on Tuesday after the long weekend.
Edwards is accused of participating in a scheme to take over $1,000,000 from two wealthy campaign donors to hide his pregnant mistress Rielle Hunter, while he was running in the 2008 for the highest office in the land.
The attorney for Edwards used his closing argument in the case to differentiate a wrong and a crime; a sin and a felony. The flirtatious woman in the Red blouse didn’t seem to care that John Edwards was the pond scum who had a child with his mistress while his wife was dying of cancer. He was attractive, and a Player. Unfortunately for the American people it seems that a “wrong” or a “sin” seem to be not only acceptable for our politicians, but the norm. The 2012 GOP primary race was a perfect example. There was Newt’s serial adulterous affairs, which occurred while his wives were facing life-threatening illness. Herman Cain kept us entertained with the number of women he harassed from his past. Then there was the noticeable absence of his wife from the campaign trail but the appearance of Ginger White. Rick Perry kept us guessing. We weren’t wondering about whether he was guilty of adultery, but the sex of the people with whom he had the sexual encounters.
The 2008 election was also typical. As Sarah Palin rallied the Christian conservative voters while her husband was profiting off of a prostitution business. She herself has been associated with a number of extra-marital affairs. John McCain, the presidential candidate, was an adulterer. Cindy McCain, the potential first lady, was formerly his mistress.
History teaches that adultery seems to be the norm for Presidents. It was not so much a question of whether the President would be unfaithful, but with whom, how often, and whether the sexual encounter would occur in the oval office or whether it should be considered “sex.” George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln, Warren Harding, FDR, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Bill Clinton are just a few Presidents who all had adulterous affairs. It seems inevitable that with power and prominence comes the likelihood of infidelity. It would be unrealistic to think that this would ever change. However I hold onto the hope that there could be an end to the hypocrisy. What’s even more offensive than John Edwards having a child with his mistress while his wife is dying of cancer, is the fact that he was serving as the co-chair of the Senate Prayer Breakfast.
What is even more offensive in the John Edward’s case, than the suggestion in trial that he didn’t know about the $1,000,000 payoff by campaign donors to his mistress, is the fact that a female alternate juror is flirting with him instead of paying attention to the testimony. If the judge and reporters have noticed it, the jurors have too. Have the jurors been deliberating for 6 days because they can’t make up their minds about his guilt, or because they just want to gain more exposure to John Edwards, and the media blitz surrounding this trial? Are the jurors confused about what a witness said, or whether they slept with Edwards? Are the jurors deliberating the veracity of Edwards’ testimony, or are they trying to evaluate whether he is repentant? This trial, and the flirtatious conduct of the alternate juror illustrate the absurdity of the political environment. When are the American people going to demand more? We don’t need to demand or expect that a politician would be faithful to their spouse. That is for the spouse to demand and expect. We as voters should demand and expect honesty. Even if we can’t expect honesty, we object to dishonesty. A candidate for office doesn’t have to remain loyal to his wife to earn our vote, but that candidate should refrain from telling us that he/she talked to God, and God said it would be o.k. this one time. Nobody was surprised that Bill Clinton was getting a blow job from an Intern at the White House, it was the fact that he denied having sex with her.
From past experience we know that watching Bristol Palin on television can evoke enough rage to cause the viewer to resort to shooting the television with a shot gun. Mr. Cowan, who shot his television, is home on probation.
It is unclear if he has replaced his television, but if he has, his wife would be well advised to remove all guns from the house before June 19th which is the date of the premier of Bristol’s new reality show. If Mr. Cowan has not seen Bristol since her medically necessary re-alignment of her jaw, perhaps he won’t recognize her.
Much speculation surrounds the show. Members of the mainstream media are asking:
1. Is it true that 70.8% of people would rather watch paint dry than watch this show.(that was the report when I took the survey.)
2. Will Todd Palin’s business be a sponsor of this show?
3. Will Bristol feature a segment on her love of camping?
4. Will Bristol proclaim the importance of being a Born-Again-Virgin in a Trial Divorce?
5. What hidden meaning will be given to the selection of Juneteenth as the day of her premier?
6. Is people’s preference for watching paint dry rather than being interested in watching this show related to the color of the paint?
7. Will Bristol beat any fish with a bat on the show?
8. Will Bristol disclose the true meaning of the name selected for her second child?
9. Does Bristol’s house have a separate room or building for the “trial-husbands” to experience “trial marriage” to Bristol?
10. Will Bristol have the Anchorage Police issue a press release announcing the debut of her new show?
11. In an effort to foster the importance of family, will Bristol make sure that Tripp spends some quality time with his little half-sister, Breeze Beretta?
12. Will Bristol be filmed teaching Tripp the importance of living up to your word, and paying what you promised to pay for services rendered?
13. If we opt for watching paint drying, do we get to select the color?
14. How much will this show cost the taxpayers in Alaska? Will Dianna Pree of the Film Tax Division of the Department of Economic Development in Alaska return my call? The current public disclosures do not list the Helping Hand Production Company which was the company previously reported as producing this show. How much of the cost of production of this show will be paid by the Alaskan taxpayers?
Since January of 2011 Americans have heard the report that Todd Palin was a pimp.
I have previously documented the amazing report of facts surrounding this scandal, and the failure of the national media to report on this story.
Today I have copies of the notebook that was seized by the Anchorage Police Department that they claim never to have reviewed. This notebook was in the possession of the Anchorage Police Department for over one year. Not only did they fail to attempt to make any arrests of Shailey Tripp’s pimp, or Johns, they issued a press release attempting to vindicate Todd Palin. They must have been too busy either having consensual sex on the job, or covering up their knowledge of the rape of women by Office Rollins while on duty.
This notebook was returned after Shailey Tripp served her probation of one year. Here are copies of the notebook:
Now there is the additional story of David Chaney being introduced to Shailey Tripp by Todd Palin, resignation of David Chaney from the Secret Service as a result of the prostitution scandal in Colombia, detailed reports of Shailey Tripp to Homeland Security of her sexual encounter with David Chaney, two Senators on the Homeland Security Committee being advised of this evidence, and still there has been no coverage of the story. In her book, Shailey Tripp provides names, e-mails, and descriptions of Todd’s anatomy that is information only an intimate partner would know. Yet there is still silence from the national media. No longer can there be any question about the truth of the allegations of Shailey Tripp. No longer can there be any question about the truth of the cover up. Perhaps it would be embarrassing to the Republican Party to have nominated a person for Vice President of the United States who was married to a pimp. Perhaps it would be embarrassing to the Ex-Half-Term-First-Dude to have the description of his penis the subject of national news. Yet, it is clear that the potential embarrassment of the Republican Party, or Todd Palin, is more important than applying the laws equally and fairly. Shailey Tripp has admitted she broke the law, running a house of prostitution. She was arrested. Yet her pimp, Todd Palin, and one of her Johns, including David Chaney, has never been charged, and hasn’t even been asked to give a statement under oath denying these allegations. It is a sad day for women, for Alaska, and for the country when the government, Senators, police departments, and the national media refuse to hold Todd Palin and David Chaney accountable.
Consider all the evidence:
1. Arrest of Shailey Tripp and charges of running a house of prostitution, to which she pled no contest.
2. Witness, like William Fortier, who saw Todd Palin coming and going from the House of Prostitution.
3. Shailey Tripp’s lie detector statements to the National Enquirer implicating Todd Palin.
4. Todd’s complete failure to EVER deny the allegations.
5. Records confiscated by the Anchorage Police Department that were in the possession of Shailey Tripp with a reference to Todd and phone numbers associated with Todd.
6. Pictures of David Chaney “checking out” Sarah Palin while on duty.
7. Resignation of David Chaney after being implicated in the prostitution scandal in Colombia, memorable for the failure of the Secret Service Agents to pay the amount promised to the prostitute.
8. Shailey Tripp’s account of sexual services provided to David Chaney and being paid an amount that was less than the amount promised.
9. Shailey Tripp has documented details of her recruitment by, and work for, Todd Palin in Boys Will Be Boys, which has been available to the public for three months.
This is so outrageous that if it was the plot of a movie, the movie would never be produced as the story would be too unbelievable! If the Republican party, Senators, or national media is to retain any credibility they must report on this story,…NOW.
Yesterday the NY Times reported on the touching story of a 5 year old boy wondering if the President’s hair felt like his own.
As we might expect of Barack Obama, his answer to the young boy was to bend over and let the boy feel for himself. That touch was real in the physical sense and the metamorphic sense. It was a profound example of Obama’s understanding of the need of the American people to reach out to him and know that he is real. It was a young boy’s need to know that the President of the United States, was a person just like him.
Mitt Romney is out of touch as illustrated by his comments about the economic issues that affect women, his hob-knobbing with owners of cars at NASCAR, or his offer of a $10,000.00 bet to resolve a political difference with Rick Perry.
Imagine the response of Mitt Romney if he were President and asked by a boy if his hair felt the same way as the boy’s,
Romeny might say:
1. I don’t know. I never touch my hair. You’d have to ask my stylist.
2. I’ll bet you $10,000 dollars mine is softer than yours.
3. Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn’t.
4. You can’t touch my hair, but do you want a cookie?
5. Hair is a person too, and under the U.S. Constitution it has the right to life.
6.You look like you need a hair cut!
7. You can touch my hair after you wash your hands, since you just finished playing with Seamus.
8. You can’t touch my hair but my elevator operator will give you a free ride in one of my cars.
As I sat in my home in Dallas, Texas, I found myself feeling threatened and insecure. I was listening to the CSPAN Senate hearing regarding the fiasco in Colombia involving the Secret Service. My reason for devoting two hours of my day to finding out what the Senate was up to, was not to brush up on my 8th grade Civics. I was hopeful that the “culture of corruption” within the Secret Service would include a discussion of indiscretions that took place in Alaska that involved Todd Palin, David Chaney, and Shailey Tripp. I knew that the Department of Homeland Security knew about this episode, because I put the investigating officer in touch with Shailey Tripp. I knew from Shailey Tripp that he had interviewed her not once, but twice. I knew she gave him embarrassing details about the sexual encounter she had with David Chaney, explained that it was Todd Palin who introduced her to David Chaney one morning in a bagel shop, and the fact that David Chaney refused to pay her the agreed upon price for the services rendered. He paid her $40.00, which was less than the cost of the massage Sarah Palin had received, with no sexual experiences included. I knew that Senator Leiberman’s office knew about this episode, because I sent them the information. I knew that Senator Collins knew “all about” this information because a member of her staff confirmed that to me the day before the hearing. Yet, nothing was mentioned about this encounter involving one of the SAME agents involved in the Colombia scandal, who had a history of an encounter with a prostitute in the United States, while traveling on assignment, who became famous by posting a picture of himself “checking out” Sarah Palin,
and who engaged in exactly the SAME behavior of the agent who brought attention to the matter inColombia. Instead of hearing someone ask the question about this history of indiscretions, what we heard was praise for the Secret Service, and the recitation of a parable from the Bible about stone throwing. Outrageous. Disappointment. Disgust. Politics as usual. This hearing was no longer about Sarah Palin, Todd Palin and Shailey Tripp. It was precisely about the safety and security of our nation being compromised. It was the most transparent example of the failure of our political system of government. This was not an issue of Republican principles or Democratic ideals. It was not even a commentary on the moral fiber that used to be associated with the Secret Service. This was a frightening example of the failure of our political system to address an embarrassing and outrageous example of a breach of security that could have compromised the life of the President.
Forget for a minute the fact that the Senators were seeking to determine if there was a history of this type of behavior. The fact that this incident happened was in itself an unacceptable breech of security. The fact that after the incident occurred specific safety precautions were not taken, should have been cited as unforgivable. How could the “clean-up” crew fail to sweep the room for bugs? How could anyone justify failing to take a sworn statement from the agents involved? We can water-board potential enemies of the state, but we can’t take sworn statements from people who have indisputably compromised the safety of the President.
If the goal was to determine if there was a “culture of corruption” then that was proved by a single fact! It was reported in a survey of agents that only 60% would report an indiscretion if it occurred. Outrageous! There could never be a better example of a “cultural” problem than the unwillingness of 40% of agents to report a problem. If we accept a 40% standard for security for our President and dignitaries, then we could expect that only 40% of the leaders who visit our country would be assassinated. Only 40% of terrorists would be successful! The President would be safe MOST of the time.
The Secret Service agents receive starting salary of $52,000.00 per year. http://www.secretservice.gov/opportunities_ud.shtml. A college degree is not required. Their jobs are characterized by the Secret Service as “driven by integrity.” The culture is “represented through the agency’s five core values: justice, duty, courage, honesty, and loyalty. These values, and the Secret Service adage “Worthy of Trust and Confidence” are supposed to “resonate with each man and woman who has sworn to uphold these principles” and they are supposed to “hold each person to the highest standards of personal and professional integrity.” While I heard about these five core principles during the Senate hearing, there was no evidence that even the agents identified in this scandal had operated with these core values in mind while inColombia. There was no indication that “justice” would be served. By allowing these agents to simply resign, I’m sure we the tax payers will be paying for their retirement for many years to come. The sad thing is that neither the Secret Service or the Senate Committee on Homeland Security seemed to be “Worthy of Trust”. I had no confidence in their pursuit of truth and justice, and instead they seemed to be interested only in the pursuit of their re-election. If there is to be restoration of confidence in our system of government, we should start with something so basic as the safety and security of our President, regardless of who he is, and regardless of the party with whom he is affiliated. He was elected by the majority of voters in theUnited States, and he is a symbol of our country. This scandal inColombia, and the total failure of the Senate Subcommittee to attempt to address the problem, is a symbol to the country of the disease that infects our government.
The only thing that may help on a day like this is to find something to laugh about! Stephen Colbert helps us remember the lighter side.
Mark Sullivan, the director of the Secret Service, explained that he was “dumbfounded” when he discovered that agents invited prostitutes to their hotel rooms in Colombia. He went on to say that “these individuals did some really dumb things.”
The word choice of Mr. Sullivan illustrates the problem. As a lay person, it seems that words to describe such dangerous conduct might include: alarming, fatal, formidable, risky, menacing, outrageous, precarious, serious, threatening, terrible, treacherous, or unsafe . “Dumb” is not a word I would choose to describe conduct that could have compromised the life of the President of the United States.
Dwarf tossing is dumb.
George Bush illustrated, many times, the definition of dumb.”
My favorite person doing something “dumb” was the guy who attempted to remove a suspended tomato from the ceiling through a rotating ceiling fan.
Robin Williams, in a comedy routine, explained that:
“God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time.”
It is unforgivable to adopt a similar attitude regarding the Secret Service. To say that “Boys Will Be Boys” or boys do “dumb” things suggests boys and men are driven by hormones and simply can’t help themselves, even if the safety of our President is at stake. A beautiful woman should be able to stip naked before a Secret Service agent, and he should be trained not only to ignore her, but to suspect that she was put in front of him to distract him from his mission. Instead Secret Service agents seek out prostitutes and invite them back to their rooms. Even after it is determined that the agents have been compromised their rooms are not checked for bugs or monitoring equipment. Their supervisor then describes their conduct as “dumb.” The attitude of the Director of the Secret Service is prima facie evidence of an attitude that is intolerable.
Recent Comments