RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Romney’s Executive Talents – Exemplified

Every time I stop in at Staples — although I didn’t know until recently — I have Mitt Romney to thank for its existence. I don’t know what I’d do without Staples in the small town where I live – from the array of printer cartridges to the choice of mice. My neighbor takes her computer in for a regular cleaning. The staff answer our questions, capably and politely.

Mitt Romney did far more than finance Staples. That multi-millionaire pitched in to stock shelves at the flagship store and for years worked hard on its board of directors, so intensely involved he’d soak through dress shirts.

It’d be hard to put the Staples story in a stump speech, although it exemplifies the executive qualities we need in a president. If every voter knew about these qualities, they’d know who to vote for.

  • Mitt didn’t let others’ uneasiness deter him from taking his own look at the Staples concept
  • He had the ability to see possibilities others missed
  • He sold the concept to his own doubtful partners
  • He conducted due diligence
  • He personally followed through — at every step — to ensure the first Staples store lived up to his concept of a “supermarket” for office supplies

From “How Involved Was Mitt Romney in the Founding of Staples?,” an article at Mental Floss (“where knowledge junkies get their fix”):

In every debate this campaign season, Mitt Romney has been hammered by his Republican rivals for essentially teaching companies how to ship jobs overseas during his days at Bain. Romney almost always responds by saying he actually created jobs, and helped start Staples. Did Romney really have a hand in creating an office supply giant?

He did. More accurately, he convinced a bunch of people with a lot of money that Staples’ business model would work. He also put in a few shifts at the first store.

Let’s start at the beginning. In 1984, Romney left consulting firm Bain & Company to co-found their new private equity investment firm, Bain Capital. Not long after, supermarket executive Thomas G. Stemberg approached Bain with an idea. According to Staples company lore, Stemberg was working on a business proposal over a holiday weekend when his printer ribbon broke. “After driving from store to store and not finding the correct ribbon,” Staples.com explains, “Tom came to a realization: The world needed a supermarket for office products.”

When Stemberg went looking for a venture capital, he got laughed out of offices all over Boston. …

Be sure to go to the original site and read what a tough time Stemberg had in getting investors to listen to him. Next, here’s a section on how Romney made Staples possible:

When Stemberg took the idea to Bain, Romney was intrigued, but his colleagues were uneasy. Romney decided to do a little research and the firm began surveying small businesses in the area. They found that business managers often thought they were spending very little on supplies, and believed it would cost more to send someone to a store to buy them. When they talked to accountants at the same businesses, though, they often found the places were spending as much as five times more than management thought. Romney figured the savings Stemberg’s store could provide justified someone having to actually go there. He took his survey results to his partners and convinced them that Stemberg’s model could work. They agreed, and gave Stemberg the initial funding for what would eventually become the Staples chain.

Romney’s role didn’t end there. He was very involved with the first Staples store when it opened. Stemberg was short on hands, so the Bain Capital guys helped out, picking out the computer system and stocking shelves for the first few weeks it was open.

Romney didn’t stock printers for long, but he did sit on the Staples board for years. Even out of the store, he put in hard work, though. In his VC days, Romney reportedly got so stressed out and exerted himself so much that he regularly sweat through his dress shirts. It happened so often, in fact, that his Bain Capital friends came up with the term “pitting” to describe it.

Read the rest of the fascinating story here: “How Involved Was Mitt Romney in the Founding of Staples?.”

How about that? Can any of us imagine that Barack Obama has ever worked that hard? Furthermore, as Obama’s government buddies have proved, it takes a real businessman, with a history of success, to envision new enterprises that have a good shot at success.

And do you think that Mitt Romney would ever permit the rewriting of a contract to make taxpayers the chumps who have to pick up the tab for his failed investment?

Go ahead and ask the same of Rick Santorum … how many businesses has he had the vision to create and work long hours to bring to fruition? Yeah …

No matter. Congratulations to Romney, and his partners at Bain, for creating a business that provides a true service.

  • Anonymous

    Office Max is closer to me than Staples and Office Max’s prices are the same as Staples and the staff are just as friendly as Staples.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    This video needs to go viral. Put out by ShePAC.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5ISKQD7ytSk

  • Anonymous

    Those who were engaged in the Salt Lake City Olympics know that no one leads arounds Mitt Romney – he is the one in charge. Like any good manager he listens to advice and the minute he feels he is getting bad advice he will fire the advisor. While accepting the blame, he has done that within his own campaign.

    I think it is historically wrong to place any blame for Boston’s Big Dig on Romney. He did not become governor until the beginning of 2003 when the first phase completed and was about to be opened. He presided only over the completion of the last phase and none of the planning or awarding of contracts and the massive overages were things he inherited.

    And for those who think certain labels absolve them of being bigots should read this:
    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/89334/the-hitler-test/

    • Anonymous

      Salt Lake proved that Utah was more important to Romney than the State is he was elected to govern! If those games where in any other state than Utah, ole Mitt would not have given two rats asses….

      I am also not blaming Mitt for the Big Dig! I am blaming him for losing control of it and dropping the political ball under his watch! I am also blaming him from running away from it! So the bid deal making job creating (lousy 15, 000 jobs placing MA 47 out of 50) hero could not get the Big Dig financially under control. Why? Because he was and still is a political lightweight….. Business IQ to boil the Atlantic Ocean. Political IQ? Couldn’t boil the toilet bowl.

      By the way, nice link, the Hilter test! Typical neocon bullshit.. Same applies to your buddies John Bolton and Fred Kagan!

      Here try this one… http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer52.html

       

  • Anonymous

    Romney is the man of the hour! Please spare me!

    Besides Bain the man has no other governmental experience. His record as governor is one of flip-flopping on issues. Yes he has great private sector experience but….. once again the President of the United States has limited power on domestic economic issues. Moreover as Governor Romney’s record is not the best. Study the entire record and its impacts on local governments, property owners and commercial businesses. There is a reason why he only serve one 4 year term and then bailed…..

    Of course those neocons and ziocons are pushing Romney because they are leading him around the primrose path by the nose….

    Unfortunately and yes I will say this for the record here at No Quarters. Willard is better than Santorum and Gingrich. If only Ron Paul was just slightly more hawkish on foreign affairs he would be the man of the hour. His economic platform is a hell of a lot better than Romney’s.

    But saying all of this….. Romney as the others with exception of Paul if elected will be lead around by the special interests that gave him the cash to run. Think those Super PACs ain’t going to want something in return?

    Romney in my opinion would be no better than what we have right now. Obama has proven he can’t be trusted with the office and Romney has proven he is a flip flopper….

    But Romney is NO CONSERVATIVE! Hence I predict a fallout in the general if Romney as expected gets the nod….

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    love this quote from Dick Armey talking about Newt Gingrich:  “I feel bad for him. I think he’s digressed into a state of taking a second-rate campaign and turning it into a first-rate vendetta”

    • Anonymous

       Dick Armey has no room to talk!

  • Anonymous

    No President ever entered office with all the experience a President ends up having. We’ve had people enter office having led the military (i.e. Washington, Eisenhower, Grant) but it never guaranteed they would be good Presidents. With foreign affairs experience there were those with foreign services experience (i.e. George HW Bush) but again it did not guarantee a good President.  And in terms of running a government we have had plenty of governors (i.e. Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter) and that too did not mean it resulted in good Presidents.
     
    In fact, when in Reagan’s first terms as Governor of California he sought to balance the budget by cutting spending and raising taxes. That’s right – Reagan raised taxes in California. With those credentials what do you think his chances of securing a GOP nomination would be today?
     
    We tend to seek the person to be President for the times we face. In today’s time we have had to live through the worst President in American history – a man completely unqualified for any office – a man who had no meaningful experience -  and has exhibited a complete lack of leadership. He has made a complete mess of the economy and foreign affairs. The reason for complete gridlock in D.C. is the man in charge who is incapable of leadership and compromise.
     
    The biggest issue we confront is the economy and the effect of a behemoth federal government that cannot function well. If this was a corporation it would require a turnaround and what is called a re-engineering. Romney is uniquely qualified to be the President now – not 4 years ago and maybe (hopefully) not 4 years from now. Anyone who downplays his experiences (plural) at Bain Ventures has no idea what they are talking about. Staples was only one success story – he had many.
     
    I do think Romney is the man for the time we have now and will know how to dramatically change the federal government – even if he only has the majority in one house on Capitol Hill. Romney has experience in working with a Democratic majority and has an ability to persuade people to join him.

    • Anonymous

      “The biggest issue we confront is the economy and the effect of a behemoth federal government that cannot function well.”

      The economy is coming back because of the steps this Adminstration took over the last several years. We we had listened to Romney he would have sunk the auto industry. There is also nothing wrong with the U.S. government. If anything it does too little.

      Romney is the last person we need to be President after what this country has just come through. We do not need another Republican with the same ideas that got us into this mess. We do not need a 1%er Wall Streeter that will do nothing but continue to promote the trend of a concentration of wealth in this country and an ever increasing amount of the income going to the top.

      • Anonymous

        I strongly suggested you read a book about thinking but apparently you bought the wrong book. You must have gotten this one:
        http://www.sensible.com/chapter.html

        There is not a single line in your ignorant comment that is not copied from an Obama press release.

        • Anonymous

          Hokma you are like a child with your continueous juvenile responses.

          • Anonymous

            Get lost lightweight and get a brain.

            • Anonymous

              You just prove my point once again!

              • Anonymous

                You have no point and ignore anything explained to you. If your point is that you can cut and paste Obama’s brainless platitudes then you excel.

                • Anonymous

                  I don’t ignore anything. You are just flat wrong 90% of the time. Your simplistic logic makes no sense.

                  Going back to my original comment above. Can you prove your statement that we have:

                  “a behemoth federal government that cannot function well”.

                  The U.S. has one of the smallest goverments in the OECD. If you look at federal government spending as a percentage of GDP it is currently at about 23%. The average for countries in the OECD is closer to +45%. Even if you factor in total government spending including both state and local we are at about 35% of GDP. We have much much less government in this country than everyone else. It is far from “behemoth” as you say.

                  In addition, on average the federal government of the U.S. works quite well and is generally one of the biggest reasons for the success of ths country. If you think differently then prove it.

                  • Anonymous

                    Again. Get lost lightweight. Go read a book.

        • Anonymous

          Hokma you are like a child with your continueous juvenile responses.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds no different than any other private equity or venture capital deal. End of the day Romney did not invent the concept, he did not work to actually build the store and the franchise himself and he did not roll-up his sleeves and do the yeras of hard work required to make Staples successful. He and his fellow investors just put $5 million in the company.

    He essentially just convinced fellow investors to put money in and sat there and hoped it would work. Like all private equity or venture capital companies do. A good investment no doubt, but Romney is not really a business innovator or job creator or builder. That would be Stemberg and his employees.

    By the way how do you know this story is correct? Where did this Internet blogger from Mental Floss actually get his information? Sounds like he is just copying a press release from the Mitt Romney campaign.

    Basically, Mitt invested in another big box store concpet that was responsible for the further hollowing-out of “mom and pop” stores all over American and pushing our trade into deficit from massive sourcing from Taiwan and China. Staples also represents a bunch of low paying retail jobs for people essentially considered working poor.

    “[When] you’re the CEO, you’ve got to do things the most cost effective way you possibly can. And sometimes that means closing a factory somewhere and moving the manufacturing to China,” he said. “At other times, just like recently at Staples, they shut down a bunch of jobs in Massachusetts and moved them, of all places, to Columbia, S.C., because they can be done more effectively there. And that’s the way the world works.” Stemberg, CEO Staples

    With friends like these… Maybe Romney should be running for President of China.

    Lets also remember that being a good investors is very different than running an economy and creating jobs. Romney was 47th out of 50 Governors in job creation when he was Governor. A terrible record. And he did not even bother to run for re-election, which was strange.

    We do not need a private equity guy as President. The U.S. is not a private equity market. 
     
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mitt-romney-tries-to-play-the-jobs-card-2010-02-23?pagenumber=1

    • Anonymous

      “He essentially just convinced fellow investors to put money in and sat there and hoped it would work.”

      Typical left wing inane comment. Clearly you don’t know anything about this.What is really disturbing is that you don’t have the slighest drive of intellectual curiosity. You are content to be dumb.

      • Anonymous

        Do you have any experience in private equity? Have you ever done any private equity investing? Nothing special about Romney’s investment in Staples. It was a good investment. Kodos to Romney for making a good investment.

        Tell me exactly where I am wrong? You speak in generalities and juvenile insults.

        • Anonymous

          “Do you have any experience in private equity?”
          LOADS of experience

          “Have you ever done any private equity investing?”
          I’m the one they invest with or with people I group with.

          And if you a friggin clue or an ounce of curiosity you would learn – on your own – that these groups DO NOT just hand over money and pray.

          Do some research on your own and learn – or just accept the insults you so richly deserve..

          • Anonymous

            I am personally more than well aware what private equity is all about.

            Private equity investors generally do not actually run companies or come up with ideas or the concept. Some good private equity firms provide a lot of board level guidance, inject sometimes actual third party management talent, help in restructurings, bring relationships, etc. It depends on their control and the deal they strike with the company and management they are investing in. However, private equity investors are not the entrepreneurs who actually create the companies they invest in. There is no evidence that Romney’s investment in Staples was nothing more than a typical private equity investment, particularly for the 1980s, which tended to much more passive than PE investment today. His due diligence, mentioned in the post above, was no different than what anyone else does. In fact, given when that deal was done, the due diligence was likely much much less than what a typical PE firm does today. There is no evidence that Stemberg gave any real control or strategic or management role to Romney or Bain, so essentially Romney’s investment was very much sitting back and hoping that Stemberg would be successful.  

            The post above is also completely misleading. It suggests that no one wanted to invest in Staples and it was only Romney who saw the light. That is complete BS. There were many who lined up to invest in Staples in 1985 and 1986.

            “To do so, Stemberg approached his old nemesis Kahn, who invested $500,000. In addition, Stemberg made presentations to venture capitalists in the Boston area and was met with an enthusiastic response. In the first round of financing, the company raised $4 million. With this money, Stemberg set out to recruit a management team. Looking for people who shared his philosophy of how to run a business, he sought out those with a similar background, bringing in people who had worked at the same national grocery chain that he had. By the spring of 1986 everything was in place.”

            • Anonymous

              “I am personally more than well aware what private equity is all about.”

              Obviously not based on the rest of your comment. Again, intead of continuing to make an absolute fool of yourself look up what pruvate equity firms are, how theyare structured, and what they actually do before making another moronic statement.

              • Anonymous

                Another juvenile reply by you that says absolutely nothing and is nothing but a generality.

                A very school yard like reply from you:

                “You are wrong.” 

                “How am I wrong?” 

                “You are just wrong.”

                Why don’t you enlighten us with all your private equity knowledge? Instead of all these generalities that you constantly speak-in?

                Most private equity investments are relatively passive investments, especially back in the 1980s. There is no evidence that Romney and Bain played any actual role other than financing or providing some seed or growth capital to Staples. And if many were lining up to give Staples money, their financing was of questionable unique value. If you have some evidence that Romeny and Bain played a big role in the success of Staples then please present it.

                • Anonymous

                  Most are not passive investments. I said get a friggin education on the subject and stop mouthing off just plain ignorance.

                  Or give us some evidence that there is something between your ears other than air.

          • Anonymous

            I am personally more than well aware what private equity is all about.

            Private equity investors generally do not actually run companies or come up with ideas or the concept. Some good private equity firms provide a lot of board level guidance, inject sometimes actual third party management talent, help in restructurings, bring relationships, etc. It depends on their control and the deal they strike with the company and management they are investing in. However, private equity investors are not the entrepreneurs who actually create the companies they invest in. There is no evidence that Romney’s investment in Staples was nothing more than a typical private equity investment, particularly for the 1980s, which tended to much more passive than PE investment today. His due diligence, mentioned in the post above, was no different than what anyone else does. In fact, given when that deal was done, the due diligence was likely much much less than what a typical PE firm does today. There is no evidence that Stemberg gave any real control or strategic or management role to Romney or Bain, so essentially Romney’s investment was very much sitting back and hoping that Stemberg would be successful.  

            The post above is also completely misleading. It suggests that no one wanted to invest in Staples and it was only Romney who saw the light. That is complete BS. There were many who lined up to invest in Staples in 1985 and 1986.

            “To do so, Stemberg approached his old nemesis Kahn, who invested $500,000. In addition, Stemberg made presentations to venture capitalists in the Boston area and was met with an enthusiastic response. In the first round of financing, the company raised $4 million. With this money, Stemberg set out to recruit a management team. Looking for people who shared his philosophy of how to run a business, he sought out those with a similar background, bringing in people who had worked at the same national grocery chain that he had. By the spring of 1986 everything was in place.”

      • Anonymous

        Do you have any experience in private equity? Have you ever done any private equity investing? Nothing special about Romney’s investment in Staples. It was a good investment. Kodos to Romney for making a good investment.

        Tell me exactly where I am wrong? You speak in generalities and juvenile insults.

  • Anonymous

    cnn has an interesting delegate calculator that lets you predict the number of delegates a candidate will get in the upcoming primaries.  so you can see if, and when, someone will reach the magic number.  it’s fun.

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/calculator/

  • Anonymous

    Rah! Rah! Mittens~ brought 2 u by BQ!

    Hip Hop Hooray

    • Anonymous

       Why don’t you just crawl right back under the rock you just came from.

  • Anonymous

    GOP to Dems: You want war. Here’s a war.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9JR4dT5NcXc

  • Anonymous

    Breitbart just put up a video of Pelosi’s daughter on Maher’s show. You will not believe what Pelosi has offered. It’s not what you might think. At all. Totally blew me away.

  • Anonymous

    Despite what seems to be an obvious advantage having a candidate with a track record of hard work and determination there are many that will find any reason whatsoever to not support Romney. Whether it’s the ‘He’s a Mormon and not a Christian’ crowd or the ‘He’s a vulture capitalist’ crowd or the ‘He raised fees in MA’ crowd or the ‘He is the reason we have Obamacare’ crowd. It seems that nothing he has done is good enough for them.

    The loudest crowd argues that he doesn’t have the support ‘of the base.’ Yet not one of the other candidates does either, just in case no one was looking. And Romney has far more votes than either of them. So this got me to thinking and it occurred  to me that if Romney doesn’t have the support of the base but is still way out in front then perhaps that should send a message to the Republican party about the viability of their ‘base.’ Or that their ‘base’ has shifted.

    Romney has flaws. No doubt. I wish he were more charismatic but in some ways I am glad that he isn’t. And I disagree with him on some issues. But he is not nearly as radical as the other candidates and that appeals to me. I don’t want a far left Administration followed by a far right Administration. Just don’t.

    On a personal note, reading about Romney’s sweating pits is as repulsive as seeing Santorum with his shirt off. I get why it was mentioned, but still….. Can’t we move on to more appropriate imagery?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

       If I wasn’t so concerned with getting Obama out of office in November, I would total support a Santorum nomination *just* so he could get his  #ss handed to him in the GE & the alleged GOP base will learn a sorely needed lesson. This article at The Daily Beast lays it out perfectly:

      http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/16/the-case-for-crazy-what-the-gop-would-learn-by-picking-rick-santorum.html

      *I say “alleged” base because these people aren’t the base, otherwise Romney wouldn’t have been the “conservative choice” against McCain in 2008 — these are the loons who cut off their noses to spite their faces with the Sharron Angle nom. ensuring Harry Reid’s re-election & who are determined to ensure Obama’s re-election as well.

      • Anonymous

        If the GOP does nominate Santorum I want to see him get his ass kicked in the general. I won’t support him or the GOP. Haven’t made a complete decision about who I would support but it definitely would not be a Santorum led GOP.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

    Romney is the only candidate who has actually had a real job (I’m not including b.s. place holder jobs until they got elected like Obama had nor am I including lobbying because rubbing elbows with Congress isn’t a real job). Of course, the others resent him for that just like they resent him for actually be successful at it instead of having to get into politics & feed from the taxpayer trough to make money like they did, hence all the attacks from Newt & Santorum about how “rich” he is. They are trying to make him out to be Little Lord Fauntleroy to say he is “out of touch” with the common man but the truth is, given that Romney has actually worked so hard he sweated, he has much more in common in with the common man than they do.

    • Anonymous

      Dr Paul was a doctor for many years also.

    • Anonymous

      ” real job ”

      How do you define “real job”?

      Yeah, we know Romney was an investor. He put rich people’s money to work in private equity invesing and leveraged-buyouts, which at best has a mixed record at even being good for America. And then he got involved in the Salt Lake City Olympics, which he turned into a taxpayer boondoggle. After than he did one term as Governor (why did he not bother to run for a second term?) where he had a terrible performance as a job creator and now walks away from his only significant achievement, which was healthcare reform. And since then or for the last 6 or 7 years has sat on his ass or money doing nothing for this country.

      This is the guy who had all the advantages in life. The proverbial silver spoon. He simply followed the typical route of the wealthy. The right schools and then to Wall Street or into private equity to leverage his father’s connections and influence.

  • Anonymous

     Rick Santorum hasn’t started anything except trouble.  lol

  • Anonymous

    Yet another link.
     
    Obama signed a new Exec. Order in the night that allows him to take over all liberty 3/16/12

    The Exec.Order allows the nationalization of pretty much the entire
    USA even in peacetime if he desires. They can, under this order,
    restrict civilian travel by any mode, including (probably) foot travel.
    They can ration food. They can restrict water usage, even from private
    wells. They can ration any and all drugs, including OTC and vitamins.
    They can collectivize farms. They can take over all energy production,
    including home solar units.

    It also allows for drafting civilians. If they have need of your skills, they can compel you to work for no compensation.

    All this not in a time of war, but in time of “National Emergency”
    (several EO national emergency states already in place) or even in
    Peacetime

     

    controlling the food:

    That’s in there:

    Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority
    of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App.
    2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or
    orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national
    defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to
    allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or
    appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the
    following agency heads:

    (1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food
    resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant
    health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and
    commercial fertilizer;

    (e) “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple,
    mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products,
    that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals,
    irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be
    put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products
    thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. “Food
    resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable
    containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats
    and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such
    material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or
    agricultural product.

    (f) “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles
    (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production,
    processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food
    resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and
    fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).

    They can take charge of all aspects of food production and processing.

     

    control energy:

    PART II – PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS

    Sec. 201 … (2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to ALL FORMS of energy; …

    ——————–PART VIII – GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Sec. 801. Definitions.

    (b) “Energy” means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both
    natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all
    forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal
    gasification), solar, wind, other types of renewable energy…

     

     

    control working for no money:

    Sec. 502. Consultants. The head of each agency otherwise delegated
    functions under this order is delegated the authority of the President
    under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(b), (c),
    to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section may not be redelegated

     

    Here’s your Civilian Military Force (Brown Shirts?)
    PART V – EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
    Sec. 501. National Defense Executive Reserve. (a) In accordance with
    section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), there is established
    in the executive branch a National Defense Executive Reserve (NDER)
    composed of persons of recognized expertise from various segments of the
    private sector and from Government (except full time Federal employees)
    for training for employment in executive positions in the Federal
    Government in the event of a national defense emergency.
    (b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue necessary guidance
    for the NDER program, including appropriate guidance for establishment,
    recruitment, training, monitoring, and activation of NDER units and
    shall be responsible for the overall coordination of the NDER program.
    The authority of the President under section 710(e) of the Act, 50
    U.S.C. App. 2160(e), to determine periods of national defense emergency
    is delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security.http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/obama-signed-a-new-exec-order-in-the-night-that-allows-him-to

    • Anonymous

      Yeah Presidents have been signing shit like this for decades…. Hell most Governors also have these powers…. Of course this coming from the Tea Party makes me laugh….and cry..

      • Anonymous

         Sec. 202. Determinations. The authority delegated by
        section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have
        been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the
        national defense:

        It now says:

        Sec. 202. Determinations. Except as provided in section 201(e) of this order,
        the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only
        to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or
        appropriate to promote the national defense:

        And section 201, e, previously said:

        (e) The Assistant to the President for National Security
        Affairs is hereby delegated the authority under subsection 101(c)(3) of
        the Act, and will be assisted by the Director, FEMA, in ensuring the
        coordinated administration of the Act.

        It now says:

        (e) The Secretary of each resource department, when
        necessary, shall make the finding required under section 101(b) of the
        Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(b). This finding shall be submitted for the
        President’s approval through the Assistant to the President and National
        Security Advisor and the Assistant to the President for Homeland
        Security and Counterterrorism. Upon such approval, the Secretary of the
        resource department that made the finding may use the authority of
        section 101(a) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(a), to control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market.

        This is a clear grab for power in situations that have nothing to do
        with a national emergency or national defense. Obama and the left want
        total control. Control the food, gas, distribution of health care? They
        control us. Completely. Think they’ll ever let a “crisis” go to waste
        with this kind of power? Isn’t global warming a “crisis”? Isn’t poverty?
        Aren’t gas prices? How about election night violence? Come on, people.
        Wake up.

        • Anonymous

           Does not work that way….

        • Anonymous

           Does not work that way….

      • Anonymous

         How many other Presidents said they will fundamentally change America ?

        • Anonymous

          Almost everyone of them in one form or another…..

        • Anonymous

          Almost everyone of them in one form or another…..

      • Anonymous

         No-not as far as this one has gone.  Quit giving Obama a pass, by saying all the other boys do it too.  How juvenile.  Geez, we just seemed to have gotten rid of PPAA and now we get popsmoke to take over the conversation.  (and his/her prejudice against Romney)

    • Anonymous

       congress should stop this.

    • Anonymous

       It’s pretty clear, by your post and things the Obama administration have said themselves, that the second term of Obama will be ruling by executive orders and actions forced upon us by government agencies. They don’t care what Congress does because they are planning to just go around Congress and do what they want. And that is why this may be the most important election of our lifetimes.

  • Anonymous

    Why will things not change in Congress currently?

    “We call it “the nation’s capital,” but that’s increasingly a misnomer.  Consider Congress, where as last year ended 250 members, or 47% of our representatives, were millionaires, and the estimated median net worth of a senator was $2.56 million”

    http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175516/tomgram%3A_barbara_ehrenreich%2C_american_poverty%2C_50_years_later/

    • Anonymous

       Obama`s plan is to make congress ceremonial.
      If we don`t get rid of him this time, Congress won`t have any say……..PERIOD.

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness

      • Anonymous

        Jeez, yes Obama is screwing our civil liberties… So did GW Bush…. BUT! So is Congress! You think Romney will be any different? According to Grover Norquist the republicans will take control of both house and senate this year… Our civil liberties are so screwed that we will be getting screwed even while we sleep…

        Its just not Obama….

        • Anonymous

           You don`t fully understand. If Obama gets his way, Congress, as we know it will cease to exist. Oh you will see them all applauding and making some irrelevant statements, but they will have NO power.
          North Korea comes to mind.

          • Anonymous

            Harp… Yes things are not good. But your really going of the deep end here. If it even approached getting anything near North Korea the first to raise the warning would be the US Military….

            • Anonymous

              A good friend of mine has made a quick assessment of this and his conclusion is:

              ————————–
              The main order rescinded was one signed by WJC and was named “National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness”.

              Emperor Barry’s rescinds all of it and replaces it with “National Defense Resources Preparedness”

              Notice that it no longer concerns merely industrial resources but ALL resources.

              I’m going through it line by line and it is a means by which private concerns can be nationalized by the Administrative Branch of government. There are no provisions for any consultation with Congress and it can be put in place by merely declaring some sort of “emergency”, which is not defined anywhere in the document–how convenient. It is an autocrat’s dream come true–declare an emergency and take over by fiat.
              ———————————

              Why would anyone, Democrat or Republican want ANY President to have this power ?

              Here is another link with a break down.

              http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources

              • Anonymous

                Where do  you think this came from? Try G W Bush! Yes Obama is taking it further…

                Just like Bush took it from Clinton and expanded it….

                Congress does not care as long as no one can point the finger at it!

                The USSC? Shit….

                So all branches for government are screwing the American public in the name of national security…..

                • Anonymous

                   You are starting to babble now.

                  • Anonymous

                     Babble?

                    Please they said the same things about Bill Clinton….

        • Anonymous

          There you go again playing the blame everybody but Obama game.  Obama is supposed to be in charge of not only the country but his party who is in charge of the senate.  In every other endeavor the “lesder gets most of the blame.  Maybe you should rename yourself Smokescreen.

  • Anonymous

    Here is an interesting take on Romney….

    Money Pol

    Does Mitt Romney really love you?

    by Louis Menand

    Read more http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2012/03/19/120319crat_atlarge_menand#ixzz1pTeHN4Ms

  • Anonymous

    The reason why to vote for Romney!

    This is from Brown people prespective….

    http://youtu.be/Z6QOscKvUjU

    Heed the warning!

    • Anonymous

       Thanks for the link.

  • Anonymous

    The Chicago Tribune says many of the things you mention in it’s endorsement of Mitt Romney

    Chicago Tribune Endorses Mitt Romney
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-chicago-tribune-endorses-romney,0,824934.story

    And Roger Simon explains a few things about RDS.

    Romney Derangement Syndrome http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/03/17/romney-derangement-syndrome/?singlepage=true

  • Anonymous

    Look dittos to Romney for what he has accomplished in life. But at Bain Romney was in control. In DC he is not…. Besides as Governor, one term Governor, he was at best, mediocre. Romney needs more than Bain to make it to the Presidency…..

    Take a real look at the man as Governor… Yes he balanced the State budget and set up an surplus. But how did he do it?

    Let’s start with a page from the Mitch Daniels play book…. Federal aid…

    Romney now says about his proposed budget plan… ” my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes and puts defense cuts on the table.”

    But as Governor of Massachusetts, Romney, created some 33 new fees, doubled fees for court filings, professional regulations, gasoline, business signs, marriage licenses, and firearm licenses, and increased fees for many state licenses and services along with some 57 fees that were increased.

    He approved the New Market Tax Credit…as in all tax credits the public pays for them… He approved $128 million in tax changes and raised another $181 million in additional business taxes calling them the elimination of “loopholes”.

    Romney’s reduction in local government aid forced local government to raise property taxes and in 2005 Romney increased commercial property taxes. So much for no new taxes!

    Job creation? The Bain gunslinger created only a 1.3 percent employment rate ranking Massachusetts 47th out of 50 states. Yes he created 51,362 jobs during his term. BUT! Those were both low wage and part time jobs. Romney played the same numbers game as Obama is playing now.

    He backed the “Defense of Marriage Act” and opposed gay rights legislation….

    He backed gun control measures and the death penalty….

    Romney flipped his abortion position, now he is pro-life. Back then he was in favor of “woman’s rights”….. He did the same thing with Stem Cell research…

    Immigrations? Another joke… Romney signed an agreement  that  allowed Massachusetts State Police troopers to arrest and seek deportation of suspected illegal immigrants they encounter over the course of their normal duties.

    Environment? The man is 3/4 a tree huger….

    Lets talk about the disastrous “BIG DIG” and its continued mismanagement even though Romney fought to bring it under control. What the powerful and mighty Bain capitalist could not get the Big Dig under control?

    Transportation Earmarks…. Romney was King….

    The Olympics…. The man saved the Olympics!!! At the expense of the citizens of Massachusetts since he was missing in action as Governor to SAVE THE OLYMPICS! You think for one minute that if the Olympics were held in any other States than Utah, that Romney would have given a shit? 

    The last year of his term? Romney was rarely in State (212 days missing in action) and was preparing for his presidential run at a security cost to the Massachusetts residence of $103,365.00. One term as Governor and the man is ready for the Presidency???? Shit this is Obama part deuce….

    Lets not mention Romney-Care!

    As I said… At Bain if Romney wanted the lights on or off he flipped the switches. In public office those switches had lock boxes and he did not have all the keys…

    Besides Romney is about Romney… A one term mediocre Governor whose own party was at odds with does not make the Fantastic President many are trying to make of him……….

    To top all of that.. your voting to continue the Bush legacy…. So here is my position. Sucky candidates do not make it any better than the sucky president we already have….

    • Anonymous

      Is there anyone who meets your standards?  

      • Anonymous

        Yeah… Jindal, Huntsman, Christie, Clinton, Webb, Bayh, Pawlenty, Thune and even….Cuomo.

        Just to name a few….

    • Anonymous

      Is there anyone who meets your standards?  

    • Anonymous

      Is there anyone who meets your standards?  

  • Anonymous

    Sorry for being O/T but can the Republicans be serious about ending Medicare?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-republican-mediscare/2012/03/16/gIQAfoWYGS_story.html

    • Anonymous

      This is why our founding fathers created both a House and a Senate, and a two-party system.

      No matter how angry we get — let’s use Obama as an example — no matter how badly we want Obama out, we must avoid tossing out all Democrats.  That’s because we don’t want to toss out the baby with the bathwater.

      We need all types in Congress.  The four in that story are four VERY rightwing members of Congress.  If we get a far-right president, god help us all.  

      One solution I do see is that retirees who can afford their own insurance to be required to do so.  BTW:  Mitt Romney just turned 65 and he has chosen to keep his own insurance policy and didn’t enroll in Medicare.  He can afford to do that. And, in so doing, he will save U.S. taxpayers a lot of money. If his wife Ann does the same, she’ll save taxpayers even more since she has MS (unless Mitt’s policy shuts her out in which case she’d need Medicare).

      • Anonymous

        Look the best way to handle an Obama second term is to take control of both the house and the senate… Not run Mr. Flip Flopper against him. Besides Romney does not have coat tails. So we are gambling blindly right now… We can loose more than just the Presidency.

        By the way, “If we get a far-right president, god help us all. ”

        Eh…. and Romney’s advisers are what? Moderates?

        • Anonymous

          Well, that’s what happened in 2010.  And how has that gone?

          Unless you like constant stalemates.

          We have problems. Real problems.  It used to be that members of Congress and the White House got together, negotiated, and came to agreement.  Once upon a time, we actually got things done.  I actually remember great pieces of legislation getting passed — in the days when members across the aisle got along and made deals.

          But, because of hard-headed extremists (and lobbying), it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.

        • Anonymous

          Well, that’s what happened in 2010.  And how has that gone?

          Unless you like constant stalemates.

          We have problems. Real problems.  It used to be that members of Congress and the White House got together, negotiated, and came to agreement.  Once upon a time, we actually got things done.  I actually remember great pieces of legislation getting passed — in the days when members across the aisle got along and made deals.

          But, because of hard-headed extremists (and lobbying), it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.

          • Anonymous

             ”it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.”

            Gridlock and checkmate…. Its better than extreme left or right….

            My opinion? Time for term limits… Its not working otherwise….

            • Anonymous

               Exactly how many bills has Reid tabled that were passed in by the House?  Too many?

          • Anonymous

             ”it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.”

            Gridlock and checkmate…. Its better than extreme left or right….

            My opinion? Time for term limits… Its not working otherwise….

          • Anonymous

             ”it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.”

            Gridlock and checkmate…. Its better than extreme left or right….

            My opinion? Time for term limits… Its not working otherwise….

          • Anonymous

            Media hypes every move towards compromise or bi-partisanship as someone “winning” or “losing”. Scare the bejeebers out of folks who’s prime concern is getting re-elected.

            • Anonymous

               I get so tired of political people saying that it’s important for them to get re-elected so they can do the job for their constituents. Never occurs to them that if they actually do the job instead of spending all their time fundraising, that they can get re-elected on their record instead of how much they can raise for the campaign. They work 4 days a week, if that, presumably so they can get home to their districts/states to connect with their constituents. Most of them spend that time fundraising and having their asses kissed by lobbyists, not going home and seeing how their constituents feel about things. With the internet and video conferencing, they can have town meetings all week long, from DC. Then they can go back to working a 40 hour week, like their constituents. Well, the ones that have jobs, anyway.

              • Anonymous

                 ”Never occurs to them that if they actually do the job instead of
                spending all their time fundraising, that they can get re-elected on
                their record instead of how much they can raise for the campaign.”

                Oh no they all are very aware of this and they all hate it. Matter of fact anyone of them will tell you. The next campaign starts the day after your elected. Its all about money and reelection…

                It sucks… Time for term limits…..

                • Anonymous

                  “Its all about money and reelection.”
                  When it should be about representing one’s constituents and running on how well you did that. They seem to miss the point, as do you.

              • Anonymous

                Amen to that Fl Dem

        • Anonymous

          Well, that’s what happened in 2010.  And how has that gone?

          Unless you like constant stalemates.

          We have problems. Real problems.  It used to be that members of Congress and the White House got together, negotiated, and came to agreement.  Once upon a time, we actually got things done.  I actually remember great pieces of legislation getting passed — in the days when members across the aisle got along and made deals.

          But, because of hard-headed extremists (and lobbying), it’s impossible for Congress to get anything done anymore.

      • Anonymous

        Bronwyn,

        First a very sincere and huge Thank You for all the hard work you do for NQ. Have loved your thoughtful insight and strong research and critical thinking skills since Obamcare first hit congress. Just about everything you predicted happened, unfortunately, for those of us over 65,

        Romney obviously has not had time to study the Obamacare law in detail. There are severe penalties for those who do not sign up when they are 65.

        In a rather snarky way, Daily Caller laid it out in an easy to understand way.

        http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/16/mitt-meets-medicare/

      • Anonymous

        The Dems threw the baby out with the bath water already. I will continue to fight them until they understand the error of their ways. They won’t get my vote until they deserve it.

        Yes, we need all types. But lately we have been only given two choices: extreme this and extreme that.

    • Anonymous

      This is an opinion piece from a lefty leaning newspaper. Medicare will not be ended.

      What will happen however is if ObamaCare is allowed to stand in its present form, Medicare will be gutted, not by the repubs…. but by the dems.  Many people don’t realise, Medicare is only as expansive as the doctors that accept it, as more and more doctors don’t accept it, seniors will have less choices, more wait time, less quality of care…. in essense it is the dems who will have gutted Medicare, all the while screaming at the top of their lungs that it was repubs. It will hurt the middle class the most, the wealthy will be able to pay out of pocket, but the middle class will have to accept the limited choices they are given. The space in terms of care will grow even more expansive between the middle class and the wealthy, ObamaCare will have achieved what the dems professed to what to fix, quality of care will go down, access will go down, prices will go up.

      The legislation was not written to help the middle class with healthcare, it was written to help the political class, namely dems, they threw in a couple of good ideas (like the 26 yr old being on parent’s plan), but the rest of it is crap disguised as something to help the middle class.

    • Anonymous

       I don’t believe anything the Washington Post puts out.

  • Kathy Fitzgerald

    Instead of boring – let’s call it behind the scenes….

  • Anonymous

    Romney is boring and competent.

    The ignorant jerk in the WH is “exciting” and incompetent.

    I’ll take boring and competent.

    • Anonymous

       I concur.

    • Anonymous

      We need for the voting public to stop acting like immature jerks. Exciting and “cool” may be fine for adolescents but competence and knowledge are what’s needed in the real world.

      The snotty punk in the White House with his constant attacks on the Republican Party is a prime example of juvenile behavior. If we, the voters, reward that, we are no better.

      Blame some of the nonsense on the media that is constantly telling everyone that Romney is boring. IMO, far more boring is the pinheaded media that can find nothing else to say. Remember when they attacked Hillary Clinton for being a wonk?

       When did we, as a country, decide that competence and knownledge were bad things?

      The media tells us frequently about the intellect of Obama. They must then remain silent as he proves them liars from his own big, never silent, mouth on a regular basis. If the media wasn’t covering his stupid remarks the public would be laughing louder at him than they did at GeeDubya.

      • Anonymous

        “The snotty punk in the White House with his constant attacks on the Republican Party is a prime example of juvenile behavior.”

        News flash Marge!!! That jackass Dubya, Chaney and the republicans controlled DC and they directed the economic and constitutional screwing we are now suffering from. The democrats added to it all by holding us down and blaming the republicans for the actual screw job.

        Now you expect what from either party?

        • Anonymous

          Did I claim Dubya and Cheney were better?

          I want better behavior from a president than what we get. The president is supposed to represent the “country” not just his party and I want them to act like it.

          Snotty POS in the White House has a multitude of clones, surogates, obamacrats, not to mention the MSM to do his attacks for him.

          Obama and his juvenile attacks are undignified and unworthy of the high office he holds. JMO. And I would feel the same about ANY President from ANY party.

          Every comment about Obama doesn’t mean there isn’t an equivalent remark to be made about some Republican. Dubya and Cheney are gone. Why complain about them now? All the harm they did is all ready done.

          Obama is in the White House NOW. He is the frakkin POTUS. I want him to act like it. As I’ve wanted all of them, for as long as I can remember, to at least act like they have some character and dignity.

          I actually started loathing the men in the Oval Office with Bill Clinton and his damn blow job. We deserve better.

          • Anonymous

            We have deserved better since Reagan and since Reagan all we have gotten have been blow jobs….

            Romney is no Reagan and just as bad as Obama… The only difference is one is republican the other is a democrat….

            So you want to pendulum to swing from far left back to far right..again?

            OH Yeah! That will make a difference! 

            • Anonymous

              Romney certainly isn’t Reagan. But I don’t believe he’s as bad as Obama. You on the other hand do.

              No need to discuss this with you any further. We will never agree and while you seem to like arguing without end, I don’t.

              • Anonymous

                You live under Governor Mitt Romney?

                I did…..

            • http://profile.yahoo.com/DXEH5226VXYIM22E66OTQCVPRE Jacqueline S

              Romney has lived overseas as an adult.  Romney invests HIS money in overseas markets–My guess he is more aware and has a better grip on the foreign affairs than Barack Obama ever dreamed of.  He is Certainly more qualified on the international stage than most who would aspire to this position.

              Right now it is the Economy and the Constution at risk.  Romney has a good grasp on both.

              Unexciting yes, LEADERSHIP SKILL? Absolutely.

              Best interests of the Nation at heart yes.

              Good man with a well documented past, record of success, and vision for the future.

              No one has regretted hiring Romney.

              • Anonymous

                Bravo!

              • Anonymous

                 Delusional!

              • Anonymous

                 Good response Jacqueline.

          • Anonymous

            Why complain about W and Dickie now?

            Because we are feeling the effects of the screwed administration they lead. You also are suppose to learn from Lessons Learned…But hey lets repeat the same mistakes again… You know, doing the same things time and time again, expecting a different result?

            Insanity….

            • Anonymous

              By the way Marge… Besides Bain what other government experience does Romney have? How about experience in foreign affairs where the presidency really matters?

              The reason why Romney focuses on his private sector experience is because THAT IS ALL HE HAS!

              Its not enough…..

              • Anonymous

                None of the other candidates have foreign policy experience either.

                • Anonymous

                  You get a cookie! They all suck! As I said before sucky candidates make sucky presidents…

                  • Anonymous

                     I suppose this explains the “blowjob” comment you made earlier.

          • Anonymous

             By the way Marge… Besides Bain what other government experience
            does Romney have? How about experience in foreign affairs where the
            presidency really matters?

            The reason why Romney focuses on his private sector experience is because THAT IS ALL HE HAS!

            Its not enough…

            • Kathy Fitzgerald

              And Obama had LOTS of experience when he took office.  By your standard, he should not have been elected.

              • Anonymous

                Obama has shit for experience…. The man should have never been elected….

              • Anonymous

                Obama has shit for experience…. The man should have never been elected….

        • Anonymous

           Holy sheep shit! Why are you bringing up Bush and Cheney? Do you really believe that we are ignorant of what they did? Did it even enter you mind that you are addressing a former Democrat? Believe me, we formers know very well what Bush and Cheney did. And we were as vocal in our admonitions against them as we are Obama. Perhaps even more so.

          • Anonymous

            I bring it up to equalize the blame game… This blaming Obama for everything is bullshit…. Yeah he is a problem…But he is not the entire problem….

            • Anonymous

              I completely agree with you that Obama is not the whole problem. Our partisan Congress, both on the right and left, have an equal share of the blame.

            • Anonymous

               That’s because we already went through eight years of blaming Bush.  Been there, done that, now shut up about it already.

              • Anonymous

                Oh so now Bush’s failed policies do not matter?

                • Anonymous

                   They matter. They just aren’t relevant.

                  • Anonymous

                    They just aren’t relevant.

                    YOUR STLL PAYING FOR THEM!

            • Anonymous

              “I bring it up to equalize the blame game… “  That is the game plan of you Obama lovers to “equalize the blame”.  Well guess what I hope Americans are looking for someone to fix the problems not blame others.  We are so sick of the “its not my fault” strategy of Obama.  He was elected to fix the problems not make them worse.  What his team is really afraid of isthat  in the contrast of jobs, unemployment, deficits etc., his record will be worse than Bush.  He knows he will have a tough time winning hence the “its not my fault things were too bad to fix in 4 years” strategy.  If that is the case what mkes us think you can fix it if you are given another 4 years or 8 years in all?

              • Anonymous

                Me an Obama lover? LOL! Just baloney….. 

      • Anonymous

         I’m not convinced that, as a country “we’ve decided that competence and knowledge are bad things.”   I’m more inclined to believe that we as a country disagree on what constitutes competence and knowledge.   There are those who believe that those qualities are embodied in President Obama, and thus they will vote for him.   There are those who believe Mitt Romney represents competence and knowledge, and will vote for HIM.     Whatever people believe it’s their right to believe it.  You may pass judgement on the beliefs and opinion of others, and that’s your right to do so.  But to think that there ought to be consensus on the definition of those terms, well good luck with that.  America is a diverse country with diverse views.  That “snotty punk in the White House” may be constantly attacking Republicans, yes, but those Republicans are constantly attacking President Obama too.   Is there one side that hasn’t and doesn’t attack the other?   To believe that only one side is guilty of attack, well that just isn’t an easy thing for me to do.   It’s all a matter of perspective.   The guy you like is right, competent, good, knowledgeable, and the best thing since sliced bread.   The guy you hate is snotty, stupid, and incompetent.   I agree with President Obama on some issues, and the same is true for me with Governor Romney.    Neither one of them is perfect – all good or all bad.  They are politicians, for the cry.   Politicians lie and tell you what you want to hear to get elected.  I would be delusional to think that only one party/side is guilty of lying and attacking.    

        • Anonymous

          Never claimed that only one side does the attacking. I just think the frakkin POTUS should be held to a higher standard.

          • Anonymous

             and that is Mitt.

          • Anonymous

            The problem with Obama is that he takes no responsibility for problems when they make him look bad. It’s always someone else’s fault. Harry Truman’s “The buck stops here” should be the scale by which we judge our Presidents. Whether or not something is directly a president’s fault or not, he or she is responsible for fixing things, even things seemingly out of his or her control. Comes with the territory.

            • Anonymous

               What Americans want IMO is someone who can pull our wagon out of the ditch. Yes maybe it was a Republican who drove the wagon into the ditch in the first place.

              But all we’ve heard from this administration is:

              1) does the horse have adequate contraception.

              2) is it environmentally safe to drag the wagon out of the ditch.

              3) is there a green alternative to pulling the wagon out of the ditch.

              I think its time to send Obama and his crew home. We need to get someone who isn’t afraid to sweat out his dress shirts to get the job done.

              • Anonymous

                 Your 1, 2, 3 has me cracking up. Wonderful analogy.

          • Anonymous

             okay.  slap rec’d.  going home now.  peace.

            • Anonymous

              Wasn’t meant as a slap, was meant as an explanation. Whatever.

      • Anonymous

         I agree with your apt description of Obama-snotty punk.  His attitude demeans the office.  I would like to have a man who is not intimidated, but at least reveres the office of the Presidency.

    • Anonymous

       competent… As a business leader… Not as Governor or President….

      • Anonymous

        At this point, a competent business leader is needed. However boring he/she is.

        • Anonymous

          Bullshit… The President has shit power over domestic economic issues…. That is the realm of the US Congress, where the real problem lies…..

          • Anonymous

            Talk to any small business person and see how terrified they are at all the crap being thrown at them. I have family that own 2 small businesses, one of them is scared like nothing else to hire because he’s not sure what future demand will be.

            The president has tremendous control of giving faith to smaller businesses that the govt is on their side. Corporations have enough lobbying power and revenue buffer to not be effected. Small businesses are the first to suffer., and the blame lies with both the president and the congress, equally!
            And this current president is nothing but hostile to businesses, especially smaller ones, and even corporations, unless they doante to him, like GE.

            • Anonymous

              Yes the president has a share in the blame… BUT! The MAJORITY of it is on the Congress…

              By the way, you know that business competent guy you like? When he was Governor to balance his books he INCREASED the corporate tax….

              Who do you think suffered? The big guys or little guys?

              By the way Staples? How many small businesses did Staples take out?

              Romney is just not the guy… Neither is Santorum or Gingrich. Obama? The best thing we can do is checkmate him in the Congress and then get a real player in the WH in 2016…

              Also TERM LIMITS! Would be a good thing…

              • Anonymous

                And how many small businesses did Staples cause to be formed?

                ABO all the way, Mittens is the person I’m voting for.

                • Anonymous

                  Go for it! Make that vote count!

                  But don’t complain later…..

              • Anonymous

                And how many small businesses did Staples cause to be formed?

                ABO all the way, Mittens is the person I’m voting for.

            • Anonymous

               Sing it-no longer a Democrat.

      • Anonymous

         Is that why the Republicans voters in Massachusetts  overwhelmingly voted for Romney in the primary.  Must have been the shitty job he did.

    • Anonymous

       He is a one-term governor who would have lost re-election had he run again.  Yes, I know that Barry was a one-term senator, but that’s my point–you claim Romney has some kind of uber-cred on “competence” but…why, exactly?  Because he was smart enough to invest in someone else’s bright idea?

      • Anonymous

         Just to be clear, Obama never served for one term.

    • Anonymous

      How do you  figure Obama is “incompetent”? He has actually been one of the most competent Presidents we have ever had. He has run the WH very well and made very good well thought-out decisions. He has so far done a good job at cleaning-up the mess left by the previous President.