RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

What Really Happened in the Presidential Election

Barack Obama and his drones are deservedly happy over dodging the bullet of a shitty economy and getting another four years to play golf at Andrews Air Force base. But when you step back, wipe the tears from your eyes, the actual vote numbers are fascinating. Let’s just deal with the facts:

Fewer people voted this year than in the 2008 election.
In 2008, Obama garnered 69,456,897. Compare that to the 61,128,734 this year. That means more than 8 million people no longer thought that Obama was the one or was worth a vote.

How about the Republicans? Here’s another shocker. McCain received 59,934,814 in 2008 while Romney, despite the appearance of more enthusiasm, only received 58,138,521 this go round. That’s almost 1.8 million fewer Republican votes for Romney. Despite reduced enthusiasm and support for Obama, Republicans were not inspired.

Rush Limbaugh devoted a big part of his program today discussing this. Rush insisted:

We didn’t lose the election on Tuesday because we’re pro-choice or pro-life; we did not lose the election because single women hate us and don’t like us. That’s not why we lost. We might not be getting a majority of those votes, but when three million of our own people don’t show up, it doesn’t matter who on the Democrat side we’re not getting. I want to take you back to this program and me on January 6 of this year. . . .

In a subsequent conversation with a caller Rush continued:

CALLER: Well, I want us to get the Republican leadership to wake up, and we’ve gotta get conservatives.

RUSH: Ken, I hate to tell you, but that’s not the message they’re taking from this election, as you know, if you’ve been listening to the program today. They know that three million didn’t show up. If they come to believe that the three million didn’t show up because they don’t like moderates, they’re just gonna get mad at you like the Democrats get mad. At least what I’ve seen so far on TV, and read, and is coming from the so-called conservative media, the Republicans think they goofed up by failing to get the Hispanic vote and the single women vote. They think they goofed up on the demography side, which tells me that you’re gonna continue to be pretty unhappy with the direction they go.

CALLER: Well, the establishment of the Republican Party has unfortunately been in Washington too long –

RUSH: Well, I’m just gonna tell you, look, I understand what you’re doing, but you gave us Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama. Your vote is your vote. I understand. I saw this figure, I saw this three million didn’t show up. I saw it yesterday morning. It didn’t register. I even mentioned it at the beginning of this program. It didn’t register ’til last night when I compared it. Had you guys all shown up, Romney would have beat Obama, popular vote, by 180 thousand. Those are hard numbers, real hard numbers. I don’t know what it would have meant Electoral College-wise. Anyway, I gotta go. Ken, thanks for the call. Back after this.

Looks like the number is closer to two million than three. That said, we are seeing what I think is Conservative denial. Conservatives (whatever that is) insist that if only they had a genuine Conservative they would have victory. Nonsense. There is no such thing as a “genuine Conservative.”

Why do I say that? Answer me this–which of the following is a “genuine Conservative?”

Rick Perry
Rick Santorum
Michelle Bachman
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich

Depends on what your pet issue is. If abortion is your make or break, then Santorum and Bachman meets the test. But their position, while based in a strong moral position, is not shared by a majority of Americans. Do you really think either would have fared much better than Romney? Perhaps they might have drawn more of the base, but you cannot discount the possibility that they would have inspired more Democrats and Independents, who sat this one out, to go to the polls to vote against them by backing Obama.

Want some more anecdotal evidence of the Conservative myth? Look at what happened to Tea Party Conservatives Alan West and Joe Walsh. Both won their races as Tea Party advocates in 2010. This time, both lost. While West is still disputing the results (and only lost by less than 3000 votes), neither West nor Walsh managed to rally a surge of “Conservative” to vote for them and keep them in office. Sad, I think both men brought courage of their convictions and deserved to be re-elected. But, their conservative views did not produce enough conservative voters willing to back them and off-set the Democrats and Independents who did not agree with them.

Hardline Conservatives are like hardline Liberals. Each have a Utopian vision that they believe would usher in perfect Government if only given a shot. But each are pursuing a Chimera–a mythical thing composed of different parts.

What do Conservatives believe? Ostensibly, they believe in limited Government. However, on the issue of abortion, some who claim to be Conservatives insist the Government has every right to insert itself in the decision on whether or not a fetus should be carried to term.

Marriage? Many Conservatives want the Federal Government to insert itself on the question of who can marry whom. Social Conservatives, for example, strongly believe in the Defense of Marriage Act and want the Feds to set the standard for what States can and cannot do on the matter of whether Homosexuals can marry.

How about the Government’s power to detain someone without habeus corpus? Well, if the Government labels the person a “terrorist” then many Conservatives are quite happy to let the Government do what it wants.

There is an inherent conflict between Economic Conservatives and Social Conservatives.

The caller to Rush’s show quoted above is an example of the dark underbelly of Conservatives. This guy is mentally just like Al Qaeda’s Ayman Zawahiri. No, I do not mean that the caller wants to kill innocents in the name of his belief, but he does hold the same kind of uncompromising mentality. Zawahiri will condemn practicing Muslims as Apostates because they do not adhere to what he considers true Islam. This caller rejected Romney as not an “Authentic Conservative” because he dared to take the rational, sane position that in Government one must work with the other side in order to achieve tangible results.

I also am fascinated by the bizarre obsession with Ronald Reagan. I thing Reagan was a great President. But he was not a “true Conservative.” He found ways to compromise with Democrats in order to get his legislative priorities through. Reagan did not act like the mythical true Conservative. He did not eliminate the Department of Education, for example. And, under his leadership, the Federal Government grew in size.

Okay, I’ve teed it up. What do you think?

  • shelldoll2

    Agreed Mr. Johnson. There is no mythical perfect candidate that Republicans have never had and they never will.

    They would rather lose and put our Republic at risk than vote for competent leadership.,

    • MG6

      Agreed…..

  • binky354

    Larry, I’ve been reading various blog and news articles all day and I’ve decided it just doesn’t matter. We have lost this country and there’s no way “we the people” can win. Laura Ingram and her pundits were blaming it on the Republican Party; not a thing was said about an ignorant populace and blatant voter fraud. There’s no integrity in the election process. Then I read this about Florida politics and Allen West’s attempt to keep his seat in the House: http://tinyurl.com/cx2387d

    We worked our hearts — and for what?

    I know some people think Ann Barnhardt is a nut, but she sure can hit the nail on the head at times. I believe she’s right about this: The results of this election were determined in 2008, including the faux-opposition candidate. You people who have spent the last several months breathlessly agonizing over this, analyzing fake polls and deluding yourselves into believing that this was somehow a legitimate operation are just sad. You’re
    like the people in Iraq who supported the opposition candidate to Saddam Hussein for all of those years. Yes, Saddam Hussein held “elections”. Regularly. That is what happened here yesterday. We had a Saddam Hussein “election”. …

    The Republic was overthrown in a neo-Stalinist putsch four years ago. Stalinists don’t walk away. Ever. Stalinists don’t hold elections – they put on shows to delude the masses, which they consider to be vermin, into believing that they still have some say and some degree of freedom. …

    [and then she said this] Note that all of the so-called pundits on the so-called “right” are avoiding the issue of massive voter fraud. They’re all just spewing the same nonsense as ever: …

    I listened to a little Fox news today, and sure enough none of the pundits said a word about suspected fraud. One article I read said that Romney won in the states that required Voter ID and Obama overwhelmingly won in those states that didn’t required ID (I personally haven’t checked for backup articles to that information.)

    Needless to say, I’m at a low point. The evidence is overwhelming that the voting public is voting in ignorance, being brainwashed by the liberal education system and the liberal media. And, I think it won’t be overcome no matter how hard we try.

    Sorry to be such a downer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xhblsFPVRys

    • jrterrier

      I’m not ready to explain the results yet. For starters, it is my understanding that the total vote tally isn’t in yet. There are absentee ballots to be counted, armed forces ballots to be counted, and provisional ballots. we are comparing the total 2008 tally with an incomplete 2012 tally.

      for every explanation put forward there are three others that are not considered.

      coulter had a good article today about it noting the downer effect that Akin & his Indiana foot-in-mouth twin had on the female vote coming out for romney. i can attest to the fact that a lot of young women were taken in by the contraception madness. and noting her sadness at the fact that we won’t ever have Romney as President. http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/07/ann-coulter-dont-blame-romney/

      i agree on voter fraud. lower voter turnout doesn’t jive with the lines at the polls unless there were fewer polling places or voting machines, which no one has suggested was the case (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/06/5th-Election-Reports-from-Citizen-Journalists-Keep-Going) and meanwhile back in Philly, “In 13 Philadelphia wards, Obama received 99 percent of the vote or more.”
      (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/20121108_Vote_was_astronomical_for_Obama_in_some_Philadelphia_wards.html:
      In WI, R/R lost but Republicans took back all the recall seats they had lost earlier in the year.

      the faux bipartisan/FEMA photo-op also had something to do with the loss (if the exit polls are to be believed).

      the complicit media. the one debate that Romney slammed was the one where the moderator stayed out of the fray. CBS holding back the Benghazi tape, Candy Crowley interrupting; the rest of the constant slicing of Romney.

      we ran some lousy candidates in some places.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      I remain hopeful that West will prevail. It sucks.

      • Theymustbemorons

        I was down in FL (Palm Beach County) until 3rd week of October (I’m a NYC “snowflake”) and I could not believe the dirty, dishonest, and nasty t.v. ads being run against West. I hope he does prevail.

        • foxyladi14

          Me too Larry.

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      Please watch Bill Whittle’s election night video for a plan to do a runaround around the government. It’s brilliant:

      http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/26770607

      • binky354

        I’m watching now. Thanks. And I hope you’ll watch http://tinyurl.com/cx2387d the story of the politics involved in changing West’s district to cause him to lose among other things. That’s when I realized the depths of corruuption men would go to to get rid of good men. I didn’t cry when Romney lost, but I cried after reading that articles, because if this prevails against hope is gone.

      • HObama HObamanana

        Thanks for the link. It took me a while but I watched the whole video. He has some very interesting ideas, many of which I agree with. I can’t honestly say that I agree with everything he says but he does make a good case for his position.

    • randi

      “Note that all of the so-called pundits on the so-called “right” are avoiding the issue of massive voter fraud. ” Don’t flame me..this is just my personal opinion at the moment. I think that the reason that both sides are avoiding the issue of massive voter fraud is that BOTH sides manipulated the votes. Any serious investigation of the votes in the swing states would ‘out’ the corruption of both the Republican and Democrat Parties. Both sides cheated…one side managed to out-cheat the other and ‘won’. If this was a novel, it would be brilliant. As it is real-life, I find it just so sad.

      • piattq

        I can believe the voter fraud issue and the knowing Chitown politics Repubs have to know they are babes in the woods compared to Dems. Allowing people to register on election day tho’ should not be allowed anywhere. Good luck with getting that passed into law.

    • olivia1998

      I agree! When you have a sitting President getting 2,000 and 4,000 numbers at rallies and the opposition gets 18,000 and 30,000 and he loses something is very wrong and that’s how dictators win. First the media , they have that, then elections and bingo

  • HARP2

    The numbers just don`t add up.
    Obama only won by 3 or 4 good size graveyards.

    • http://twitter.com/ChocChipsMusic The Chocolate Chips

      if this is the road you guys are going down (more reality denial) you will never learn your lesson.

      I’m fine with that. but realize that you are digging your own grave.

      • beachnan

        Explain to me again why Democrats are against voter ID?

  • HARP2

    What luck! Obama won dozens of Cleveland districts with 100% of the vote.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2957358/posts

    • beachnan

      And no one is questioning this? Frightening.

      • randi

        I am one person questioning the integrity of some of the election results, as are some others. The rest, including our no-longer-free press just accept anything or look the other way. It seems that corruption is acceptable now to a majority of Americans. The rest of us are ‘crazy people’. I am so tired of being told lies. I cannot just fall in line. I cannot un-know what I know..un-see what I see. I guess that most people believe what they want to believe, regardless of facts or logic or anything.

    • jrterrier

      where is the Rep Governor & Senator?

      • KenoshaMarge

        Hiding under their desks? Because to question the results makes them “sore” losers donchaknow!

        • HObama HObamanana

          When Kasich tried to fight the unions in Ohio (and lost) it was obvious that he was unwilling to really put up any kind of fight. The unions put out effective and numerous ads, the Governor put out few and lame ads.

          He has been a good Governor from a financial standpoint but he is one of the biggest wusses I’ve seen as a head of the state. And I hate to say that because I honestly like him.

          • KenoshaMarge

            Until the GOP starts showing some guts there is no chance that anything like a democracy will exist in this country. First and foremost is a free and unbiased media. Without that there is no democracy. And we are without that.

            • HObama HObamanana

              I’ve been doing a lot of thinking over the past few days about what went wrong, about what, if anything, I could have done differently and all kinds of things. I sort of came to the conclusion today that there was a reason I was a Democrat for so long. I believed in something I thought that party stood for. As it became blatantly obvious that I was wrong in my perception I lashed out and joined the other side, thinking that doing so was a good thing.

              But I have never been a Republican. Their positions on social issues is quite off-putting and offensive to me. And while I support fiscal responsibility I have also been unable to dismiss some comments from prominent members of that party about those less fortunate. And I’m tired of pretending as if they don’t exist.

              In short, I find myself without political representation.

              Now, to your lamentation about the state of the media. I fully agree with you that what we once had no longer exists. And I really don’t think it will ever come back. We essentially have a state run media now and that will not change for at least 4 years, if ever. The solution, as I see it, is to use the tools we have available through the medium of the internet, to become our own media. As many of us are already doing. But I am thinking of something more organized.

              Breitbart has the right idea. But they are as biased as any other media outlet. What I envision is something more akin to a balanced approach to reporting the news so that the facts sway people, not people swaying the facts to sway people. I think there are enough of us ex-Dims that are moderate enough to present things fairly. And perhaps, there are a few ex-Pub moderates out there too. I just don’t see any other way to set things right unless we do it ourselves.

              • KenoshaMarge

                I agree with most of what you say. I am an Independent who is conservative fiscally. Socially I am a moderate.

                Conservatives who are appalled at the government interfering in their lives want that same government to interfere when it is for social issues they support.

                I want the government out of our personal lives most of the time.

                Media? The MSM is run by and for the left.

                You are on the right track I think but I wonder if it isn’t too late. The gimme voters are so numerous that it seems impossible to defeat them and their greed. Or maybe right now I am just too depressed and angry to see any hope.

                • binky354

                  I wish I could be optomistic, but I think it’s too late to change MSM. They are part and parcel of the destruction of this country. We’ve allowed Hollywood and MSM to shape our culture and we’ve unwittingly been a part of it. I get sick when I hear the young people giving the reasons for their vote. As a parent and grandparent, how did I participate in allowing this to happen? When I hear the young people giving their reasons for voting, I hear liberal media and Hollywood coming out of their mouths. A total collapse of this country might wake them up, but it’ll be too late. They don’t know that Hamas is celebrating Obama’s victory. They don’t know the Communist party is ecstatic over this win. They don’t know how happy Putin is that Obama won. They have no clue how their lives will be limited because of this election.

                  I’m old and I don’t have the energy to fight another day. Let them sing, I expect they’ll cry tomorrow.

                  • KenoshaMarge

                    They will have at least earned their tears.

                    Those who tried to tell them have not.

                    Ignorance may be bliss for a time…

                • Alan Davis

                  The MSM is run by corporations for profits. The corporate model is THE controlling factor and the bottom line is always money.

                  I agree about gimme voters tho. Start with the big money and end oil subsidies, and farm subsidies! No bailouts for banks! The most lazy and greedy are the corporate welfare queens and the farmers.

                  • KenoshaMarge

                    Stop the handouts. Period.

                • HObama HObamanana

                  You may be right that it is too late. But I am an optimist generally and can’t allow myself to believe that the bastards have won everything for all time. I look at this more like we have lost a few fairly significant battles. The war rages on even if it will be behind the scenes and without apparent direct action.

                  There is nothing wrong with grieving, with being down or being pissed. Just try not to let it get the best of you. Because that is truly what these people want. They want us to feel defeated so that we won’t keep fighting on.

                  • KenoshaMarge

                    I am usually an optimist too. Right now I can’t see anything to be optimistic about. Perhaps in time.

  • beachnan

    I am a fiscal conservative and a progressive when it comes to social issues, so where does that leave me? Larry, I have said it before, but I will say it again–the numbers don’t add up. The enthusiasm for the Republican Party was up this year. We were told that people were waiting for hours to vote in many states and that in Virginia they had to keep the polls open longer to accomodate the large number of voters. Yet Virginia said that the Republican vote was down in 3 different counties-by thousands, so you have to ask why? I don’t trust the system anymore, and unless they change the system, I don’t think I will ever feel I can trust the outcome. Someone has to ask, why doesn’t the Democratic party want photo ID? Why do they allow same day registration and voting in Wisconsin? Why do we allow the New Black Panther party to stand outside of several polling places in Philadelphia? Why do we put our faith in machines that have been proven to be hackable? Somebody doesn’t want all these checks in place, so we citizens are going to have to demand a change, if we want to ensure that our votes count. Everyone wants to figure out what went wrong, but what if they didn’t do anything wrong? What if someone just hacked the machines to get the outcome they wanted? That’s not to say that the Republicans ran a perfect race, but they had internals that showed a very different outcome. I used to think people were crazy (tin foil) saying that the system is rigged, but I don’t anymore. It just doesn’t add up.

    • jrterrier

      I agree with you. so let’s do something about it. let’s start writing letters to the editors. let’s make sure this doesn’t happen again.

      the war on women is the war the DEM party ran. we’ve gone from liberated persons to vaginas.

      MLK had a dream that his daughters would be judged by their character rather than the color of their skins but all we do any more is count the colors on everything.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      You know what you are? A good American. Don’t lose hope. There are two ways to learn. One is by listening to words of wisdom and understanding history. The other is experience, which will be damn painful. We experienced this kind of delusion in the lead up to WWII. I hope we don’t have to go thru something so bloody. But the liberal fantasies being so ardently pursued will be exposed as the nightmare they are.

      • beachnan

        Back at you Larry. Thanks.

      • Fred82

        Well……

        It’s kind of hard to argue that Americans are good at understanding history. In fact, I don’t think Americans have ever been good at learning history.

        I guess painful experience is going to be the way to go once again.

      • foxyladi14

        And soon I hope.

    • politicsisdirty

      I hope Allan West gets his manual recount so we can also determine if the votes for Romney were counted by the machines accurately. The program in the machines can easily be tailored to favor Obama or the machines can easily be hacked.

      If Allan West suddenly wins, JUST TO AVOID A MANUAL RECOUNT, then it gets really “fishy”.

      Why are “intelligent” people not entertaining the possibility of widespread irregularity?

      • jrterrier

        Because everything is now viewed through the prism of partisanship. Liberals, whose rallying cry for 50 years has been — don’t trust the government and the military — now blindly accept whatever this White House has to say about Benghazi, Fast & Furious, the unemployment #s, or anything else — because our govt never lies to us.

      • olivia1998

        there is county in Ohio were Obamba received 108% of the vote. just sayn….

        • win43

          See, that’s just a lie. I debunked it here ten minutes ago.

        • Hondo Elroy

          What BS. I live in OH and followed county election results closely. In NE Ohio, the County of Ashtabula (next door) in the past has tended to go Repub with about 75% if its county offices and votes this election Dem across the board by solid margins in either ALL county offices or almost all of them plus went solidly for Obama, Dem Sen. Brown, Dem State Reps and Senator, etc. And there was no conspiracy nor rigged voting machines, etc (monitors from both sides at many – random – polling sites… plus I personally spoke with many Ind and Mod Repubs and they specifically indicated that they simply no longer have any trust in the GOP [obviously at all levels] and were tired of the “obstructionist GOP Congress” and their fear of the GOP being taken over by a “base core” of fundamentalist hateful God pseudo-Christians and the extremely wealthy looking to establish a plutocracy dictatorship). Anyway, please send me links from legit sources as to where you got your 108% figure.

          The Ashtabula info can be found here:

          http://voterfind.com/public/ohashtabula/results.htm

    • Mary Stanfield

      “I am a fiscal conservative and a progressive when it comes to social issues, so where does that leave me?”

      It leaves you rather confused. You vote Republican, a party that is neither fiscally conservative nor progressive on social issues. There is absolutely zero evidence that Republicans have ever been fiscally conservative. Remember Cheney’s line “deficits don’t matter”. Both Bush and Reagan completely blew-up the deficit and debt. Romney’s economic plan was largely to push through a massive unpaid for tax cut, which would have further blown up the deficit and debt.

      More voter conspiracy stories from you. Very funny stuff! The first thing required to rebuild your party and movement is to start being honest with yourselves. Get out of the bubble you have all created for yourselves and start facing reality.

      • beachnan

        I am registered Independent, so I don’t have to fix any party, nor am I beholden to any party. I just see way more pretty in the Republican Party these days, then I do the Democrat. I am sick of Dems and Hollywood types that preach tolerance, but act like thugs and say the most vile things about the people those that don’t agree with them. Former Dem here of 36 years, now happily Independent for the last 4 and continuing…

      • Denver McDaniel

        What is a “not paid for tax cut”? Quit buying in to Liberal economics lingo. tax cuts do not “cost money” unless you believe that Gov’t owns 100% of our paychecks and that tax cuts actually decrease tax revenue, which they don’t.

        • Alan Davis

          As a fiscal conservative, it probably means giving a tax cut while increasing spending and paying with credit. I think her point was that the R brand is almost worse than the D brand for irresponsible spending on credit.

    • jrterrier

      I’m sorry but the question desk is closed. You are not allowed to question the govt because the First Amendment after all was only inserted into the constitution to protect & provide free contraceptives. Questioning the running of govt is not permitted.

      Oh, wait, just reread the Bill of Rights: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
      Never mind. You do have an absolute right to petition the government for a redress of grievances but couldn’t find anything about contraceptives. Don’t know what I was thinking.

    • HoosierinDixie

      I agree with you beachnan, it just doesn’t add up. The more I learn the more I think this election was a result of fraud. Why would defense workers in Virginia stand in line to vote for Obama knowing their jobs could be eliminated through the sequestration cuts? Why would Cuban Americans in Florida vote for Obama (14% more than 2008) when they already hold preferential immigration status? Why would there be lines of people suddenly registering to vote shortly before the polls close on election day? Why did we hear of numerous machines switching votes from Romney to Obama but ONLY in the swing states? I sincerely hope the states that have Republican governors and legislatures will take immediate action to ensure the integrity of the vote before the midterm elections of 2014. I hope those efforts include mandatory voter ID and automatic hand recounts. We wait four years, I think a few more weeks won’t hurt to make sure all votes are counted accurately.

      • win43

        Why would ANYONE but the very rich vote for Romney, given that the Romney tax plan would have required raising their taxes?

        We can do this all day. Point is, not everyone evaluated the candidates and their proposals the same way you did. And more people voted for Obama than Romney. Period. It was an election and that’s how they work.

        • HoosierinDixie

          Fuck Off.

          • win43

            Okay. I guess I’ll leave you to pout and misunderstand democracy.

            • beachnan

              Yes, please leave.

            • PortiaElizabeth

              Win, what part of “voter fraud” is beyond your level of comprehension? Do you truly want people to think you don’t understand the concept?

              • win43

                Where did voter fraud occur? Please point to one documented case. Just one.

                Thing is, you guys are either making this shit up, or swallowing shit that other people made up.

                • olivia1998

                  tell me how Obamaba won 100% of the vote in Republican districts just sayn…..

                  • win43

                    He didn’t. You are making that up. If you’re not, cite a source.

                • PortiaElizabeth

                  Okay, win, how about this for just one?

                  10 counties in Colorado had a total registration ranging between 104 to 140 percent of their
                  respective populations.

                  • win43

                    So they should purge their voter registration rolls.

                    Was turnout greater than population? (I’m going to go ahead and say “no.”)

                    Any evidence whatsoever that this was anything more than counties being lax about updating their rolls?

                    • PortiaElizabeth

                      90% voter turn out. Let’s see, 90% of 140% is… 126%. (I wanted to say, “You do the math,” but was afraid you might not know how to calculate, being such a babe in the woods and all.) You do understand that 100% = ALL of the registered voters, so 126% would be… voter fraud? That concludes our lesson for today, children. Have a good weekend and try not to think if it hurts your brains to do so.

                  • https://openid.aol.com/opaque/711ce89c-2aed-11e2-8da0-000bcdca4d7a Maliengus

                    Registration is NOT turnout. Some counties just dont do a good job of purging deaths, residents who have moved away, and other clerical deletions that should have taken place but never did. That can be a function of lack of manpower, lack of oversight, etc… REGISTRATION issues do NOT necessarily mean actual voter fraud.

                    • PortiaElizabeth

                      Well, Maliengus, since you seem to be so wise, then I shouldn’t even need to point out that, given what you say is true, then it wouldn’t be news, would it? And perhaps you missed the part where i reported there was a 90% voter turn out in those counties. So, again given what you said is true, then if there were actually fewer voters, it would be an even bigger discrepancy in numbers.

                      For one example, let’s say for the sake of simplicity that in a particular county, the number of voters registered is equal to the percentage. In other words, 140% =140 voters registered. If 90% of the registered voters in that county actually vote, it would be 126 votes. So by your theory, if there are really only presently 110 voters in that county, but there were 126 votes cast, that would mean the turn out was 139%. Since 139% is a greater number than 126%, It would be obvious that the voter fraud is even more egregious by your own logic.
                      Sheesh, this is not rocket science. It’s not even up to SAT questions. I can’t believe the intellectual quality of some of the dissenters who try to argue here.

                • Bigfoot Steve

                  Thing is, you guys are either making this shit up, or swallowing shit that other people made up.

                  Ironic, coming from a supporter of a guy who has been making shit up for 4+ years, lol.

        • Bigfoot Steve

          Why would ANYONE but the very rich vote for Romney, given that the Romney tax plan would have required raising their taxes?

          That’s just as big a lie now as it was before the election.

      • Barb Bf

        When I was on my way to an appointment on the afternoon of 5 November..I passed by and looked at the long, long, line at the precinct..and was surprised that it consisted of a huge number of persons of color. Actually, I don’t recall seeing anyone not a person of color in the line. I was surprised …because this particular area is 95% white. Was it because everyone white had voted early or used absentee ballots?

    • PortiaElizabeth

      Is it true the Republicans won in every state with voter ID laws?

      • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

        Wouldn’t surprise me one bit.

        • Denver McDaniel

          no it’s not true…we have photo ID in Michigan and Obama, as well as Dem. Senate Stabenow

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      You know how easy it is to change numbers in a database? Takes a few keystrokes, that’s all. Where’s the system in place to verify all these vote? I don’t see it. Can I as a citizen join a vote oversight committee? I’ve certainly never been invited to do that. We go vote and then our votes end up in some musty dark room where some unknown computer person is tallying everything up. Anyone who is *not* concerned about this process is someone who is benefiting from cheating.

    • buzzlatte3

      This election has a rigged feel about it in every direction. The jig was up on the cheating so the fix was from within. Drudge has an interesting red/blue map up today. It doesn’t match the results either.

      • HObama HObamanana

        The fact is that the election is over, we know we got taken, that it was rigged and there isn’t a damned thing we can do about it. The Dims don’t care, the GOP acts as if it ain’t no big deal and the media is absolutely nowhere to be found.

        I am going to concentrate on things I have the ability to change and let the bitching and speculating go. Or at least give it my best shot.

        • buzzlatte3

          I’m not a conspiracy theorist or rabid right-winger. But got taken is right. The government has been snooping around in the form of friendly surveys regarding natural resources on private property all this year. I sniff and I smell Agenda 21 and the UN all over it. I really don’t think an honest election was held. There’s been no accountability on the foreign donations to Obama. It stinks big time.

        • obxpatriot

          I knew when the stories started coming out in early voting….I pressed the button for Romney and it KEPT coming up Obama. Were the first 3 or 4 votes that went to Obama deleted, no of course not!

    • Dianne Babin

      not to mention the 40,000 + military absentee ballots that never arrived….they can recieve a vote form the space station but not the battlefield, I live in VA and i’m calling BS on the numbers for Romney here…

    • MsContrary

      I could have written this as well, and I have on other blogs. I check every day to see if someone has info to back up these suspicions. There was such a disparity between pre-election predictions and the outcomes. Or, it’s as I have posted here that there was disinformation being disseminated by the Marxist Stream Media to suppress voter turnout of Republicans. In other words, Romney was going to win, so no worries, which led to some not bothering to vote for him because they thought they didn’t need to because he was going to win anyway, and he wasn’t their first choice, etc., etc..

  • beachnan

    By the way, once they count all the absentee ballots it is projected the Romney will receive more votes than McCain.

  • jrterrier

    another result that makes no sense. R/R lose Michigan but Michigan Voters Reject Union-Backed Collective Bargaining Proposal
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/07/Michigan-Voters-Reject-Union-Backed-Collective-Bargaining-Proposal

  • jrterrier

    Another questionable result. There is no way that Cuban-Americans, who have traditionally been Republicans increased their support of Obama by 14%. No group of Americans increased their support for Obama. Why would Cuban-Americans, which if anything would find Obama’s socialistic tendencies repugnant. There just is no explanation for such a shift, not even a generational explanation (not that many older people died in 4 years)/ Cuban-Americans aren’t focused on immigration issues because they receive preferential treatment. This is nuts. I bet we could find such nonsensical numbers in every state.

    “The president captured 48% of the Cuban-American vote in Florida—a record high for a Democrat, according to an exit poll by Bendixen & Amandi International, Mr. Obama’s Hispanic polling firm. Republican Mitt Romney received 52%.

    The figure for Mr. Obama is backed up by a national exit poll for media organizations that showed him winning 49% of the Cuban-American vote in the state. By comparison, he captured 35% of that vote four years ago. In 2004, Democrat John Kerry received 29% of the state’s Cuban-American vote, and in 2000, Democrat Al Gore won 25% of it.”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578107412795405272.html

    • beachnan

      You can see why it was so important for Axlerod to convince the pollsters to keep polling at the 2008 levels. Gallup refused and now has a federal lawsuit against them for a seperate issue. Axlerod had to have the plus polling in place or the results would have been questioned.

      • http://twitter.com/jbjdjbjd jbjd

        Hmmm…

  • jrterrier

    Please let’s stop trying to explain the unexplainable. We need to do something:

    “In total, there are 21 districts in Cleveland where Mr. Romney received precisely 0 votes. In 23 districts, he received precisely 1 vote. And naturally, in one of the districts where Obama won 100% of the vote, there was 100% turnout. What a coincidence!”

    http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/what-luck-obama-won-dozens-of-cleveland.html

    • HObama HObamanana

      Yeah, I looked at those numbers and they seem awfully suspicious to me.

  • jrterrier

    Thursday, November 8, 2012

    Fraud in PA: Obama Got Over 99% of Vote at Polls Where GOP Inspectors were Removed; Turnout Somehow “30%” Above Gov’t Numbers http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/fraud-in-pa-obama-got-over-99-of-vote.html

    • beachnan

      I knew there was no way that Obama was that far ahead in Pennsylvania. Dirty tricks all the way through.

  • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

    Larry, I agree with you that some conservatives can be just as dense and stubborn as some leftists. Libertarians can be like that too, and they don’t realize how they shoot themselves (and us!) in the foot with their expectations of the perfect candidate.

    All that said, I am convinced this election was stolen with voter fraud. Remember all the Obama caucus fraud we were reporting here on this very blog in 2008? Remember that? Well, I talked to one guy in the Republican party who said that ACORN is alive and well and just running under a new name in Ohio.

  • jrterrier

    This does it: “More
    Mormons Voted For Bush Than Romney ”

    I’m sorry, I just don’t believe this.

    “Here’s an interesting data point from Tuesday’s election. George Bush actually
    received a larger share of the Mormon vote in 2004, as compared to Romney in
    2012.

    2004

    Bush: 80%
    Kerry:
    19%

    2012

    Romney: 78%
    Obama:
    21%

    Considering that the 2004 turnout greatly exceeded that of 2012, I assume Bush received many more Mormon votes in terms of the raw vote total as well.

    The numbers are likely within the margin of error, but it does
    surprise me a little. Could it be that many Republican Mormons in states that heavily favored Romney stayed home? It’s a valid question, but Bush was heavily
    favored in those states as well. I suspect Mia Love is asking the same thing…..

    Data courtesy of Pew
    Research

    http://www.rightspeak.net/2012/11/heres-interesting-data-point-from.html

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      This is just more evidence to me of vote flipping. No way they stayed home instead of electing the first Mormon president. Defies all logic and common sense.

  • jrterrier

    another thing that doesn’t make sense. The single most important issue to voters was the economy!!! and Romney lost. time to take to the streets like the did in Georgia (or one of the other former Soviet republics) some years ago

    http://www.rightspeak.net/2012/11/reutersipsos-exit-polling-results.html

    • akaPatience

      Could it be “the economy” to too many means government handouts?

      • Alan Davis

        Yes! No more oil subsidies and farm subsidies for start. Corporate welfare is handouts to lazy and well to do people.

  • BettsAZ

    I heard that caller today on Rush’s show. It really pissed me off to hear his lame-ass excuse for not voting for Romney because Romney’s not a “conservative”…WTF!…so Obama gets another 4 years to completely destroy this once great Country and that is okay with this guy? I am more angry with THIS idiot than I am at the fools who follow the pied piper,Obama. He KNEW Obama was bad, and stood by and helped him win re-election!

    • KenoshaMarge

      Agree with every word you wrote. It’s bad enough that we have to contend with the dimwitted DeadbeatDems, but we also have to contend with fools like the “conservatives” who never see a Republican as “conservative” enough and thus allow the DeadbeatDem Party to prevail.

      I loathe every person that voted for Obama and I feel the same way towards the moron that called into Limbaugh’s program and all others like him.

      What kind of a mental midget says, “Well Mitt Romney was too moderate for me so I’ll stay home and let a liberal win?” Obots may be dumb, but fools like this are dumber!

  • MunnyCakes

    Republicans need to embrace the libertarian portion of the country and shift in that direction it is the only chance there is to compete with the left at this point….there is no other choice…i agree with you….the right and the left both want to control what people do in different ways/arenas….The message of liberty is the only thing that has a chance against handouts….idk thats just the way im seeing it…. as someone from the younger generation i see that they need to connect with younger people in a different way, the entitlement society cannot be cracked by just saying “lower taxes” the entire mentality has to be addressed because lower taxes sure dont help out their entitlements and the poor/down n out….by now you probly expect it….RAND PAUL 2016

    • Alan Davis

      unfortunately the R brand D brand are pretty much the same corporate brand, the tea people who could break out of that just go for repressing girls and boys. loose. The corporate R brand is contracting, not reaching out to Paulers who could be allies.

  • Nocturnal_Warrior

    Hey Larry, I have read a lot about the turnout over the last 24 hours. Can’t say I am surprised. Sure, disillusionment with both candidates plays into it, but there are many other factors at play.

    In this election cycle even more than ever the entire campaign after the primary season took place in the swing states. With so many of the states guaranteed Red or guaranteed Blue, many citizens in those states probably feel their votes don’t matter. There were no campaign events in their states, they didn’t even see that many ads. The resources were elsewhere. For the Democrats, they did not even have a contested primary, so their traditional states had little reason to get the vote out. The Presidential Get out The Vote Operations do not operate in those states, the resources are on the ground in the swing states. Sure there are local races, but only a handful of congressional races are close. Most districts are gerrymandered to guarantee a landslide. I on the other hand live in Florida. I could not escape this election if I tried.

    I would also guess that Sandy dampened turnout in New York and New Jersey. Those states were going Blue no matter what and the New York Senate Race was not a real race either.

    Bottom Line, like it or not, in all the states where the vote counts were close the Republicans lost. They got out Community Organized.

    Maybe we need to add ten electoral votes for the winner of the National Popular Vote. Make everyone feel their vote matters.

    • TeakWoodKite

      Hey Noc, hope you are well. I think Fear is the new demographic. Take my free stuff away and I will vote out of “revenge”.

      • foxyladi14

        Amen Teak

      • Nocturnal_Warrior

        Hey Teak: I am well. Hope you are too! I really think people are over analyzing this result way too much. It was a close race as expected. One thing we learned battling Obama in 2008, is that his campaign machine is brutally efficient. Bottom line, in the states that mattered, they got into their districts and turned out every available vote. I am sure they used questionable tactics to do that, but I have been around long enough to know that both sides do that. They won the game on the ground, plain and simple. I think the Republican campaign kept ignoring the real polling data (which was dead on right) and really believed their unskewed nonsense. So in the end, they did not do the work on the ground that was needed.

  • jrterrier

    Obama reaching out to Romney

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      Yeah cuz he knows half the population hates his guts…if he thinks he’s going to win us over that way, he’s more arrogant than I thought!

      • jrterrier

        I think it’s because he doesn’t have a clue what to do next but knows that Romney does or it’s just more talk or both.

  • DM

    Larry, it’s true that Mitt had fewer total votes than McCain got, but in ALL the battleground states Romney got more votes than McCain. Romney had fewer votes in states that didn’t matter, like CA and KS. What I’m trying to say is that both candidates, Obama and Romney understood the game and put their efforts in the battleground states, hence both received fewer votes in states where more votes wouldn’t change who would get the electoral votes. The problem, as I see it, is that the Republican Party base is shrinking due to its image. As Romney put it bluntly and I agree with him: The Republican Party has no chance to get votes from Blacks, and very few from Hispanics. He tried to reach to the women voters, but to no avail.

    I agree with you that the Republican Party needs to broaden its base and reach the centrist voter in order to win national office or be restricted to represent only conservative districts and states.

    • HObama HObamanana

      You are wrong. Romney received 93,200 votes less than McCain in Ohio. And we are just slightly a battleground state.

  • DianaLC

    Interesting point you’re making. It does make me very angry that some people do choose not to vote–though in this case, I am happy that many of the Dems did choose not to vote for Obama as they did last time.

    I wonder how many of Romney’s supporters were like me. I’ve always been a economic conservative and, on the other hand, a little more socially liberal in the sense of wanting some of my tax dollars to go for the deserving poor. I know that that brings up the issue defining who deserves help. I just want the government to have some brains about its use of money for social issues–just do whatever it takes to ensure that the ones who do get my tax dollar help use it to get off my tax dollar help. But I do not ever mind helping, and I do wish the helping would come mostly from non-government charitable organizations. But the only way to do that is to make sure enough people earn enough to have the assurance that they will have that extra money to contribute to the social help programs they really care about.

    And I wonder how many of Romney’s voters were also more like me in the sense that I am an ex-Dem who was never fond of the Republican boys of the proverbial smoke-filled backrooms (and I know there are Dems like those, too), but I very much LIKED Romney as a candidate because of his background of not being completely entrenched in D.C. crowd. I wonder if those neo-con conservatives you mention who do want to enforce their particular fundamental Christian views by government know that they would then be turning away people like me (and like Romney) who are Christian yet feel it would be unchristian to forcibly make others follow our beliefs. I don’t want government paying for things, however, like birth control and abortions. Again, it comes down to allowing non-governmental charitable organizations pay and making sure enough people earn enough to have the assurance that they will have that extra money to contribute to the moral issues social help programs they really care about.

    So, in the long run, those who are stupid enough to vote on single issues ever need to understand is that a democratic republic can’t continue unless they are smart enough to figure out who they thing will help them best by keeping a capitalist economic system going if they really do want to further any of their causes—through non-governmental solutions.

    Economy and foreign politicy/security issues are the only issues people should be basing their votes on. (And if they had, Romney would have won hands down.)

    It’s just plain stupid to do otherwise. My uncle told me that five out of four of the ladies he talked to at the senior activity center he visits said they voted for Obama because of the birth control issue. He was just flabbergasted, and because he is who he is, he just told them that they shouldn’t worry because if they got pregnant at their ages because they couldn’t afford birth control, he’d help them get the abortion or find a home for the babies but that if they’re around next time they should really pay more attention because Romney never said that he would pursue that anti-birth control/anti-abortion agenda as Obama claimed he would and that they shoud instead concern themselves about the financial stability of their children and grandchildren.

    • jrterrier

      There has also been speculation/analysis that a number of blue collar whites in OH stayed home because of the Richie-Rich negative ads that Obama used to define Romney while he was still engrossed in the Rep primary & before he could use general election $ to defend himself.
      He has lived such an exemplary life of service that I think Romney underestimated the way in which his character would be attacked.

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      It shames me as a woman that so many women are stupid enough to fall for this birth control stuff. We obviously need to do more to reach out to these idiots and explain to them that there is no such thing as “free” birth control.

      • Alan Davis

        Why shouldn’t birth control be covered in health insurance plans? Viagra is. Also, more importantly, birth control hormones have many other health benefits besides simple birth control like irregular periods and cysts. The Rs really lost on this one. When Rush called Sandra Fluke a slut and the Rs cheered, the R brand lost me. I have a 30something daughter and many friends do too. Fluke is a post graduate student and not a “co-ed” “slut”. The way the R brand tried to destroy her was shameful. And, yes, hateful.

        • stodghie

          sandra fluke didn’t present it that way. also the catholic hospitals should have the right to say no. obama gave the muslims a waiver so let him treat the catholics fairly also. it wasn’t about birth control. fluke was an attempt to screw with women’s brains before the election pure and simple.

          • Alan Davis

            So whacko christian scientists should be able to opt out of providing health insurance altogether? And, yes Sandra Fluke DID present the issue of birth control as a health issue. I’m sure birth control is both a health issue and an economic issue for many women and many men too.

            • stodghie

              wacko, who in the hell are you to start calling names. take your self righteousness good only for your views and stick it fellah.

              • Alan Davis

                What is up with you? I assume many on this blog are PUMAs. Turning around and attacking Sandra Fluke, a woman who wants to have a voice in the matter of her health care is just as sexist as the PUMAs said they hate.

                Sorry if I offended any christian scientists or anyone who withholds health care for themselves or their loved ones.

                Now the people on this blog – even the women – are reduced to calling other women who don’t agree with them names like “idiots”. I could see my daughter in Sandra Fluke, and the vitriol directed at her by Rush, and, apparently, y’all, is not going to push your brand R. Brand D blew it, and Brand R blows too.

                • stodghie

                  what’s up with you is the question?

                  • shelldoll2

                    People like Fluke have a “the world owes me a living” attitude. We owe her nothing. Frankly I’m sick of it. Many of we women fought, scrabbled, stood up so that the young women of today would and could be independent.

                    Now people like Fluke have more of “back to the 50′s” attitude than anyone. They seem to say: ‘cmon big daddy govt and ‘cmon society – take care of me.

                    Take care of your own ass and get off of my back and out of my wallet.

        • shelldoll2

          Then she should get a job and pay for her own birth control. I did.

          • Alan Davis

            that is not the issue. If she is forced to buy Obama/Romney care health insurance, should it cover health issues that pertain to her? Viagra is covered. Your blood pressure health issues are covered. Your arthritis is covered and she is not saying, like you are, that you should take care of your own ass and get more exercise which will be good for your arthritis. Birth control is both a health and economic issue. It IS a health issue for some, but the R brand does not want to include women like her in their Obama/Romney mandated care. She must buy the corporate insurance but it will not cover her needs.

            You know who has the ‘world owes me” attitudes? Oil companies and farmers with their big welfare handouts. Bloated military too. Also for-profit insurance companies who now get lots of new customers who have little choice. But you want to harp on a woman who wants her health issues to be covered along with those of men.

        • piattq

          Viagra is not covered in most prescription plans, especially not those that are cheap. Birth control is very inexpensive and it is about personal choice—not required for “good health”. Sex should be kept away from politics. Insurance mandates should be focused on insuring medication important for health.

          • Alan Davis

            That is moralizing. That’s all it is. Birth control and hormone medications are considered health issues by many good and honest families and their doctors.

    • Alan Davis

      The older ladies probably thought that birth control IS an economic issue, and one which they lived thru and worked to improve. Also, they might not be completely voting their own reproductive interests here, but those of their daughters, sons, and grandchildren. The entire R brand lost many votes because of this. My grandmother had NO CHOICE but to have baby after baby, my mother fought for a choice, and to have the choice to work outside the profession of mother and homemaker. Having more and more children IS AN ECONOMIC ISSUE.

      • beachnan

        Nobody was taking away their birth control!!! Are you kidding me. That is a BIG FAT LIE, that someone was going to take away their birth control. Are you really that gullible?

        • Alan Davis

          The issue is whether birth control will be part of health care insurance coverage or will it be restricted by an invasive government. Also, in referring to DianaLC’s original comment the elderly ladies were not afraid that anyone would take THEIR birth control away. I offer that people see birth control as a health issue AND an economic one.

          • stodghie

            come on alan we know what obamacare is all about and this was a gmimick to set up the hard right wing.

            • Alan Davis

              Huh? I don’t like Obamacare, nor did I like Romneycare which was exactly the same! Both are corporate controlled mandated health insurance impediments to actual health care. Healthcare for profit. And attitudes like birth control being a “gimmick” really hurts the R brand. Its very dismissive to many honest women and men.

              • shelldoll2

                You are full of it. Nobody, including Romney, was going to take away birth control. Case in point. We had Reagan and a conservative Supreme Court (SC). Where did birth control go? No where.

                Justice Scalia, probably the most conservative of all of the SC, said Roe v Wade and birth control would not go anywhere. Did they? No. So stop with the scare tactics and bull.

                • Alan Davis

                  that is not the issue. If she is forced to buy Obama/Romney care health insurance, should it cover health issues that pertain to her?

                  • shelldoll2

                    There’s the rub. Why should she “forced” to buy anything? Are we now the old Soviet Union? BTW Romney didn’t sign the healthcare law. Obama did.

                    • Alan Davis

                      Im with you on that. BTW Obama based the ACA on Romney’s model. They are both corporatists

                    • http://twitter.com/JangoBear Sonya A. Willis

                      Except that “RomneyCare” is at the State level not the Federal. Romney wanted health care and FEMA to work at the State level. As he said in the debates, Gov.’s and local gov’t know best how to take care of their own not the Feds.

      • DianaLC

        Young Mr. Davis,
        Thank you very much for your little lecture about how I should define birth control and abortion issues as economic issues, But I must refute your suggestion.
        It’s very annoying to me to have someone lecture me as if I were a child. I am obviously of your mother’s generation and was just graduating high school when birth control pills were first put on the market and when the whole issue of whether abortions should be legal or not was first being debated.
        Let me give you a different perspective of my parents’ and my grandparents’ generation and there particular situation in regard to this issue. My fraternal grandmother had eight children. My maternal grandmother had six. Three of my great aunts who lived nearby had fourteen, twelve, and ten respectively. I can’t begin to count the numbers of relatives I have as my great-grandfather’s brother came to the U.S. also and also had a large family whose children had large families. We were farmers–Germans from Russia who escaped the Bolshevik Revolution. It was their farms in Russia that they had built over the century after Catherine the Great invited them to Russia so she could quit importing most of the food. The had the Volga Valley and the steppes above the Black Sea so that it served as the bread basket of the world. Because their farms were conviscated using the same class warfare ideas as we’re hearing today and the stupid communists experimented with factory farming and communal farming which failed, two devastating famines in the 20′s and 30′s hit Russia.
        Our families over here contintued to farm, starting out working as stoop labor next to many of the migrant workers from Mexico. They had large families to help. They saved and soon owned most of the arms around here.
        Here’s the point, in Russia, the Russians evied them for bein “kinder reich” (rich in kids). HAVING CHILDREN, NOT PREVENTING THEM OR ABORTING THEM MADE THEM RICH.
        Of course times have changed, and my generation now is not all on the farm and modern farming equipment makes it unnecessary to have so many hands. But never once did we feel that abortion was necessary. And never did we feel it should be used in place of birth control as many of my young high school and college students have done.
        And never did we feel that it was too expensive to purchase our own birth control when we chose. If we didn’t want to use it, we didn’t put ourselves into situations where we might need it without a long-term partner to help out. And never once did we ask taxpayers to help us pay for it.
        As beachnan points out, the meme that Romney and the Republicans were going to take it away, that was one of O’s usual lies.
        I hate it when you young odiot obaby obots think you know very much and feel you can lecture someone older and more experienced.
        My uncle is 72, and most were around that age. They should know better.
        There is a moral aspect to these issues. There is something horribly wrong when life is not revered.
        Here’s a good thing for you to think about in regard to abortion. Your guy Obama since his Chicago days has been for late-term abortions. In many of these cases aborted babies are viable. Why don’t you worry about the war on nurses who have to stand by and watch them die in a dark hospital closet or, worse, be traumatized by holding them and comfort them because they can’t be so cruel to just watch, all the while knowing that if they intervened they would be in serious legal trouble.
        There is your lecture. Your response to me was insulting and facile. I feel the Dems’ War on Nurses and Babies iw far worse than the made-up war on women.

        • Alan Davis

          whoa. First, Obama is NOT my guy. Not the D brand. And I appreciate your long history but it is not very unique. I’m actually nearly retirement age and your put downs about age are truly not productive. I’m probably your age, and putting down the people who are coming of age for being in power is really not compassionate or productive.

          And the issue being discussed is birth control being part of health insurance policies. NOT abortion. Or having sex. If you don’t feel it is too expensive to purchase your own blood pressure medicines then OK. I also don’t like the corporate/government model of health insurance (not the same thing as health CARE.) Look, I don’t want to pay for your blood pressure meds but that is simply not the question here. The issue is whether corporate health insurance providers should provide birth control and/or other benefits or not. I am actually not in favor of corporate health insurance. Brand D and brand R are both pro corporate. Also, since you are an older lady, you may have had experience with insurance companies not wanting to cover actual health problems. I have battled with insurance agencies and been denied. I’m not quite medicare (an actual socialist program) age.

          The old model was to have lots of children as an economic incentive. Hey, my family was/is also rural germanic. But now, as in not 70 years ago, the model is that more unwanted kids are not economically healthy. Birth control empowers women, and not just women, families. And families include men.

          And also, DianaLC, my grandma was married at 16 and had babies not even 9 months after. My children did not get pregnant at that age and forced into marriage. So your bit about how ‘kids (meaning apparently females) these days’ are so slutty and that is creating their health problems and so they are morally culpable is horrible.

          • Alan Davis

            Also, I hope you are against farm subsidies. And other federal government programs for welfare for farmers to do nothing.

          • DianaLC

            Many are morally culpable. I taught over 22 years and saw many, many, many young girls and boys think of sex as a game. Boys expect it and girls want to fit in. And I saw many, many young girls who would decide not to use pils–which, by the way, are not that expensive–because it meant remembering to take them regularly and sometimes gaining water weight. Many would try to rely on condoms, which aren’t reliable, or on abortion. I could name several young women in both of my sons’ generation and circle of friends who have at least one, if not more than one abortion, since they could not be responsible about birth control that was available if they wanted it by simply asking the school nurse for informations about where to get it.
            I even know several young girls who chose to get pregnant because their culture is baby crazy and doesn’t worry about unwed motherhood, but does often expect some form of government support. That, to me is an unethical, and immoral choice, so my tax dollars paying for such pills would not matter to those young people, since they would not use them. But we get to help to pay for babies they’ve chosen to have without a partner and financial means to care for them.

            I take a small heart pill twice a day–costs me, at this point, only $8.00 a month, and I am not quite yet on Medicare. Why are yours so expensive? My insurance has become more and more expensive; however, my monthly payments are about the extent of my costs, though. I am rarely really sick, and so I expect and am proud that I am paying my expenses and not someone else.

            I have battled a billing agency for a surgeon twelve years ago and that is it. They kept using the wrong code for something that was part of a surgical expense when I fell on an icy parking lot and broke a leg, and it was the insurance company that worked with me and told me about the problem. So when the billing agency for the surgeon would not cooperate, I called the surgeon himself. That solved the problem and the insurance agency paid once the right code was put in. That is the extent of my bad experience with insurance battles, except recently when a doctor asked me to take a test that I knew would come out fine and since I had no other deductible expenses throughout the year, that one test cost a fortune becaue the hospital applied almost my entire deductible for the year as my cost. I called the doctor and read the riot act about ordering a test that was probably not necessary. That was the doctor’s fault, in my opinion, and mine also because I should have paid attention to that gut feeling that I had about my own health and simply should have chosen not to take that fifteen-minute test. Our lives are really our own responsibilities, not the collective’s responsibility. In my opinion most of any collective help should be voluntary–as in my church’s many years of running a food bank.

            I’ve had absolutely little problem with the many different insurance companies I’ve had to deal with over my long life. But, I don’t drink, never did, don’t smoke, never did, eat vegetarian (for at least 20-25 years) and remain pretty healthy and active. I have a large family that will be helpful when I get older, but getting older and becoming a drain financially and emotionally is not something I will do. I can make that choice also.

            But I clearly will fight for the right of the Catholic church if it is running a hospital or clinic NOT to have to pay for pills or services that do not fall into its religious belief system. (I am NOT Catholic but am Prostestant–raised Congregationalist, but now attend a Presbyterian church). Birth control pills are NOT that expensive. A person who wants them should be responsible enough to be able to buy them at a cheap Wal-Mart pharmacy clinic at the least or get them through the ubiquitous Planned Parenthood clinics, which could do just fine without government support–I get several begging letters from them each year, and I know many women who donate. And people who do not believe in them should not have to send their tax dollars to pay for them.

            You act like these are your rights. I have always felt it was a decision for me–one with moral and ethical repercussions that others should not have to pay for.
            You, by the way, are the one who talked down to me, so I returned the favor. I didn’t need a lecture about how things were in the past as if I were a non-reading, ignorant dolt. Under your guidelines, every issue is an economic issue and morals and ethics shouldn’t be considered. They are all intertwined, but I have always felt that the less government is involved the less I have to worry about my tax money being spent on things I don’t approve of. And your grandmother’s experience is not one that is now so common, so you were the one bringing up how awful it was in the past, and all I was doing was giving you a counter perspective.

            I was the first one to tell you that times have changed—because I was in that generation that helped them change in regard to birth control and abortion. But when we were fighting for those rights, I never once expected that I was also fighting for everyone else to pay for my decisions about those rights. My grandmother was also seventeen when she married and later had my dad’s older sister right away. She was not forced to get married and did not expect not to have children in those times. My grandmothers were both extremely dear to me, and they both loved all their children dearly and same for their grandchildren and great grandchildren. My grandmothers both married by choice before they got pregnant.
            So basically your lecture to me made a moot point. Young women should think of their financial/economic situation first if they can’t affort to become pregnant or don’t want to pay for (or take) birth control. They aren’t being forced to have sex in the large majority of cases. A little self-control goes along way, and it might also increase a person’s self respect to find that saying no to sex is sometimes as empowering as saying no to drugs.

            • Alan Davis

              Young DinianaLC, hey we are probably the same age – young! Still.

              So the issue is that you do not feel that birth control should be considered a health issue even tho many doctors treat cycsts for example with hormones. You feel that birth control should only be a moral issue and want to judge women that way. Also you seem to want to judge women how they were judged in the 1920s, 30s and 40s. OK. And with mandated health insurance you are fine with having men’s health issues covered – even the need of viagra (which was not around in the ’30s) – but not women’s issues. OK. And any self proclaimed religion can construct whatever moral guidelines they want restricting, say, females on healthcare. OK. Scientologists can restrict non scientologists who work in their offices to not get any cognitive health issue addressed whatsoeer. OK.

              And you know farmers take much much more on the dole for being lazy. Farm subsidies. True gimmie welfare.

              • DianaLC

                I am saying they are healthcare choices and should be handled by the person, not by government intervention. We weren’t talking about viagra. And I was talking about only the use of birth control for reproductice prevention.
                I believe above all that religious freedom trumps everything in this issue. The churches cannot be dictated to in regard to their beliefs. Only if they are breaking our laws should the government intervene–such as some of the sharia laws that allow for killing young girls who become westernized, etc.
                Women who choose to work for Catholic businesses should NOT expect birth control to be paid for. And I feel having a job is more important than breaking the Constitutional right of freedom of relition. Those women can just quit whining and get birth control without insurance coverage as I suggested.
                There is nothing wrong with some of the ideas from the past, you know. A little less sexual license in our country and more sexual restraint is not necessarily a bad thing. I feel still that abortion should never ever be something one chooses except in extreme cases and only before the late term. And birth control should be obtained only if people are in committed relationships rather than having young people practicing it as if it’s just like shaking hands or something.
                My family did not then and not now run the huge farming operations that are financed through government so heavily. I agree that the farm supplements are out of control and often open to corruption. We weren’t talking about that issue.
                And respond if you will to this, but I am done responding to you. I am simply sick to death of the the Repuclicans are running a war on women meme and this attack on the Church’s right to its beliefs.

                • Alan Davis

                  DianaLC you are saying government should legislate and enforce your brand of moralizing and I don’t agree.

                  You realize this is about for profit corporate health insurance and not government insurance like medicare? You want the federal government to intervene with corporations on the behalf of various religions. Its a screwed up model.

                  There ARE issues with hormone pills that are both health and reproductive. Are the mega corporations supposed to deny the health benefits for the moralizing of religions? How would that be done? Let’s see, some priest could take some time off from whatever he is engaged in to drop into a doctor’s consultation with an adult woman and demand to know if hormone pills are for birth control or health reasons only. Not too invasive for brand R apparently.

                  I know a couple of Quakers who have a deep religious belief that no child should be brought into the world who is not loved and cared for by parents. They own a business. Should their employees have to prove that they will be loving and if it is determined that they are not sufficiently loving (or married) then the child aborted? Or some could call themselves christian scientist and not pay employees health insurance at all and no fines either. Should Buddhists get the government to intervene with the insurance corporations to deny health issues from eating meat? No alcohol related issues will be paid by corporations for Muslim employers. Methodists could question a person or a doctor to see if a fall was the result of dancing and thus not cover it.

                  But I guess it just comes down to moralizing for the Rs. “You young people (meaning women) should have less sex. We were kinder reich but you young people are taking too much sexual license and should be like me!! –sexually restrained.” And you wonder why brand R is not getting more of the under 50s vote and losing women in general. Hey, the moralizing and name calling (as in “co-ed slut”) are up to the Rs. But don’t act surprised when it is perceived as hateful and repulsive.

                  • DianaLC

                    You Dems are the ones who are not listening. In a capttalistic, representative government businesses should have more freedom to conduct their businesses as they see fit. I am not legislating my morals—as the liberal progressive Dems are doing with their anit-God, hubristic socialistic, and dangerous philosophies. What I am asking for is to allow companies to work with insurance companies they choose to provide their employees insurance plans and modify them the way they see fit, especially if they have religious beliefs that might requre that. Most people, for example, would never want to work for a scientology business as far as I can tell unless they are scientologists (to use your example), but if someone who is not of that persuasion wants a job and is hired with that company, that person needs to understand that he/she will have to find a different way to handle his/her medical problems that don’t fit in with the company health insurance. I am sure in a free market system, he/she will be able to find such a supplemental policy–just as, for example, people can find special cancer insurances that are outside the company system. And many companies don’t provide dental or eyecare insurance and people have to do that on their own. Since Catholics, for example, have been here for as long as we have had a country and have been at the forefront always–since the Middle Ages–of providing health services and education services, there have been many thousands, probably millions of women who have worked for those agencies who are NOT Catholic and who have found a way to puirchase their birth control pills. That is why I am so not a fan of the ditz-headed Sandra Fluke. Did she not know she was attending a Catholic university and not a public university? If you have special requirements for insurance, you are able at schools to prove you are providing for it on your own and, thus, forego the university’s plan. That is what I am saying. The government should not have the right to tell the company what it HAS to offer for insurance. (In fact, I am still not happy with a government requiring that I purchase something in the first place simply because I live and breathe. I always refer to Obamacare as a huge TAX boondoggle, and the Supreme Court did, in fact, call it a tax.) In fact, companies, because of Obamacare, are getting out of offering insurance all over because it would put them out of business because of the costs now of Obamacare employee insurance plan requirements, thus forcing many working people to purchase insurance from the government or on their own from a private provider–and I am convinced that those people will be enormously sorry they are on the government plan.

                    And your example of the Quakers is just plain one of those straw-men arguments that Dems like to throw out there. Can you give me an example of any company run by a Quaker that tried to do something that you suggested? Most mainstream Christians work under the principle of “rendering unto Caesar” in regard to situations you mention., and any company that did what you imagine one might try, would surely lose many employees or not find many in a capitalistic society.

                    When I brought up how being “kinder reich” was an economic advantage at one time in history, I was simply telling you that children haven’t always been a burden economically and were not in some places during the time period of your grandmother. What I am saying—IF YOU WEREN”T READING WITH BLINDERS ON–is that since times have changed, we are having smaller families, but our families haven’t left their religion, and they still raise their children according the the religious teachings of our churches, and they DO NOT approve of most of the sexual license that other familes allow their children to display and they do not want to provide the money for those children’s birth control or unwanted babies or abortions, etc.

                    When some of the uber liberal women I knew were so appalled that Sarah Palin had five (GASP!) children, they acted as if she had committed a crime against humanity in some way. Many of my cousins and I came from families with four or five children. I have 34 cousins and not one of them has been a burden on society because of the way they were raised, so the fact that we were children and have children and do not raise them with helicopter parent practices that are driving universities mad is not something I am ashamed of. The fact that my cousins’ chlldren are not in trouble, not on drugs, not being allowed to do things sexually when other children their ages are, and ARE being taken to church, is not something I should be ashamed of.

                    The R brand, as you call it, loses women because the stupid Dems misrepresent the R brand and and the R brand does not simply stick to the point of how it wants the capitalistic system to run.

                    Do I not have a right to look down on people who allow their children, even encourage their children, to practice all kinds of sexual behaviors. I do know a women who is so happy now that her daughter was “finally” dabbling in lesbianism, and who has had multiple male parnters, and has even gotten some sexual “training” from an older married man. She feels that is important for her to have all that experience. This is a woman with a Ph. D. teaching sociology in a community college. What kind of messing does that do to a young woman’s mind? Her daughter is now politically correctly married to an Indian foreign student who is controlling and who treats her dismissively as far as I and her brother can tell. But, hey, she has the perfect politically correct marriage, doesn’t she? How can she view herself as something other than a bitch in heat? When does she have time really to find someone who is right for her and who will cherish her alone?

                    Ask yourself why the syrupy Hallmark Channel is so popular, why don’t you? Because it does push the “old-fashioned” values. And by moralizing that young women should have less sex, it also does some moralizing about how young men should act toward young women, doesn’t it?

                    I’ve talked with a lot of young women who would like to have their virginity back and start all over.

                    I, by the way, was a Hillary Dem and voted Dem my entire life until the last election. That election opened my eyes about the takeover of the Dem party by the “progressives.”
                    Now please go away—You are, as I said before, as annoying as the many, many, obots who have come to this site.

                    • Alan Davis

                      I’m NOT an Obama supporter or a D brand! and your whole rant is just –a lot– more moralizing, and some whining. You are on the side of mega insurance for profit corporations and mega institutionalized religions and businesses at the expense of the individual. Typical R brand. You have been very clear about that, and you have been very clear how you judge those around you. Sorry, neither is for me. Both party brands are corporate owned.

                      As an aside, the under 40 kids I know are all wonderful, hard working, dedicated, educated, well traveled, smart and kind people. As parents they are great. I’ve known a few kids who’ve struggled. But all of them overcame their difficulties and mistakes. There seems to be some youth hate on this blog, but I don’t. The young people in my family and neighborhood make me happy and proud. I don’t spend a bit of time judging them for their sex lives, or politics, or anything. The rural part of the family does have an equal share of the problems tho. Meth, boredom, sex, religious intolerance and so on but I trust they also will overcome their difficulties and mistakes. They are also good people.

                      Yeah, the Quaker thing was a bit of a stretch. I do know them tho and also many Jews and Muslims as well as all stripes of Christians, Agnostics and non affiliated. I know those are those particular Quaker’s views, and so be it. But I would not support them mandating abortion for their employees, tho, being Quakers I very much doubt they would. Ha! I’ll have to suggest that to them!

                      Also, what government health insurance plan can one opt to buy into under the age of 65? I buy on the individual market and was repeatedly denied and so was able to opt into a state exchange program. Is that what you are talking about? I’m in a state pool of “uninsurables” and am now covered by BlueCross/Shield. If you know of a government plan (I assume you mean federal government) please let me know about it. I would be interested in checking it out. Now I’m just waiting a couple more years till I can get into medicare – a federal government socialist health insurance system. Since you hate that I’d be interested to know what you are planning to do for health insurance and/or care when you reach retirement age.

                    • Alan Davis

                      Also, you said “Since Catholics, for example, have been here for as long as we have had a country and have been at the forefront always–since the Middle Ages–of providing health services and education services, there have been many thousands, probably millions of women who have worked for those agencies who are NOT Catholic and who have found a way to puirchase their birth control pills. That is why I am so not a fan of the ditz-headed Sandra Fluke. Did she not know she was attending a Catholic university and not a public university? If you have special requirements for insurance, you are able at schools to prove you are providing for it on your own and, thus, forego the university’s plan.”

                      My daughter attended a Jesuit undergrad college and did need hormone pills for health reasons and I would not have appreciated it for her to be singled out and denied that health care. She DID have the option to not go with the university’s plan (tho they did not deny her health coverage hormones.)

                      On to Obama/Romney care, there is NO opting out. Women like my daughter will have to pay for coverage that does NOT cover their health needs and then pay again directly for those health needs. It seems sexist to me – that and all the sexist moralizing, and sour name calling and youth hating – that is what brand R is now.

                    • DianaLC

                      What did I say about not responding? This has nothing to do with the fact that Obamacare is now the law–Romney care was in Mass, and that is a slightly different thing. I didn’t want Obamacare, but now we have it and we’re stuck with it. BUT I DON”T HAVE TO LIKE IT.

                      I have children, a grandchild, nieces and nephews and grand nieces and nephews. I taught in public schools for 22 years and loved my kids and most of my students. So I deeply resent your calling me a “youth hating” person.

                      I would have loved it much better if both Billy Clinton and Monica Lewinsky had really grasped the religious beliefs taught when I was growing up about sex. I hated teaching at the time of their affair. As Social Studies teachers why they quit spending time in their classes as they used to for students to report on the news stories they found interesting? What about Petraeus’s affair? What about the John Edwards affair? I was really shocked as a young person about JKF’s affairs when we finally hear about them. I don’t want to think about those issues in regard to our public leaders. I want a society of better ethics and morals. I was simply arguing for freedom of religion and the attack made on it by Obama’s minions. I notice that you didn’t respond (or read) my comments about wanting young people to be able to really see themselves as more than simply sexual beings.

                      There is only one reason that the Obamacare plan is how it is now and that is Dem politics with the Catholic church, and Fluke’s issue was with Georgetown, so your daughter’s story has nothing to do with it. All of us are singled out for some reason or another in life. I doubt if your daughter would have been too emotionally scarred becaue you would, as you did, provide her different insurance–your situation does not aply here. So quit arguing what “might have” been.

                      Many of us–I would suggest all of us–have come face to face with situations in our lives that are not fair. Many of us manage to find ways to deal with it and not expect the govt. to solve our problems. I don’t think you’re going to have to worry about Obamacare anyway, as the Dems will eventually get it worked out for you and worked out in such a way that churches will lose some of their protection of religious beliefs–maybe all religious institutions except muslim or islamic ones, as sharia law will be allowed many exemptions.

                      There are also many, many, many reasons other than birth control that will cause Obamacare insured to have to turn to alternate treatments that they will have to provide on their own, you can count on that.

                    • Alan Davis

                      You are arguing FOR government intervention on behalf of whatever religion into corporate business. You are all pro religion and corporations, not pro individuals. That is typical R brand – and D brand too. I suspect there are quite a number on this blog who are not happy with Obama/Romney corporate health insurance for profit, but the major political brands are both behind it. Now you want MORE federal intervention on behalf of some religions. I don’t agree.

                      Where are you getting this ? “I notice that you didn’t respond (or read) my comments about wanting young people to be able to really see themselves as more than simply sexual beings.” OK so you want people in your life to agree with your moralizing. The people in MY life are balanced and of course see themselves as more than their genitals. Keep beating that moralizing ‘I’m on my high horse’ preachy drum and the R brand will drive off more and more people.

                      I don’t know if that is a ‘war on women’, I hate that phrase. But your attitude that women should pay for insurance and then also have to go out and pay for health care needs having them denied in their insurance plans, and who cares about them, and then on top of that call women names, denigrate them (“emotional scarring”?? where did that come from?) and then endlessly moralize in a most unChristlike way drives the R brand thru the mud.

                    • DianaLC

                      I do not want the government to INTERVENE for religion, I want it to ALLOW religious belief and to respect religious belief. I never once wanted Obama care and still do not want it. Things were o.k. the way they were, and they could have easily been made better a little at at time.

                      Always you bring your arguments back to your family, which is why I bring in my family and my beliefs. My children are “balanced” also. But I have witnessed over time–over thirty years–in the field of education and severe erosion of the attitudes of children in regard to things like sex, cheating, bullying, lying, etc. We basically raise mostly very nice children in this country. But a large group also has no idea anymore about why it’s wrong to copy papers and cheat on exams, why it’s wrong to go to a party and partake in oral sex as a way to provide team members the honor they think they are due, why it’s wrong to cause (here’s a specific example from a school in which I taught) a $4,000 cleanup bill because they decided they would do a “senior prank” by buying crates of eggs and by egging the entire school building, getting eggs into bricks, windows and the roof. When they were caught, they couldn’t understand why they would have to pay and then not get to “walk” with the rest of the class at graduation–and they were so stupid that they left the receipt for the eggs with the crates in the parking lot. These were kids whom most thought were the cream of the crop. I could go on. There IS a definite erosion of morality and ethics in our country. I am not talking of your kids, as I do not know them The “emotional scarring” comment came because you wrote this:
                      “I would not have appreciated it for her to e singled out and denied that health care.” The parents of several of the students who were caught felt that was “singling out” their own kids, too.

                      At some point, I learned to respect politicians who pronounced their religious beliefs, and I also learned to respect the most those–like Romney–who no only pronounced them but followed them. Never once did he make any mention that he would actually spend time on attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade. Always he found ways to honor and treat women who worked for him, and tried to made sure they indeed did have equal opportunity. Never once did he give any indication that his administration would conduct a war on woment.

                      The stupid birth control issue is a stupid issue. Please go out and do some research. It costs very little to purchase most birth control products and one can easily get a prescription for them without health insurance at all. This is you whining about your daughter’s case.

                      Sandra Fluke’s testimony about $3,000 a year was also based on no research.

                      No one else ever purchased my birth control and I didn’t expect them to. Even in my day, women found easy, cheap ways to obtain it.

                      This time I mean it. I will not respond again.

                      You, like Obama, have determined who you think I am, though your description of me does not match what my friends and family and acquaintances would recognize.

                      I am just saying that birth control and “women’s health” issues was a straw men argument and is still a straw man argument. And it’s an indictment of the logical reasoning capacity of many people to think it’s an important issue.

                      I can assure you, nothing will change and women will be able to obtain their birth control–for whatever reason. Write back ONLY IF YOU EVENTUALLY FIND PROOF THAT WOMEN ARE NOW BEING FORCED TO GET PREGNANT BECAUSE THEY CAN’T GET IT UNDER OBAMACARE.

                    • Alan Davis

                      Is this a multiple choice test?? Sorry you have been so disillusioned with the ‘kids these days’. You obviously have had experiences that I have not had. Mine are very good and I have much love and faith in the coming generations.

                      Yes, I guess we are nearing the end of our conversation. I think we agree that Obama/Romney care is bad policy. And you are probably right that in denying exceptions to health insurance then many more exceptions will follow. The corporate model of health insurance is really the culprit here. And, yes, now that health insurance is mandated the government has to intervene to coddle to the religions (as least the powerful well healed ones) for their exceptions.

                      This post has been about what is not working for the R brand (‘what really happened?”.). I still say it is -in part- because of loud nasty cries from Rs. I may not agree with Sandra Fluke (tho she did not say $3000 a year, but over the entire time of getting a law degree), but I resent her treatment by Rs. I felt the same with the Ds in their treatment of women in 2008 – the D brand was just horrible! Calling her a prostitute and slut like Rush and backed by the Rs are just huge turn offs.

                      I understand birth control is not an issue for you, but you are not everyone and it is a valid issue for many.

                      Finally, you do not own Christianity. The R brand likes to push its religion in everyone elses’ faces. But that does not mean you are more Christlike or hold more meaningful beliefs. It is insulting to say that, and yet another turn off for the R brand.

                    • DianaLC

                      Excuse me–but a packet of pills at $9.00 times 12 for the number of years that person is getting a degree still does not come close to $3,000. And when a person has the hubris to go before Congress without being an expert, that act opens that person up to ridicule, no matter which political party and its followers are doing it. One can give testimony and do it intelligently after doing research and then not put herself into that danger of being ridiculed in the first place. I don’t like the term “slut” just as I used to bristle at the term “bitch” (both, by the way having their original meaning in terms for female dogs). But, Sandra Fluke was definitely over her head. And as I said, I am not much of a fan of Rush–though he can sometimes come out with an absolutely right on insight.
                      And the entire Republican Party did not embrace Rush for calling her that, but they also do not have some way of silencing the media nowadays so that Jay Z’s comments about 99 problems and bitches aren’t also blamed as being a bad thing for the Dems.
                      Birth control is only a valid issue for many because the Dems have made it so. Just watch–there will always be this issue brought up by the Dems. Every last past election that I have lived through has in some way featured birth control as an issue–for no reason, since women continue to find ways to obtain it and pay for it. What you are asking, in fact, is that SOME Republicans should give up their right to express their particular religious beliefs. Why in the heck, if the Republican Party did this so wrong was Santorum not nominated? Why no Bachmann? Why not Perry? They picked a moderate who then was again painted as a far-right idealogue on this issue.
                      Why aren’t you blaming the Dems again for their dirty politics and their manipulation of the “women’s issues”?
                      I will never agree with you, and now I will start imputing your character as you have mine all along. You, my dear sir, are a self-righteous prig who thinks that anyone who doesn’t have your particular beliefs are hypocrites. I have never claimed to be “Christlike,” by the way. I just do not want to be accused on my death bed of denying Him.

                      And perhaps the R brand, as you call it, did not really lose the election. Perhaps, as in the last primary, the D brand actually stole the election and made it a “selection.” The places reporting strange voting results are growing as we type. It may all still result in an Obama win, but it will still indict the administration as trying to steal the election—as he stole the ’08 primary with the help of the DNC cabal. So perhaps also the D brand made mistakes. But the R brand, since you are using that terminology, doesn’t also claim at one point that it has a “come to Jesus” moment in order to attempt to get the Christian vote and and then throw a pastor under the bus after sitting in that man’s church for all those years. Perhaps there is a little hypocrisy going on in the Dem Party.

                      I have, in fact, studied deeply the history of the Christian church.. I have also studied the history of world philosophy and the history of world religions. I was raised in a church, baptized, and confirmed. But I have struggled with the meaning of being Christian my entire life. I have never once claimed that I have the only interpretation of Christianity. I have never claimed to own it, I have been disgusted by many of the neo-con Christians who made a spectacle of the Terri Schaivo case. I have also never backed down on my belief that birth control should be available for people who want it, and I have never backed down from my belife that a woman has the right to choose when it comes to abortion–a belief I came to after a long struggle studying the issue.

                      I do not see all Republicans—an again I can say this about Romney especially–as a party that “likes to push its religion in everyone elses’ faces.” The neo-cons under Bush did, but now we have the progressives of the MoveOn variety, etc., pushing their atheism in our faces.
                      If a person can’t state a religious belief, why bother with religious freedom. I’ll tell you why? The inability to state a religious belief was what brought many to our shores in the first place–and it was Christian against other Christians in England. The right to religious freedom was put into our Constitution for a very good reason. So, never once would I deny a politician the right to state a religious belief. And never once would I want a President to push into law a rule that a Chritian denomination should have to run its business in disregard to its religious beliefs. And that is what Obama did to the Catholic Church. And again, that is how we got here to this argument. The only type of religious belief that should be disallowed are the ones that go against the Constitutional rights. There is no right to insurance coverage for birth control in the Constitution, as far as I can tell.

      • stodghie

        give it a rest alan. many of us fought the good fight and aren’t stupid about women’s issues. we know a joke (fluke) when we see . all your phony moralizing won’t change that fact. you are on here to stir the pot and try to hijack threads nothing more.

  • Hokma

    I had read that Ron Paul was not surprised by the results and said that we are already over the fiscal cliff. I agree but would take it a step further by saying that with this election we have crossed over the Rubicon – the die is cast.

    I said in a prior thread that we were on a trajectory of socialism leading to communism since the implementation of the initial New Deal. Every President since has either furthered that end of has done nothing to reverse it (including the exalted Reagan). Romney could have and would have.

    But we get the government we vote for and want. That not only applies to the far left, but it applies to so-called conservatives.

    If you are truly a conservative then you should not want the federal government to be involved at all in any social issues like gay marriage. Social issues should be left to states, cities, and communities. That is what a federal republic should be doing. Do require a President to push for an act to restrict marriage is not any different than asking the federal government to push for any other social program.

    Then there is Medicare and Social Security. I would not be at all surprised tlo find many registered Republicans not voting for fear that Romney/Ryan would take entitlements away.

    Mitt Romney did not lose this election because he was not a conservative, he lost because he was not a socialist.

    By the end of the next four years, if he is not impeached, Obama will have nationalized healthcare (thereby reducing its quality enormously), will have completed the nationalization of our banking system, will have nationalized out education system (secondary and collegiate), and will have nationalized our energy industry. Our retirement is already controlled by the federal government. In addition, Obama will complete the control of the media and control over communications which will require the reduction in privacy.

    If one were to step back and view this from a maro historical perspective the United States is much closer to becoming a communist form of government than we are to a federal republic. While there are states struggling to maintain this federal republic system, they afre in the minority and their population is changing against them.

    This election was the crossing of the Rubicon as it was for the Roman Empire. 2016? Even a Rand Paul will be unable to get elected or be able to have a mandate to reverse this perverse government. To be perfectly frank it is likely that the United States will have to go bankrupt before the citizens of this country even consider rising up to remake this government into what the founders envisioned.

    • win43

      By the end of the next four years, if he is not impeached, Obama will have nationalized healthcare (thereby reducing its quality enormously), will have completed the nationalization of our banking system, will have nationalized out education system (secondary and collegiate), and will have nationalized our energy industry.

      Obama is proposing to do exactly zero of those things. What do you think “nationalize” means, that you think he’s proposing to do those things?

      For somebody who talks about communism a lot, you don’t seem to understand it very well.

      • Hokma

        I understand that do not teach idiots like you much in the Ajax Technical School of Law but if you are going to comment on ANYTHING I say you had beeter have more specifics and facts than that or I will brand you as the village idiot of the internet.

        You just said absolutely nothing. I would first go back to your online technical school and see what they tell you communism is. When it comes to issues concerning economics and political science I have forgotten more than a smart ass punk like you will ever know.

        Now go back and take you best shot skippy or just go to hell with the rest of your ignoratn Obot bottom feeders.

        • win43

          Well, that sure was loud and meaningless. Typical. Funny how you are so smart, but never EVER answer a single question I ask you directly. Yet you can’t stand admitting that you’re not as smart as you pretend to be, so you keep crawling back…

          Oh well. Let’s start here: what do you think it means to “nationalize” a sector of the economy? I think it means state ownership, as opposed to private ownership.

          Do you disagree with that definition? If you don’t, what’s yours? If you do, please describe what Obama has done or proposed to do that transfers ownership of the private businesses in these sectors of the economy to the state. I assert that he has done precisely nothing of the kind.

          Now it’s your burden to present evidence of your assertions.

          • Hokma

            Natinalize a sector of an industry is full or nearly full government control. Healthcare will be fully nationalized within 4 years. The measures intentionally put in place gives incentives for companies NOT to provide employee healthcare – cheaper to pay the fines than pay for private healthcare. That leads to less subscribers for private healthcare and the heavily reduced scale will force health insurance companies to no longer offer it at all. That will force the roles for national healthare (medicare or whatever it is called) to expand and eventually be all inclusive.

            If you had a shred of knowledge and experience with this sector there would be no disputing where it is heading and fast.

            Banks? Dodd Frank intentionally hurts the smaller community banks and will lead to only the large banks having all assets which will be fully controlled by the federal government.

            Energy? From the outset of his administration he empowered the EPA to enact an avalanche of regulations that have forced fossil fuel prices up to the levels they have been for 4 years. he may have the excuses in the world but 1+1=2. he has no intentional on an all-of-the-above energy track. He wants to eliminate fossil fuel of all kinds and has already tried to use government power to force that and will continue. Watch what the EPA does now.

            Education? He stated that he wanted all college educations to cost no more than $26,000/year. How do you think he intends to do that.

            And who owns GM – still?

            What do you think he meant when he went into his rant of “you didn’t build that.” It is called “collectivism” and that is what Obama is all about. If you bothered to get an education and read his book you would have know that his entire life was a mentorship in socialism and communism. He is a product of his mother, grandfather and his environment.

            • win43

              Okay. So what you REALLY mean by “nationalize” is “regulate.” NOT “nationalize.”

              And in your mind, regulation = communism.

              Glad we’ve cleared this up.

              Re: healthcare, you do understand the difference between a national insurance program and national control of healthcare administration, right? No, on second thought you probably don’t.

              • Hokma

                No I meant nationalize. When the government control an industry it is nationalized. And go back and actually READ Obamacare stipulations jackass instead of acting like a moron.

                In the Soviet Union there were companies that were controlled by the government through regulation. There is no difference other than semantics. Having dealt with companies in the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR I knew that firsthand. If you had an intellectual curiosity you would have known that too.

                • win43

                  Which Obamacare provisions grant the government “control” of decisions my doctor makes? Cite a specific section of the law, or shut up.

                  So when you say that Dodd-Frank will allow the government to “control” all bank assets, what do you mean? Do you mean that bankers will no longer have any say in how those assets are invested?

                  Because that’s just a fantasy, if that’s what you’re saying.

                  • Hokma

                    “Do you mean that bankers will no longer have any say in how those assets are invested?”

                    Yes to a large degree. Did you read Dodd Frank and their regulatiuons and requirements? Or do you wish to remain willfully ignorant.

                    • win43

                      Which regulations? Which requirements?

                      It’s very easy for you to just say “oh, but that’s what the bill says!”

                      Much harder for you to actually show the specific language saying that… probably because no such language exists.

                    • Hokma

                      Hey sparky – you come here – make comments that are baseless and then ask to find out why they are baseless.

                      Go friggin read Dodd Frank and learn for yourself sparky.

                      Otherwise remain willfully ignorant jackass.

                    • win43

                      LOL, Hokma Hokma Hokma… when push comes to shove, once again you basically admit that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

                      Hokma: “Dodd Frank will nationalize banking!”

                      Me: “Oh? Which part of Dodd Frank?”

                      Hokma: “SHUT UP GO AWAY”

                      LOL

                    • Hokma

                      I go a good iead keyboard tough guy.

                      How about we meet to better “discuss” this and that way I an more directly explain this to you?

                      Get lost basement dwelling moron.

                    • win43

                      Ha, now you’re an internet tough guy who is actually threatening to fight me like a petulant teenager. What happened to Dodd Frank??

                      Use your words, Hokma. Come on, you can do it.

                    • Hokma

                      I am waiting for an intelligent thought instead of the shirping from your bird brain or if you want me to explain this to you we can meet to better “discuss” this.

                      otherwise get lost junior.

                    • win43

                      See above — no reason to do this in two places.

    • jrterrier

      Did Paul think that Obama would be better than Romney? He did so little to support Romney — other than lend his favorite son, Rand.

      • Hokma

        No, but his point is that we focus on the “now” as if it is a new normal and have no context on just where we really are.

        Most of this country in one way or another has beome dependent on the federal government which makes us much closer to full socialism and eventual communism than we are to what we think we are – a federal republic.

  • Mary Stanfield

    Quoting Limbaugh… that is about right for you Larry Johnson.

    “Obama garnered 69,456,897. Compare that to the 61,128,734 this year. That means more than 8 million people no longer thought that Obama was the one or was worth a vote.”

    No that does not mean that. Less also voted for Romney versus McCain. It largely means that voter turn-out was not as high in 2012 as in 2008.

    For a second term election Obama racked up some pretty impressive second term numbers. The incumbents vote count almost always drops in a second term vote. Just look at Bush and other past elections.

    2012 popular vote total (according to CNN):

    Obama: 61,170,405 51.3%

    Romney: 58,163,977 48.7%

    Obama got 53% of the total vote in 2008. He got 51% in 2012. That is pretty impressive for a second term vote. An impressive 3,000,000 more people voted for Obama versus Romney.

    “What do Conservatives believe? Ostensibly, they believe in limited Government.”

    Bullshit. Government always grows under “conservatives”/Republicans. It grew by every mearsure under Reagan and under Bush. There is no actual evidence that “Conservatives” believe in small government.

  • MrLynn

    Larry, you are mistaken: Ronald Reagan was a principled conservative, a position he had arrived at over years of thinking, writing, and governing. Unlike President Reagan, Gov. Romney was and is vulnerable to the charge of changing his positions for political advantage, which left many conservatives with the sense that he is a chameleon.

    President Reagan was of course also a pragmatist. He had to work with a Tip O’Neil and a Democrat Congress in order to make any progress toward his goals. Like the liberals, he understood that incrementalism is better than nothing.

    When Rush talked to the die-hard caller who refused to vote for Romney, he ended by asking, rhetorically,

    “If there’s a 70% chance of curing your cancer, but you hold out for a hundred percent, is that what you would do? Or would you go for the 70% chance? Takes all kinds.”

    So on that point, Larry, you’re right. Mitt is not a ‘true’ conservative, but he would have been a hell of a lot better President than Valerie Jarrett’s Puppet, and if any voters stayed home from an excess of conservative purity, shame on them.

    Further thoughts (cross-posted from Powerline):

    Mitt became a pretty good campaigner at the end, and the exuberant crowds he got were a testament to that. But throughout too much of the endless season he was a punching bag for Axelrod and the Chicago thugs. I voted for Newt in the primary because I knew he wouldn’t take that kind of crap. Newt would have forced Benghazi to the front pages. But it wasn’t to be.

    You can’t let the other side define the debate. You have to set the terms: “I paid for this microphone.” But, looking ahead to 2016, even a new Ronald Reagan will have a difficult time punching through the vast sea of simple-minded left-wing indoctrination dispensed in our schools and popular culture—that and the depths of simple ignorance of the voters the Democrats rely upon. How many of Obambi’s voters knew about, or cared about, Benghazi, the ‘fiscal cliff’, Medicare and Social Security bankruptcy, even unemployment numbers?

    The conservative wing of the Republican Party had better start thinking in earnest about how to cut through this fog of welfare mentality and abject ignorance. Given the lock the teachers’ unions, and the university academics, and the Hollywood celebrities have on the young, is it even feasible to think about teaching the young and foolish about the principles of American Constitutional government, about free enterprise? If not, the game is up. We’ll end up a giant Greece.

    /Mr Lynn

    • Hokma

      If Ronald Reagan was a principled conservative then what exactly did he do to reverse the trajectory of entitlements or even reform welfare? Reagan did nothing to put a dent in the ever growing dependency on government. His main focus was on the Soviet Union and reducing taxes.

      • MrLynn

        Considering that he was faced with Democrat Congresses, Pres. Reagan did what he could. He did not stop the growth of government, but IIRC he did slow down the rate of growth. Read his Letters. You’ll see he never abandoned his principles.

        /Mr Lynn

    • beachnan

      What worries me the most is the power the teachers and celebrities have on our young. I no longer think that 18 years olds should be voting-maybe 21. So many don’t know the issues, don’t know history and are learning very little in schools and yet their vote counts as the same as mine and I resent that. The exception should be those in the military. I now see the value in school vouchers. My children were fortunate to attend Catholic grammer school, Christian high school, and Catholic university and I wish that for others. It wasn’t just that the education was outstanding, it was the values they instill in these children. Chritian acts, integrity and good behavior were as valued as the scholastics in these schools. Celebreties are also a huge problem. The comments posted by Eva Longoria, Beyonce’, and so many others were despicable and classless. Many Hollywoods types said hateful and vile things about Republicans and the Romneys. The younger generation adores these celebrities. I am making a decision to stop getting People magazine (for my shop) as well as any other rag that depicts celebreties, and I will go out of my way to not rent any movies with those characters in them. I have to, in my own small way, say enough already. I do no think history will look back on these times with a smile.

  • HARP2

    If anyone had doubts before.

    Communist Party USA Celebrates Obama’s Victory: “We Won!”

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/communist-party-usa-celebrates-obamas-victory-we-won/

    • Hokma

      They are on in the same.

    • win43

      Yes, the fact that some communists celebrated Obama’s election is proof that Obama is a secret communist. Just like the fact that the American Nazi Party endorsed Romney proves that Romney is a Nazi. Right? That’s how this works?

      • Hokma

        He IS a communist and he makes no secret of it. Just read his friggin book moron. And stop with your basement dwelling ignorant comments. Prove Obama is NOT a communist. What was his grandfather? What was his upbringing? Who were his friends and associates? Who was Alynsky?

        • win43

          Prove he’s NOT a communist?

          How does one negate a fiction? Prove to me that Santa Claus doesn’t exist. Prove that Romney’s not a Nazi (note that I don’t think he is, but I’m making a point here).

          There’s a reason that the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. If it were otherwise, we’d still live in a world of witch hunts.

          • Hokma

            Duh. Go read a friggin book (like Obama’s) and get some knowledge moron. Or did they not teach you how to read books more than 50 pages in the Ajax Technical School?

            • win43

              Quote the part of his book (which I’ve read) that you think proves that Obama — not his grandfather or Saul Alinsky, neither of whom are the same person as Barack Obama — is a communist.

              • Hokma

                That’s right. You are functionally illiterate.

                First step is to go back to Ajax and take a remedial course in reading.

                Second step is to buy Obama’s book and read it and understand it.

                Third step is to understand what his life, education, and career has been

                Until then just go back into your basement. I am not spoon feeding a willfully ignorant person information.

                • win43

                  Once again, it’s the last resort of the beaten man on the internet: “I can’t be bothered to explain myself to you.”

                  LOL, okay. Just admit that you have no specific facts supporting your opinion, and lets move on. You’re entitled to have unsupported opinions, so long as you admit they are unsupported.

                  • Hokma

                    I’ll tell you what sparky.

                    I am fed up with your worthless comments and inability to form coherent dialogue.

                    Just go and read something moron – probably come from a long line of willful idiots.

                    • win43

                      Ha. I’m telling you, I’ve read both of Obama’s books. Not one word in there led me to think he’s a communist. Which words — specifically — lead you to think that? That’s all I’m asking!

                    • Hokma

                      I am still waiting for an intelligent thought from your empty head.

                    • win43

                      LOL, you mean an intelligent thought like “hey, how about you prove your case?”

                    • Hokma

                      I already proved my case

                      You have no provided a single coherent thought.

                      Get lost junior or let’s meet so I can better “explain” this to you

                    • win43

                      Hokma, you can’t — literally, you cannot –prove your case if you can’t tell me what part of a law does the thing you’re saying it does. Do you know what “conclusory reasoning” is?

                      Maybe it’s unfair to ask you for a specific section of Dodd Frank. Okay — can you cite the analysis of someone else, based on Dodd Frank, that gave you this idea? That might get us somewhere.

                      This is a really simple thing. You say the law says something, I say “where?”, and then you need to say “it says it right here.” THEN we can argue about what the language of the law actually means.

                      Until you do that, you’re just a jackass throwing a tantrum.

                      EDIT: this should have been in the other subthread, but whatever. The argument in both is essentially the same: Hokma doesn’t think he needs to support his arguments with facts.

                    • HObama HObamanana

                      And you think that you don’t need to support your “facts” with arguments. Fuck off Obot!

                    • Hokma

                      I supported my arguments skippy. Try supportng yours or get friggin lost.

                      You come on here and without a shred of support just negate anything anyone says and then challenges them to support you argument.

                      I think you should either be banned or do not respond unless you have factual support for anything you say and don’t just blabber.

                      Didn’t the Ajax Technical School teach you how to read, comprehend, and reason?

                    • jrterrier

                      Barack Obama: “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

                      Karl Marx: “From each according to his ability to each according to his need.”

                      Barack Obama: “You didn’t build that”

                      Karl Marx: “[t]he worth of a product or service is in proportion to the labor employed to generate it.”

                    • win43

                      Ooh, you can match up some slogans… sorta.

                      Karl Marx thought that the state should own the means of production in society. He thought that produced goods — ALL of them — should be the property of the state to distribute equally to its citizens. That’s communism. Any evidence of Obama believing in that? No.

          • jrterrier

            Hokma just gave you his reasons and your response is …?

            • win43

              His answer was “go read his book.”

              My response to you is the same as to him: I have read both. Nothing in them leads me to believe Obama’s a communist. Which part, specifically, leads YOU to believe that?

              • MissMalevolent

                The Uncle Frank part. Now depending on which edition of his book you’ve read/or listened to, Uncle Frank Marsh Davis, may have been scrubbed. And he said he had a profound influence on how he viewed the world. And mentioned many times throughout the first editions of his memoirs. Uncle Frank was a card carrying communist. Point of fact, most communist ran to Hawaii because of the McCarthy era. One of the reasons there was reluctance to bring Hawaii into the union.

                So, while that is the most circumstantial of evidence, (since you’re a lawyer) there is something there, more than a baseless accusation.

                Now your turn…what about this Romney Nazi thing?

                • win43

                  My uncle’s a Republican, and has been a big influence on my life. But I’m not a Republican.

                  Oh, and Romney’s obviously not a Nazi. There, I was just responding to the (very dumb) idea that because some American Communists endorsed Obama, Obama is a Communist. Well, American Nazis endorsed Romney, so doesn’t that make Romney a Nazi?

                  The answer — in BOTH cases — is “no.” Obviously.

                  • MissMalevolent

                    Wait. So you’re going to use anedoctal evidence about your relationship with your blood/married relative with Obama and his self professed mentor and father figure given his dead beat dad wasn’t around?
                    More than that, you dismiss the fact that the person that he mentions over and over again in his books had very little influence into his political ideology, he just mentioned him cause he was being wistful? This is a man that Barack himself said had a profound influence on his life.
                    More than that, he removed many comments about Uncle Frank in the subsequent editions of his book since running for office. That doesn’t pique your interest at all? That doesn’t seem a tad bit suspicious?
                    Did you write two books mentioning you uncle in them? I mean, if you want to dimiss what I say, cause you want to believe what you want, fine. But don’t sit around on this site talking about how delusional folks are, when you’re displaying the same kind of delusional thinking right now.
                    If you don’t care, then don’t. But I answered your question without trying to diminish you as some Obamabot troll. And if in good faith I answer a question…I expect a little thought provoking answers in exchange. If you’re going to dimiss what I say out of pocket, without even TRYING to offer something as an explanation…then you’re no better than the people you’re criticizing. It’s called hypocrisy.

                    • Alan Davis

                      I get that many on this blog are not interested in building coalitions. Or winning elections apparently. But the “OMG!! OBAMA IS A COMMIE” running around with your hair on fire does not promote the R brand. Its just sort of crazy. Obama governs like a moderate republican would have 10 years ago. He is as corporate as Romney. He torpedoed the public option and has used Romney’s health insurance plan as the model.

                    • MissMalevolent

                      I didn’t say he was a communist. Someone asked why someone would believe that. I gave them a very solid example. I’m not trying to build a coalition with Obama voters.

                      I don’t buy into fear tactics, “OMG Republicans are evil they’re going to sew up your wombs”

                      I don’t hate Israel.

                      I don’t ignore the ramped up violence in the Middle East, and glibly dismiss it as an “Arab Spring”

                      I do think people should be accountable for their actions.

                      I do believe that English should be the number one language of the land…not the other way around.

                      I do understand the sordid history of the US, but I’m very proud to be an American. And I love my country.

                      And I’m pro-War (when necessary), pro-Abortion (in cases of rape or incest not as birth control), pro-Death Penalty, ambivalent about gay marriage (I don’t care who “marries” who, if there was any real sanctity of marriage, Kim Kardashian wouldn’t be allowed to do it.), against Obamacare, ambivalent about weed being decriminalized (I’ll never smoke it, but I don’t care about other folks fucking up their lives with that shit) and I like drinking pops that are over 18oz.

                      There is no room for me in Obama’s party…so why do I give a shit about making coalitions with it?

                      As to the rest, who said I was for Romneycare? And whether or not Obama took the teeth out of single payer health care…doesn’t change the fact that it’s socialist in nature. Do people even know what the definition of socialism is?

                      Here let me help you:

                      1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

                      So yeah, it’s socialist. More to the point, it’s not about helping anyone but the government into people’s pockets. All they wanted was another revenue stream…and all they had to do was pretend like it was about caring for people to give up their liberties. Much in the same way Bush and Co said that to have some peace of mind, we only needed the Patriot Act to be enacted.

                      No I don’t want join any party willing to give up MY liberty for their monetary gain.

                    • Alan Davis

                      MissM thank you for your thoughtful reply. No, it was not you that said that Obama is a commie – it was Hokma and this threadlett is about that. But I appreciated your reply. And I agree with your last sentence. But not the socialist part. Collective and governmental ownership is not what Obama/Romneycare is about. It is about CORPORATE ownership. Health insurance (rather than care) for corporate profit. The corporatisation of government is a growing problem and IMO does not follow the historic models of socialism or capitalism or any of it. Medicare is a socialist program. SS is too. Not the new models. Now we have government mandating crony capitalism.

                      The social issues in this campaign were nuts – IMO. Just hate back and forth. One quibble…I had a nerve pain issue a decade ago and was prescribed opiates for the paint. They did not work. MedMj did and I don’t smoke it now or ingest it but it does have wonderful medical uses and seems rather harmless in other respects. But that is just an aside. I mostly agree with you. I think government needs to get out of the medical consulting room, the bedroom and all the personal rooms.

                      edit: oh and I was not talking about coalitions with machine brand Ds. but rather with brand Rs. But I’m finished with both brands.

                    • Hokma

                      You cannot have a coalition with a communist like Obama – there is no room in his ideological world for compromise. He refuses to compromise and instead uses blame to demagogue his opponents.

                      Learn what communism is and why we as a country are much loser to that than to what we were founded on.

                    • Hokma

                      Go spend a few bucks and buy his book for starters. then come back here with a brain. All you have to do is read his own friggin book!!!!

                  • Hokma

                    Read the book moron and stop making comments based on your ignorance or just accept the facts.

                    Did you know his grandfather was a member of the socialist workers party?

                    Go read and get facts or just get lost moron.

                    • Alan Davis

                      OMG!!! OMG!!! OMG!!! Obama is a commie! Governs like a moderate republican, but he is a commie! I read it in some book. Be afraid! Be afraid!

                    • Hokma

                      “Governs like a moderate republican”???

                      Another example of an aboslutely failed educational system in this country. How does one respond to such an idiot comment?

                      And, yes, Obama’s ideology is socialism and communism – always has been. Should you be afraid? No. Not since you are a loyal member of the SWP.

                    • Alan Davis

                      Cute. I’m so glad you gave me permission to not be very very very very afraid like you are!

                      Obama care was modeled after moderate R law – Romney care – is a mandated corporate health insurance program. It is not medicare which is actually much closer to a socialist system. Do you even have health insurance?

                    • Hokma

                      They probably had not taught you this in that failed school system you went to but there is something called the 10th amendment that states that all powers not provided to the federal government in the Constitution are all reserved to the States and the People without exception.

                      That is the heart of a federal republic and the heart of conservative principles. For instance if it is the will of the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts to have a statewide healthcare system then they can do so without interference from the federal government.

                      Obamacare does not fall under that amendment and therefore is not patterned (and never was) after the healthcare system in Massachusetts. That was yet another political lie by Obama and fed to the low life bottom feeding morons like you.

                      In fact, Obamacare does what the Mass healthcare law does not do – impose this law on states that never wanted it. It also does many more things that are different and unconstitutional.

                      What it does do is guarantee Obama a nationalized healthcare debacle before he leaves office.

                      I know more about this than your elected offiials do because until now I provide healthcare coverage to over 100 employees in my company but have to reassess continuing to do so as are most are other companies – better to poay the penalities than the escalating healthare premiums – and let them go on the government insurance.

                      You obviously are likely on government assistance so i would not expect you to have a shred of knowledge of what has been happening with Obamacare and its effects event he past two years.

                      Now go back into your den and try and do bettergoogle searching.

      • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie

        You should be the first person laid off but you probably don’t have a job.

  • http://twitter.com/geffbeck jbeck

    Larry,
    You haven’t talked sense like this since when? Let’s say around 2007! But your partisan tendencies bubble up every now and then, must be the toxic swamp you’ve been wallowing in all this time. No. Joe Walsh isn’t fit to be talked of in the same breath a Tammy Duckworth. Republicans have slandered veterans before, without paying the price. Bush did it to McCain, and then again to Kerry. Saxby Shameless did it twice. First with Max Cleland and next against Jim Martin (who covered up his bum knee to enlist and go to Vietnam! So that’s the GOP for you, a bunch of bigots and liars.

  • akaPatience

    I absolutely agree with every word of your assessment Larry. I may not be a Rush Limbaugh listener or fan, but I’m glad to hear he chastised the “purist” caller who helped hand the election to Obama. Republicans fall into the same trap over and over again when it comes to social issues like abortion and gay rights. In the Big Picture, these are IMO peripheral issues but nevertheless are big motivaters when it comes to voter turnout. And Republican social Darwinists can dream on if they think they can ever win national elections in light of immigration trends. That is, America’s immigrants of today, largely Hispanic, tend to be poorer, less-skilled, and with high illegitimate birth rates, who are much more likely to draw upon government benefits than the great wave of immigrants at the turn of the 20th Century. If the majority of voters were honest about the economy being THE most important issue of the election, I suspect their perception of the economy had less to do with job creation than government handouts. For the sake of our country I hope that’s not the case. Rather, I hope the puritans who would cut off their noses to spite their faces will wake up and realize they have to settle for marginal gains and stop deluding themselves into thinking they’ll ever have it all.

    • Alan Davis

      The R brand is just as much, if not much much more so, pro hand out. Oil subsidies and farm subsidies especially go to lazy red states. Federal government pays out vastly more in corporate welfare then to the poor. If you really want to see government benefits look to farmers and corporate welfare queens.

      • beachnan

        Shall we start naming all of the solar companies that Obama handed money to, that have now gone bankrupt?

        • Jill Branson

          Solar companies have only received government backed loans and not actually money. The amount of financial support given to alternative energy, which has been very successful at increasing our use of renewables, is very very small compared to all the subsidies given to the oil & gas, coal and nuclear energy industries over the decades.

  • akaPatience

    Oh, another thought that occurred to me is that late in the campaign when Romney was driving home the point about bi-partisanship, which I wholeheartedly agreed with, I worried that it would turn off the purists. But I hoped in the end they would suck it up and do the right thing considering the stakes. Some probably did. But too many probably didn’t.

  • HELENK2

    mediocrity and victim mentality trumped love of country.

    In 2008 I left the democratic party and voted republican for the first time in my life. I did this because I saw what backtrack was and would be as president.

    As for the republicans who stayed home both times shame of you. you helped damage this country like spiteful children who did not get their own way and stamped their feet.

    Hate to tell you that a president is supposed to represent ALL the people not just conservatives. Sometimes that means you do not get your own way. You work with the other guy,

    • DM

      Helenk, the Republican voters who stayed home were in CA and KS and all over, but not the battleground states. It didn’t matter if Democratic and Republican voters stayed home in CA. Neither candidate made an effort to increase its margin in CA, that’s why many Democratic voters stayed home. Why should Obama want to spend money to bring more Black people to vote for him in CA or Romney spend more money to bring more GOP voters when the state wouldn’t change?

      • HELENK2

        I now live in California and understand that my vote may not have made a difference in this state. But it is my right and duty to vote. Those who elected not to vote really hurt the country. Maybe if more republicans had come out it might have made a difference.

        • DM

          Helenk2, Romney devoted his efforts to win the presidency, not to better McCain’s numbers if they didn’t matter. Romney rightly put his effort in the battleground states, and as I just explained to HoBama, Romney got 4% more votes in OH in 2012 than McCain in 2008.

      • HObama HObamanana

        In Ohio, Romney received 93,200 Republican votes less than McCain did in 2008. So someone stayed home or suddenly became a liberal. Not to mention so many precincts having long lines all day long that didn’t exist in 2008. Some of this stuff just doesn’t add up.

        • DM

          In OH Romney received 2,593,789 votes in 2012

          In OH McCain received 2,501,855 votes in 2008.
          That’s a 4% increase in votes! That was excellent work, but it fell short.
          You have the 93,200 right, but they belong to Romney not McCain. I’ve checked ALL important battleground states and ALL of them show that Romney got more votes in 2012 than McCain in 2008. That’s a fact. The other states were irrelevant to Romney’s fight for the presidency.

          • HObama HObamanana

            WRONG! My number is correct. It is taken directly from the Secretary of State for the State of Ohio website.

            McCain received 2,677,820 votes in Ohio.

          • HObama HObamanana

            You are wrong. Check the numbers at the Secretary of State’s website. You will see that I am the one using accurate numbers.

    • Alan Davis

      and the entitled mentality. Bank bailouts, oil subsidies, farm subsidies a corpulent wasteful military. It all trumps love of country.

  • HObama HObamanana

    If it is true that fewer people voted for the Republican ticket this year than 4 years ago then the blame can only be upon those that did not vote. Fools like the idiot you reference cannot be sane and insist that purity of character is the only thing worth voting for. As you state so wisely, there is no real such thing as a Conservative. There are variations on a theme with all of the various parts jockeying to represent that which is the only one true way. A way that has never existed.

    But people tend to believe in myths. And they like their heroes. Even when everyone in the know actually does know that they are made up. Substance matters little. It’s the image that counts. Yet Conservatives complain that liberals worship image when what they are really complaining about is the image they worship.

    I agree with many here that have stated that the lying and cheating occurred on both sides. And the Republicans are keeping quiet because they were out hustled, just as Obama said they would be. To make a big stink out of the fraud would expose their own complicity in the scheme and destroy what little credibility they are hanging on to.

    But for the moment let’s pretend as if there was no fraud whatsoever, that the election was lost because the Democrats won fair and square. Did Republicans do stupid things that helped them? I can think of two insane assholes that did, Akin and Mourdock. I think that in many ways Ann Coulter said it best.

    While pro-lifers in the trenches have been pushing the abortion positions where 90 percent of the country agrees with us — such as bans on partial birth abortion, and parental and spousal notification laws — Akin and Mourdock decided to leap straight to the other end of the spectrum and argue for abortion positions that less than 1 percent of the nation agrees with.

    In order to be pro-life badasses, they gave up two easy-win Republican Senate seats.

    I don’t blame Romney for this loss. I blame a Republican party that has it’s head so far up it’s ass of purity that it has lost all capacity for common sense. Face it, the Dems out-hustled the Republicans. That is what happened.

    When you try to manufacture reasonable explanations to excuse what people like Akin and Mourdock said the only thing you do is turn people off and diminish your cause. If people are really so fucking stupid that they honestly believe that what these buffoons said is acceptable then they are just as much to blame for Obama being reelected as the purists who stayed home.

    And while I’m at it, let’s consider what is also true about how the Dims won. They played the tried and true “racist” card. Labeling people that aren’t racists as racists works because people have an innate dislike of racists and would rather believe the worst than defend the best. Because even defending someone against the accusation of racism can be (and generally is) considered as being racist.

    All in all I am very disappointed with the results of the election. But it’s not the first election I have been disappointed with and I’m sure it won’t be the last. I don’t like what I see in the future headed our way but will do my best to bend and evolve so that the worst of it doesn’t get the best of me.

    • jrterrier

      Hobama, I agree with much of what you said but each time we try to reach an explanation we tend to ignore others. Here is just one of my pet peeves.

      We need to figure out a way to hold people in government and the press accountable. I cannot get out of my mind the Stephanopolous question in the NH primary on contraceptions. Romney hit it out of the ballpark. But I cannot believe that Stephanopolous question came out of nowhere; i believe it was a coordinated line of attack with the Obama campaign. It became one of the themes of the DEM campaign, which seemed silly but combined with the Akin/Murdouch comments led a lot of young women to believe that abortion & contraceptions were under attack by the Republicans. Look at this video and Stephanopolous’ nonsensical insistence on pushing the question.

      http://youtu.be/6pxyzAjk72U

      • HObama HObamanana

        I fully agree with you that this was a conspiracy alliance between the Dims and the media. I’d forgotten about the contraception question but you bringing it up brought it all back into focus. I honestly do not know, at this moment, how to hold the media accountable. And though I tend to get my news first from FOX they are hardly unbiased. I don’t know what the answer is but I’m beginning to suspect that a new method of delivering and receiving actual news is what will save the day. I have no trust whatsoever that the media magnates will change for the sake of the country. I don’t think a single one of them gives a damn about anything more than money and power.

        • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

          You can start by supporting the competition. If you don’t mind Glenn Beck, I would suggest subscribing to his new network TheBlaze. Even if you never watch it. Join at the $5/month level and help him. He’s already gone from Internet only to being on DISH. I pay for the premium subscription at $9.95/month and it’s well worth it. He makes comments once in a while about how he was gagged at Fox and you can tell he knows a lot about the censorship going on at the big networks (including Fox).

          • jrterrier

            More & more on Fox, I see an attempt to expand their viewership. Soon, if not already, you will see little difference between them & the competition.

        • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

          Oh, and for those of you who don’t like Glenn Beck…and are a little more left-leaning. Alex Jones has a $5.95/month subscription to his PrisonPlanet TV. I have a big issue with Alex Jones and his “the two parties are the same” BS, and some of his listeners are the ones that voted for Johnson over Romney…still…he covers so much of the police state stuff you won’t see anywhere, and he has lots of good young reporters coming up with his Nightly News.

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      If by “out-hustled,” you mean the Democrats paid homeless people to vote, and bused people from Chicago to Wisconsin to vote twice, then yes, I agree with you. But we have a bigger problem here than a few fringe conservatives that wouldn’t vote for Romney.

      • HObama HObamanana

        I know. I’m just not full of good solutions at the moment.

  • jrterrier

    from twitter & by a latino woman, no less.

    “Lynda Ramirez‏@LyndaRamirez
    Lets divide US in half and build a wall. Red on one side, blue on the other. How long before blue ppl try to dig a hole to red side?”

    • win43

      You know the so-called “red” states are by and large the net recipients of federal dollars, right?

      http://www.nationofchange.org/blue-states-make-red-states-take-1327337183

      No, you probably didn’t.

      • randi

        Meaningless reference. “red” may earn less, but more of them work than the “blue” – that’s the point of the comment above yours.

        • win43

          If “reds” earn less, why in the world would the so-called “blues” want to go to the red side of the fence?

          • MG6

            Blue state earn more? Tax rates are higher.

            • win43

              Nope, federal tax rates are uniform. Try again.

              • MG6

                Keep on with your delusional lies….
                State taxes are uniform? Federal are uniform? Lol!
                The Dems not only talking about taxing the rich but now they are going after the middle class.
                What usually happens people get up an go.
                Companies move to china. People move to other places that are tax friendly…..
                So what’s the plan to get the monies to fund SS? One idea floated by a Dem Senator is to confiscate the 401k’s of private individuals or private retirement plans. The idea he said is create a funding source for SS.

                • win43

                  Federal tax rates do not differ among states. To the extent you’re arguing that differential tax rates in blue states are the reason that blue states are the net payers and red states the net recipients of FEDERAL (not state) taxes and expenditures, you’re simply incorrect.

                  But your writing is highly incoherent, so it’s hard to tell.

      • jrterrier

        so, did you pass the bar?

        • win43

          A while ago.

  • MG6
  • foxyladi14
  • souphands

    You listened to rubes like Larry Johnson who believe the Fox News BS. It’s simple: you were never winning.

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      I was scratching my head wondering why paid Obots are still showing up here today, and then it hit me – the Dems know they cheated, and are sending operatives out to any website that speculates on the fraud, and has them post counter messages like this one.

      • souphands

        Keep living in your bubble.

        • MG6

          Soros’ company owns the voting systems in place. So, the Dems control the outcomes.

          • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

            Yep. I’m not wishing violence on any one, but I’ll be really glad when George Soros dies a natural death due to his very old age. He won’t live forever, thank God.

          • souphands

            Tagg Romney has stock in the voting machines used in OH and PA. Once again, you are living in a bubble. Your choice of news sources are making it impossible for you to understand the world.

            • MG6

              Holding stock doesn’t give you control as much as owning.
              If holding stock allows you to control then let me demand more from McD’s! Like free frays or something…

            • beachnan

              That story was disproved.

    • jrterrier

      The only thing that makes LJ a rube is that he hasn’t thrown you and your recently arrived obots outta here.

  • HARP2

    Proverbs Chapter 26

    As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

  • jrterrier

    I continue to argue that the 100% turnout with 100% support in the black community for Obama was either voter fraud or incredibly loyal base support that would be hard to counter. I think one of Romney’s finest hours was when he spoke at the NAACP convention. He went into very unfriendly turf and was respectful, tried to persuade, & did not pander. To little or no avail apparently.

    • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

      All they needed to do to win PA and OH was overly high turnout in the urban areas. PA is mostly red and so is OH except for inner city areas. Remember, they booted out 70 GOP election officials in Philly the day of the election, and a judge had to intervene to let them back in the precincts.

    • win43

      What precinct? Where’s the data? Agree that that’s suspicious, but where’s the data coming from?

      • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

        I’ve got you figured out now, Obot. Your astroturf job is now to try to suppress any conversation about voter fraud. I hope they are paying you well…I for one won’t shut up about it.

      • jrterrier

        Cleveland & Philly to name just two.

        • win43

          Those are the names of cities. I asked for data. Link? Cite?

          • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

            We don’t need to answer to you. People have been posting links with hard info about this issue for the past few days. You are only here to try to shoot down any speculation. Seriously, do you have any other day job than doing astroturf for the Democrats? How’s living in your parent’s basement working out for you?

            • win43

              So post the links again, since they’ve been posted for “days.” How hard can it be?

              And imagine the satisfaction of shoving the data in my face.

              • http://twitter.com/beyondpartisan beyond partisan

                Here’s what’s going to happen instead. I’m going to ignore you, and go about my day, and when I come home this evening, it will be evident that you spent the ENTIRE DAY posting on No Quarter…because you’ll argue with anyone who posts here. And I’m going to roll my eyes at how such a pathetic, hateful person could have nothing more productive to do but troll a site like this one.

              • MG6

                How much do they pay you? Is it a full time or part time position.

              • jrterrier
                • MG6

                  Don’t bother…..this obot is here to distort any information on the truth. Look at Bengazi, no honest discussion there.

                • win43

                  Thanks! The nice thing is, once I actually see the source information….

                  So, that “108%” thing? I followed their trail of source cites, and it turns out that the number of registered voters in Wood County is 108% of their voting age population. Which does point to an issue with purging voter rolls — people move or die, and the rolls don’t get purged. But the actual voter TURNOUT in Wood county was about 62k. That’s well below both the registered voter totals and the eligible population. http://www.co.wood.oh.us/boe/Election%20Results%20Final%20Unofficial.htm

                  Should they clean up their rolls? Absolutely. But this is miles from being proof, or even an indication, of voter fraud.

                  On the 100% voting point, I responded above.

          • jrterrier

            Really, I didn’t know that. Go do your own research.

            • win43

              I’m not the one accusing people of fraud.

              When you accuse someone of something, it’s your burden to prove it. The reverse is McCarthyism.

              • jrterrier

                I reached a conclusion — either incredible base support or fraud. My conclusion is based on facts that I have reviewed. i gave you a link. Go look at it. You’ve heard of the internet, right. Most states have on-line databases.
                I don’t accuse anyone of anything which isn’t based on facts. Accusing people without facts is the realm of President Obama, the Dem Senate Majority leader and Obama’s campaign operative Stephanie Cutter. You probably are on a first name basis with them.
                I guess you didn’t pass the bar after all.

                • win43

                  Oh, you reviewed facts? Great! Which facts?

                  Surely you looked at more than just the front page of the Philly elections results website, right? Because THAT page actually contains zero voting data at all.

                  But it does lead to ward vote totals. So, presumably, your “review” of the facts includes some specific ward, which led to your oh-so-well-informed conclusion. So, which ward?

          • jrterrier
            • win43

              Okay. Great. We’re getting somewhere.

              Now, which ward should I be looking at, where there was allegedly 100% turnout and a 100% vote for Obama? I assume you know, since you asserted that it happened.

              • jrterrier

                You challenged my assertion. I gave you a link. Do your own research or shut up and accept what i stated.

                • win43

                  Haha, okay.

                  So, you are unable to say which precincts are the ones where this terrible fraud allegedly occured, because you don’t know. Got it.

                  • jrterrier

                    I join my colleagues. I tried. But they are correct. You are a real jerk. The first link I sent you went to a ward where the president received more than 99% of the vote. you can click on the various other wards and you will find many more like it. If you want to close your eyes to the truth, that’s your problem. Does your mother still chew your food.

                    • win43

                      No, that went to the full results for the county (Obama got 85%).

                      Give me a ward number, please.

                    • MG6

                      You can’t argue or hold a meaningful discussion with an obot.

      • HObama HObamanana

        Cuyahoga County Board of Elections

        Find the districts to check right here

        In Cleveland, in some districts he did even better with an astounding 100% of the vote in dozens of locations. For example, in Cleveland’s Fifth Ward, Mr. Obama won districts E, F, and G 1,337 to Mitt Romney’s… 0. And in case you’re wondering, Gary Johnson received more votes than Mr. Romney.

        Well, maybe that’s just a fluke. In the Ninth Ward, Mr. Obama won districts D-G with a paltry total of 1,740 to… 3. Hey, at least Romney got .2% of the vote! In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108% voter registration!

        Okay, what if we look at an entire Ward? No way this trend continues, right? An entire ward. Why not do the First Ward? Obama won that one 12,857 to… 94. This time Romney got .7% of the vote. He’s moving up in the world!

        In total, there are 21 districts in Cleveland where Mr. Romney received precisely 0 votes. In 23 districts, he received precisely 1 vote. And naturally, in one of the districts where Obama won 100% of the vote, there was 100% turnout. What a coincidence!

        • win43

          Thanks, somebody’s actually being helpful. Now, bear in mind that I’m taking issue with the people who wrote that, not with you for posting it. But here’s the thing:

          In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108% voter registration!

          Which county? They’re naming all those other districts, why not name the county so people can verify?

          And naturally, in one of the districts where Obama won 100% of the vote, there was 100% turnout. What a coincidence!

          Again, which district? I’m looking, and in Cleveland 03-R.02, Obama won 100% of the votes and 100% of registered voters voted. But there are TWO voters registered in that precinct (that’s weird administration, but seriously, those are the numbers) and both voted for Obama. Which, I mean, so what?

          I looked at the other voting precincts where Romney got zero votes, and in none of them was there 100% turnout in addition to a 100% vote for Obama. So, what did I miss?

          • HObama HObamanana

            You seem to be selectively choosing precincts. Cleveland 5th Ward precincts E,F and G were referenced and you made no comment whatsoever. There are several others if you look through the data.

            • win43

              Those are precincts where Obama got 100% of the VOTE, but they didn’t also have 100% TURNOUT.

              –The former points to a great deal of organization and solidarity. Yes, there really are inner-city neighborhoods with zero Republican presence. Actually zero. Your gripe there is with the Republican Party for not pursuing votes in those areas, not with the voters.

              –The latter (especially combined with the former) would indicate cheating. But, as I pointed out, the latter only happened in that one weird precinct with two registered voters.

  • jrterrier

    Former Sen Fred Thompson: “Obama campaign site listed “welfare programs” as accomplishment. Remember when politicians used to brag they got people OFF welfare? #tcot”

  • MissMalevolent

    I’m just trying to wrap my head around the fact, that a candidate gets 8 million fewer votes than last time, and people are saying that it’s only the Republicans that have a problem? Really? I know far more people that voted for Obama the first time, and didn’t this time…not to say that they went for Romney…they didn’t. they stayed out of it.

    Now THAT’s the real problem. Republicans couldn’t get those unhappy with Obama, to flip to their side…and the problem really is, conservatives have acquiesced the culture wars to the left.

    I mean fanatical liberals (cause I’m liberal, but I’m not part of the lunatic fringe that visits this site and I definitely think Obama is a charlatan) will talk about the Obama machine. And how it masterfully destroyed the Clinton Machine and the Republicans…but the margins of victory don’t show a man who has just bowled over the populace with his eloquence, intellect…but oh boy do you hear that all the time from the media. And I’m not talking about the news media…because they spent all their truth capital when they lied for Bush Jr. and continued their lying for Obama.

    I’m talking about those outlets that people do trust…late night television, daytime talk shows, Daily Show, Colbert Report. What conservative version of those shows exist?

    The lunatic fringe will come on here and say, “Daily Show IS impartial, they criticize both sides” they do, to an extent. It’s hard for me to watch John Stewart today, because I can seem him making straw man arguments all the time with his Republican guests, but doesn’t seem to do the same with the Democratic guests. I also know that some conservative comedians have been turned down for being on a show that’s supposedly about telling all sides…simply because, it’s a liberal show.

    Unfortunately, the argument is not about takers, leechers etc…quite honestly many of them don’t vote. I know people who have been on assistance, have no intentions of getting off assistance…and try to scam for more assistance, and they literally think Obama is the devil. Did they vote for Romney? Hell no, cause he’s just the white devil. The argument is not about takers. The argument is about people who aren’t interested in finding out the truth…they’re very happy to have it distilled for them. And they’re getting it from their favorite celebrities. Their favorite comedy “news” shows. The passive aggressive digs that their daytime stars make. What their favorite musician tells them is cool.

    That has more sway on today’s culture, than any news show. You know this because you can see by the numbers more people watch Fox News and yet, outcome is still the same. Why? Cause more people watch the Daily Show, Letterman, Leno, Kimmel, Entertainment Tonight…et al than any news program. Low information voters are what caused this election to happen the way it did. Not Romney, not the brilliance of the Obama campaign…

    Wanna know why Romney lost? Go watch the movie, Idiocracy before you respond to this post. Then you’ll have the answer.

    • http://twitter.com/jbjdjbjd jbjd

      What an intuitive ‘take’ on things.

    • Theymustbemorons

      I have also been recalling scenes from “Idiocracy” throughout the campaign and this insane election. You are so on the money!

    • beachnan

      I totally agree with your assessment.

  • http://twitter.com/ChocChipsMusic The Chocolate Chips

    oh Larry… come on… you know that these aren’t the final vote totals right? there are still votes to be counted (not enough to change the outcome obviously, but they will effect the final #s.)

    and most importantly: Obama wasn’t running against Obama ’08 – he was running against today’s out of touch Republican Party and he handed them a big butt whoopin’ (332 to 206)

  • jrterrier

    RIGHT SPEAK: When I think about..What could have been: Mitt Rom… http://www.rightspeak.net/2012/11/when-i-think-aboutwhat-could-have-been.html?spref=tw

  • shelldoll2

    These so-called conservatives are full of it. They would rather see the country go to hell in a hand basket than try to fix things.

    This one is not good enough for them. That one is not good enough for them. What? When did they achieve perfection?

    I’m sick of both groups. The liberals who think their sh*t don’t stink and conservatives who believe the same.

    Get over yourselves. You are destroying this country, ignoring the Constitution, and crushing the rest of us who care.

    I have a legacy of my children and grandchildren and I’ll be damned if I’ll let this current group of moronic clowns, on both sides of the aisle, ruin their future.

    Piss off the American People at your peril. The government is We The People. Not you politicos, pundits, or news media.

    Get the job done or step aside and get out of the way.

    I truly believe most sane Americans have had enough.

    • mgm

      “I truly believe most sane Americans have had enough.”

      Enough of what? The election did not confirm that by any means, unless you think everyone who voted for Obama is insane. (Admittedly it may seem like a real possibility, but it isn’t.)

      I think there are enough anomlies in this election to strongly suspect votes and/or voting results were manipulated. There has aways been voting fraud–always. But these machines make it much easier and and on a much broader scale. When all the votes are finally counted, I hope some numbers crunchers takes it upon him/herselves to compare registered voters numbers to the actual votes cast in a state. Do it party by party.

      Let’s find out if these vaunted machines are so hackable, so inaccurate, so prone to error, that we will never have honest election results—until we go back to single paper ballots and inked thumbs.

  • HELENK2

    It is less than a week since the election, so far I have read of two companies laying off workers due to the results of the election. One company in Nevada and another one a coal company due to bactrack’s war on coal. wonder how many of this people voted for him

  • TrumanTown

    Lots of reality denial going on here. It pretty much guarantees Democratic ascendancy as far as the eye can see. Just keep believing that Romney was not really conservative enough, that the election was “stolen,” and that Obama is a super-socialist. It just keeps the FOXhounds from developing arguments that might actually help them win elections. The win-able turf will just continue to get smaller and smaller and…. Keep up the good work.

    • win43

      Yep. It’s funny, I’ve gotten accused a couple times here of being a paid operative of… well, somebody. The Illuminati, maybe.

      But the Democrats have to just LOVE sites like this. Denying reality has become a serious drag on the GOP’s viability at the national level.

    • DM

      I agree with you. If the GOP continues to bury its head in the sand, it will be the party that can send congressmen to the House, but fewer senators that require candidates to appeal to red and blue districts. Unless the GOP changes or the Democratic Party self-destructs, just like the GOP did with G.W.B. and the extreme social conservative agenda, there will be no GOP president in the near future.

  • DM

    I’ve read comments all over the place that Romney did not do as well as McCain. That’s b.s. Please take a moment and put McCain’s 2008 results for all battleground states. Include MN, MI and WI. Then do the same for Romney. If you do that little exercise you many stop believing pundits and repeating others who are wrong about this very subject. Romney exceeded McCain where it counted. Sure Romney didn’t get more votes in CA or KS, but he wasn’t working to get more votes there. Obama got fewer votes in CA too. Both candidates put their efforts in the right spots. Romney did everything right. The problem is the GOP image that still suffers from President G.W.B. disaster, candidates like Akin and Mourdock, and also because of the 2012 GOP primary who sent a clear and loud message that the GOP are controlled by extremists.

    • HObama HObamanana

      I’ve read and disputed your numbers for Ohio already. If you are going to quote numbers don’t use USA Today or the NYT (or whatever) as your source. I used the actual numbers reported by the Secretary of State for the year 2008. Those are the only recognized official vote tallies that matter.

      • DM

        I stand corrected. I was using the NYT unofficial results. You are 100% right.

        • win43

          There is some dadgum bipartisan unity happening on this blog! All it takes is people actually talking about real numbers with each other…

        • HObama HObamanana

          Cool. ANYTHING NYT puts out is suspect.

  • MG6
  • MG6

    A couple of weeks ago the President of Argentina was in the process of extending the vote to the youth…..then…

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/argentinas-president-rocked-by-biggest-protest-for-a-decade-8300738.html

  • http://www.facebook.com/sirmrks Mark Dormann

    bull*** he lost the swing state republican vote was huge and he was way ahead with independents.

    what you see today is the obamadatameister concern trolls sowing dissent and causing havoc. suddenly on the conservative blogs we have people posting a hell of an idea storm as to why things went wrong to cover the voter fraud that occurred and make the populace think it was the republicans fault.

    Data Points To A Powerful Romney Campaign – And Yet…He Lost.

    by Ulsterman on November 7, 2012 with 58 Comments in News

    Received this link from Insider this afternoon and told to look it over carefully. They remain completely confounded as to how the reported #s and final results appear to directly conflict with data such as appears in this link. THIS DATA IS IMPORTANT SO PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO REVIEW IT AS WELL.

    Here is a brief summary of just how well Mitt Romney did in shifting voters toward him in 2012 versus what took place in 2008:

    Barack Obama netted FEWER Democrat votes in 2012 than were cast in 2008 by 3% points.

    Mitt Romney earned MORE Republican votes in 2012 than were cast in 2008 by 3% points.

    Read more in News

    « Rush Limbaugh On 2012 Election – “Nation Of Children, Santa Claus Wins”

    Closed Hearings On Benghazi Massacre To Be Held Next Week »

    Barack Obama earned FEWER Black votes in 2012 than he did in 2008.

    Mitt Romney by the way, earned MORE Black votes in 2012 than were cast for the Republican in 2008.

    Mitt Romney earned MORE votes from both married men and married woman than were cast for Republicans in 2008, while also improving support among non-married men and woman by 2% from 2008 as well.

    Mitt Romney earned MORE votes among liberals, moderates, and conservatives than were cast for the Republican candidate in 2008 – in fact, this improvement was by a full 7% over 2008 – a very significant improvement.

    Mitt Romney earned more votes from Protestants, Catholics, and Jews than the Republican nominee received in 2008, including a 9-point improvement among Jewish voters alone.

    The two top issues according to voters were the economy and the budget. Mitt Romney earned A 38 POINT ADVANTAGE OVER BARACK OBAMA on the top two issues of the election – and yet Romney was somehow defeated.

    Lastly, regarding the following three personal trait issues – strong leader, shares my values, and has a vision for the future, Mitt Romney DOMINATED Barack Obama among 2012 voters by 45 points. And lost the election.

    ___________________________

    Here is the link to the data via the Washington Post. It is stunning, some might even say inconceivable, that a candidate improves in such categories as overall votes among Whites AND minorities, is ranked far ahead of their opponent in both the top two concerns among voters, as well as the three most important personal trait issues – and still loses the election.

    That is exactly what happened last night. Somehow, someway…that is what happened to Mitt Romney – and to all who supported him.

    • I_cant_take_this

      That’s what happens when polling machines are imported from Venezuela.

    • jrterrier

      Pls post the links.

      • HObama HObamanana

        Here is a link to the Ulsterman Report referenced.

        And Here is a link to the Washington Post exit polling data.

    • http://twitter.com/JangoBear Sonya A. Willis

      Sure what’s been all the rage in the news since the election? What do the Republicans need to do to win again? Not a peep even from so-called Conservative pundits about the massive voter fraud that took place Tuesday.

  • MG6
    • elijahzabmom

      But sadly he still supports him.

  • http://www.facebook.com/sirmrks Mark Dormann

    how about a little lamecherry for fun reading…

    It is amazing in how a few short years that Puffy Lips Rove and Puffy Cheeks Obama have seized upon a new explanation on how elections are rigged as posted by Real Clear Politics.

    Yes in 2008, we were told all the Republicans “moved” in America and that is why 10 million votes for John McCain disappeared, but in 2012 election theft the “white folks” simply just did not show up, but for some reason Sean Trende just can not figure out the numbers as he wants to blame Christians, but yet the Southern vote was not off, so it is these saltines who are missing and no one knows who they are, where they are or what they are…….they simply just do not vote.

    The answer of course is Scytl, Sequoia and SOE, the Big Three S’s in vote fraud which Tiger Lily pointed out first. The programs are simply running now casino software making it a payout for the masses in the minority, while the “house” which is Obama or Rove always win.

    It is amusing this RCP propaganda as it quotes numbers of these “minorities” which vote and they do not make up a great part of the vote. You got blackoids at 13 percent, hispanoids at 10 percent and the other oids of Asian at 5 percent with Caucasoids at 72 %.
    It is amazing in these numbers that when it came down to missing white folks, that Obama still “wins” the elections as it is only the right wing white people who do not show up to vote in the missing millions.

    I desire you to read this quote which is telling:

    We’ll have to wait for this year’s absolute final exit polls to come in to know the exact estimate of the composition this time, but right now it appears to be pegged at about 72 percent white, 13 percent black, 10 percent Latino and 5 percent “other.”
    How do the sources of Real Clear Politics know the race of people voting as that does not show up on registrations now does it. This is the clue in this that when Scytl runs it’s pre programmes that the 2012 election was designed to run on suppressed Obama voter numbers, so it immediately started running vote tallies exactly as the model was set up, the same model which stated that this would be a “close” election and other such things like a close Senate.

    I make the point that Baby and the Plasmas have a most interesting offspring in Scytl in that it literally on the Obama model wiped 20% of the vote approximately off the Romney voting block so Obama would “win”. We know this absolutely, because in Missouri Todd Akin was doing well in winning that election, but was trounced by Clair McCaskill. I have watched this model working and something started projecting out in this Scytl monster went into North Dakota and flipped enough votes to send another Obama girl there, while Kristi Noem of South Dakota had a far too close of race against some bubblehead candidate
    The national elections all evidenced an algorithm which broke hard for Obama liberals. Scott Brown of Massachusetts found this out in being booted out of office.

    Al West is the bugger in this snot pile as he had 5000 votes just appear and disappear to boot him out of office. For some odd reason, the codex does not nuance as it should. This is a primitive gaming program by effects in it is just a nuke program that turns on and puts out the same effects and when the Obabots get their marching orders, they put ballots into places they should not be on the Al Franken voter fraud principles.

    RCP goes on with this bizarre statement :

    Obviously, this surge in the non-white vote is troubling to Republicans, who are increasingly almost as reliant upon the white vote to win as Democrats are on the non-white vote.
    What surge, according to their own data, minority voting was down for Obama from 2008. The reality of this Mockingbird propaganda is to condition voters into thinking these stolen elections were valid, because Scytl was valid, but the reality is as this blog has been proven right again, is that across the board major anomalies were taking place A liberal Obama skirt in North Dakota beats a Conservative as the rest of the state goes hard GOP?
    That is bogus and it is all that software turning on and off to throw elections based upon the population centers deciding things.

    Kristi Noem of South Dakota “surged” in West River where……there were hand ballot counts.

    As it stands, the bigger puzzle for figuring out the path of American politics is who these non-voters are, why they stayed home, and whether they might be reactivated in 2016 (by either party).
    No it is not, the reality is Obama used corrupt software to steal another election and Mockingbird is conditioning the people to accept it.
    Mark Levin is screeching about being the last man standing and this idiotry about next elections. That is all designed to pacify you, criminalize you and the main point is to keep you from revolution.

    There is a way out of this and Lame Cherry will provide it. It will require you doing something though that will make things much easier financially for you. Yes Lame Cherry is going to from the poverty patch help you do things legal, not worrying about some frickoid politician or suckoid talking head like Limbaugh to save you and save America.

    That is enough now in the Lame Cherry exclusives in matter and anti matter.

    Do not fear my children. This is the brier patch and I was born here. I know how to get you out of here and to do it all legal and each of you rugged individuals is going to do this in the quiet of your homes. The patricians are secure and think in their election theft and absolute power they have you in the gulag where you are helpless.

    Not the case, but pay attention as this is so simple it will explain the brilliance of God’s Inspiration.

    Prepare yourself to accept every free gratuity which is being offered you. Do not be repulsed by this, but start pondering this as a chess move. It will be explained

    • jrterrier

      I was struck by Stephanie Cutter’s statement pre-election not to despair when the early results came in. Right, she knew the fix was in and the numbers would right themselves when all was said and done.
      MSNBC tingler Chris Matthews & Ed LNU was glum on Tuesday morning because they knew there was going to be a Romney landslide based on their true polls. It was fixed. When does the march begin?

  • http://www.facebook.com/sirmrks Mark Dormann

    BASIL99

    November 9th, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    Check this post at Crawdad from a woman who grew up in a dictatorship.

    I was born in a dictatorship that was nominally “democratic.” The President, under international (ahem USA) pressure, would hold elections. There would be massive crowds for the opposition challenger, than mysteriously the results would show overwhelming votes for the dictator. He never officially lost an election. The media would always cover this up for him – never criticized him.

    I saw the crowds for Mitt Romney. I saw the handfuls of diehards for Obama. I saw the poll skewing – Obama needed to exceed 2008 turnout to break even with Romney. Did Obama exceed 2008 turnout? No he did not. Obama lost 9 Million voters! But in the key battleground states, he got more votes than Mitt Romney. Somehow Obama voters in battleground states were more pumped than ever to vote for Obama?

    I’m not the only one whose spidey sense is tingling. These are not plausible numbers, these are 3rd world dictatorship show election numbers:

    Obama got 99% of vote in Philadelphia precincts where GP poll watchers were evicted

    Obama got 100% of the Cleveland vote

    The unofficial Boston ward and precinct results show turnout of of 129% (page 7 of pdf)

    RedFlagNews has more examples under #VoterFraudAlerts

    http://crayfisher.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/my-immigrant-gut-tells-me-this-is-a-stolenelection/#more-17093

  • Dissentispatriotic

    O/T, but with the breaking news of Petraeus’ resignation one week before the hearings…waiting to hear from Larry on this. Personal problems can happen at any time but this timing seems problematic.

    • jrterrier

      Maybe this explains where he was when Benghazi was burning. Or why he didn’t come out forcefully against the charade & cover-up.

      God help us.

      Makes you yearn for the righteousness of Mitt Romney.

    • HoosierinDixie

      Does anyone know if he was or is suppose to testify before Congress next week regarding Benghazi?

      • Dissentispatriotic

        He was set to testify and may still. Just heard a speculation from a military contributor on Fox whom I’ve never cared much for. His comment was that the Obama WH knew about the affair and threatened to out him if he didn’t resign. The leaked documents from Benghazi do not jive at all with Petraeus’ comments in the day or two following the attack. OTOH, it may boil down to an affair, plain and simple.

        • HoosierinDixie

          Thanks for the info. I agree the timing is problematic. It would be interesting to know if this was a long term affair (before accepting the CIA appointment) or something more recent and brief. If long term, why does a high ranking officer who took an oath of Honor suddenly come clean now?

          • jrterrier

            He’s not military any more, is he? Didn’t he retire before becoming CIA director? No need to resign except for personal reasons and if for personal reasons, why insult your wife further with a confession?

            • HoosierinDixie

              I don’t know but those are all good questions. Lets see if the MSM follows up (snark). I hope the House still calls him to testify under oath.

    • foxyladi14

      very.

    • mgm

      I know it’s foolishly optimistic, but what if he doesn’t want to lie under oath? Or has been forced to resign by those who don’t want the truth to come out? The timing of this is more than problematic…

  • Eyes Wide Open

    None of this makes sense, no I take that back. It was a proven fact that there was cheating with ACORN and others in 2008 in favor of Obama. Why would 2012 be any different? I am sick. as long as they are allowed to buy votes this will continue.

    Off topic but current What about Petrasus resignation? Forced out? Jumped? Blackmailed?

    • jrterrier

      Petraeus — all of the above?

      • Eyes Wide Open

        Wonder if Obama is trying to get rid of certain Generals in order to put in place his own. Things are getting worrisome.

  • I_cant_take_this

    Chris Christie single handedly destroyed Romney by sucking Obama’s &^$# and helping him look magnanimous and bipartisan. Lame brained idiots went for it or they decided to stay at home rather than vote for Romney…they got confused by the pretty pictures flashing before these poor bastard’s eyes.

    The Republicans that didn’t vote are NOT those that are Conservative or typical Republican (those were biting at the bit to throw Obama out) but weak RINO Republicans that voted Obama last time in the swing states. Also, I bet many Ron Paulers (ID as republicans often) didn’t vote either….these libertarians are the diehards and ideologues.

    Conservatives are not ideologues so stop lumping us in with weak Republicans and quirky Libertarians.

  • I_cant_take_this

    This is what happens when you import voting machines from Venezuela…but who will ever do anything about it from here on in? NOBODY!

    • souphands

      There are zero voting machines imported from Venezuela. Quit listening to liars.

  • jrterrier

    Cavuto just reported that Petraeus “won’t be testifying, not at all.” Why not? Just because he’s resigned doesn’t mean that he does not have information about what happened while he was CIA director. Hope Issa or whoever is running the hearing doesn’t put up with this?

    Where’s the President elect?

    Something is rotten in Denmark.

    • FloridaFI

      CNN just said the opposite. Stated that he can still be called before Congress for his testimony about things that happened while he was at the Agency.

      • jrterrier

        Of course he can be called. Any person can be subpoenaed to testify. But not to worry, there’s this: Update: For what it’s worth, Andrea Mitchell and MSNBC are hearing that Petraeus’s resignation really doesn’t have anything to do with Benghazi.
        Now I know for sure it has something to do with Benghazi if they sent Andrea Mitchell to say it doesn’t. Can Debbie Wasserman Schultz be far behind?

  • FloridaFI

    Petraeus, CIA head, just announced his resignation citing extra-marital affair.

    While the affair probably did happen, I suspect something far more troubling. I can’t prove it, but sounds an awful lot like the affair was being held over his head for him to toe the line with the Benghazi incident. He just threw it right back in their faces.

    He has now freed himself up to testify in front of congress w/o the worry of someone holding some dirty laundry over his head.

    Things just got interesting again.

    What think you, Obi Wan Larry?

    • I_cant_take_this

      Don’t get too excited or don’t hold your breath…nothing will come of this EVER. The pigs control EVERYTHING. They have managed to make Americans believe the House is a joke……Americans will probably cheer when Obama gets rid of the branch altogether for hindering the “will of the people” or “progress”. Impeachment will be meaningless or impossible.

      • jrterrier

        It’s the Senate Committee that was having the hearing. It’s controlled by DEMS. Explains why Petraeus is not going to testify next week.

        • FloridaFI

          He won’t volunteer. He will wait to be compelled by congress. It will also probably be closed door.

  • I_cant_take_this

    I have never been a racist but am I the only one to feel this?: A strange feeling of repulsion upon seeing a black person just by virtue of being able to predict what his/her views are with 95% accuracy. There is no one group in the world other that the American black person that votes so monolithically for anyone….and its all racially motivated!

    I cringe whenever I think of this and the real danger it poses for this country. These leftists have really mounted a “yes sir” “Kool aid” army.

    So who are the racists?

    • MG6

      My Brother tells me his Cuban friends in Miami are horrified that Obama won. They can’t seem to see how he could have carried Fla. in our discussions he thinks that immigration was what carried the vote….. illegals.”
      How can they want to be American citizens if they can’t protect the constitution?
      Further, as Catholics; How can they vote for the Dems who rejected G-d three times?!

      • MargaretM

        Hispanic immigrants, mainly Central Americans, have been leaving the Catholic Church in large numbers, for more evangelical, non-denominational churches. The stat that more weekly-mass-attending Catholics voted Obama over Romney is puzzling. It doesn’t ring true to me unless the hispanics who remained Catholics voted Obama, the lure of swag trumping tradition and doctrine.

    • souphands

      You’re a racist. Chances are you always were.

    • Renfrew Squeevil

      You want to know why African Americans vote 95% Democratic? It’s assholes like you, pinhead. And as for your last question, the answer’s easy: You are. ¡Felicidades!

  • jrterrier

    It’s all falling into place. It’s a Senate Committee — thus, controlled by DEMS. They didn’t want Petraeus testifying so they made him resign.
    If he was going to resign, why not use the obligatory, I want to spend more time with my family. Why have an affair & then rub his wife’s nose in the dirt. Only reason to explain publicly that he’s resigning because of an affair is to sully his reputation. And make whatever he may say later less credible.
    Hold the presses. if Obama is impeached before the Electoral College votes, does Romney take office?

    • http://twitter.com/jbjdjbjd jbjd

      Funny you should ask… the Electors can vote for anyone they want. Even in states which have enacted laws requiring them to vote for the candidate they promised to support; no so-called faithless Elector has ever been prosecuted.

      • jrterrier

        Woohoo.

  • MG6
  • foxyladi14
  • jrterrier

    “AP’s already picked through the gruesome national exit polling from Tuesday. I’d like to highlight one additional piece of data that is especially interesting: According to CNN’s figures, Mitt Romney actually won white Millenials (18-29 year olds) by seven points, 51-44, despite losing the broader demographic by 23 points. (McCain lost young voters by 35 points in 2008). Virtually all of Romney’s gains within this age bracket came from young whites. He got absolutely demolished by young people of color; losing young Hispanics by 51 points, and young blacks by 83 points. The specific age breakdown of Asian voters isn’t available, but Asians broke 3-to-1 for Obama overall, so an approximate extrapolation isn’t particularly difficult. The demographic implications of Tuesday’s results are becoming increasingly obvious: Republicans simply cannot win elections without dramatically improving their standing and image among non-whites. If they don’t, they’ll quite literally lose the future.”

    http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/11/09/romney-won-young-white-voters/

  • Sally Vaci

    Larry, I think you have a pretty good analysis here. I’m a hard core, lifelong conservative and well aware that my personal beliefs are far more conservative than prolly 98% of the country. But I am also a pragmatist, politically. I want a broad coalition of people on the center/right, who agree on a handful of big, important issues that keep our nation generally safe and prosperous. (Reagan had the three-legged stool.) My preference is always to vote for someone who shares all of my values, but seldom is that a choice. So I vote for the best candidate given all circumstances. I’ve yet to find a Democrat worthy of my vote, and given the leadership of today’s Democrat party I wouldn’t vote D under any circumstances. But on the other hand, many of the Reps I’ve voted for have let me down. Still, the principles of the Rep party represent my views the best. It’s that simple, and that imperfect.

    You’re correct about every so-called conservative using Reagan as his personal Gumby doll, bending RR into whatever they want him to be, retrospectively. That’s very annoying to me. The real RR was a bit of an enigma, and a very interesting, surprising, multi-faceted guy. No purist by any means.

    It may help that I’m Lutheran… we are quite pragmatic about separating the two kingdoms – the earthly one and the heavenly one. Many American Christians get themselves too wound up about Christian influence in govt. It is quite enough for me to have the freedom to believe what I choose and worship where I choose. With the HHS mandate, Obama has put a big toe into infringement of that freedom (First Amendment). We shall see how far he pushes, and what shape the resistance to it takes.

    • http://noquarterusa.net Larry Johnson

      Wise words Sally. Thanks for sharing.

    • I_cant_take_this

      I think its a combo of Venezuelan voting machines and many staying home too.

      HOWEVER, Republicans that didn’t vote are NOT those that are Conservative or typically Republican (those were biting at the bit to throw Obama out) but rather the weak RINO Republicans in the swing states that voted Obama last time (eg writer watchamacallit Brookes) . Also, I bet many Ron Paulers (ID as republicans often) didn’t vote either….these libertarians are the real diehards and ideologues Larry is mistakenly overlooking in his analysis.

      Conservatives are not ideologues so stop lumping us in with weak Republicans and quirky Libertarians. Conservatives are for the most part the Classical Liberal of nearly a century ago. We look for the facts and the truth and look to the constitution, our founding Documents, the Ten Commandments, We never believe ANYONE is perfect so we don’t tend to believe that anyone out there is capable of fixing our problems but us the people on a community, county and State level. We’re very much involved in gov on these levels and don’t hand over reigns to easily or without vigilance. We have been defined and redefined by our enemies….those that usurped our mission to ensure freedom and opportunity to the Slaves, women and others in positions of difficulty. It worked well until…the Progressives came along with their eugenics movement and desire to control all facets of life. From the beginning the mocked and derided us but usurp our ideas for themselves…Read about the superstars of this movement and you will see how Hitler got all his wonderful Ideas to eradicate races and manipulate minds. Their underlining and often self professed purposes were to destroy blacks and white trash and idiots through abortion and sterilization, If fact Mussolini and Hitler thanked and praise these much admired and respected and now famous American progressives for their great ideas. Only difference between them and the progressives of the time is they had the courage to implement it on a greater scale.
      This is the EVIL progressivism has wreaked on a world wide level. Nazis, commis,fascists all spring from this ideological insanity that reduces a human to less than cattle or dogs or worms. It continues still to this day and Obama is one of them.among others like SOROS with great power.

      You bleeding heart liberals just don’t get what mindgames they’ve played on you…you know NOTHING and in most instances you are proud to be ignorant. You have no clue of infamy this movement has caused –over 130 million deaths in one century. you’ve been programed to not listen to your fellow American when they tried to warn you or the Very Dark Clouds behind you. You just kept on being proud to be a “Liberal” . Its too late to wake up now. You have been willing duped simply because you were lazy to open a book and figure things out for yourself. Your fatal conceit: you thought that with a degree you were smarter than everyone who had diffent ideas..and that’s exactly what they counted on you to do for them. .You acted as their army to beat down the forces for truth, human worth, and ration. Your leftist doctrine made you believe that some superstar will save us all and adhering to it was the proof you needed to show you CARE for others…..do you care for what this doctrine caused all over the world? do you care the 120 million were slaughter on its behalf? TO LATE IF YOU DO! It has now here in America to stay.

      Do you know who these progressive commis, fascists, nationalists send to slaughter first? Those on their side.

      GOD help us.

      • Renfrew Squeevil

        You need to go back on your anti-psychotic medicine.

  • jrterrier

    What bothers me about the Petraeus resignation is that he is not testifying next week. His resignation should not affect his testimony. He was the head of CIA when the events took place. It is his testimony that is important.

  • getfitnow

    Please listen to what Bill Whittle has to say at the end of this article. It has helped me to come out of the blue funk.

    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50938

    • Theymustbemorons

      This is terrific! Thank you very, very much for this link. Take heart!

  • jrterrier

    Ok, someone tell me to shut up if i’m beginning to lose it. but listening to someone talk about how this is the most extraordinary event in our security community reminded me about the crazy happenings during watergate.

  • graywolf

    I think you’re right.
    As long as the Republicans (the stupid party) continue to shoot their mouths off about social issues (abortion, no matter horrible is settled law)and idiots like those 2 in Indiana and Missouri keep mouthing off, there will be a big problem winning a national election.
    Republicans have to be about small government;the party of the adults.
    Also, there’s more coming out about inept yuppies playing with computers in the Romney campaign and totally screwing up the ground game.

    • Alan Davis

      The neocon R brand is not about limited federal government. It is all about funneling money to their interests: bloated military and unnecessary/illegal wars, oil and farm handouts, bank and insurance bailouts are the biggest winners. A global DEA police force and CIA gobble up the money – the jails are exploding. The Rs seem to want to criminalize many private issues. The R brand has lost any authority it had regarding “small” government. Now it mostly just has its high profile moralizing.

      • Hokma

        I cannot imagine that “Alan Davis” is your real name because I don’t think anyone is that stupid to use their real name for such ignorant comments.

  • HObama HObamanana

    This video pretty much sums up the advice I have to all that feel discouraged, as if all is lost. Not to mention that it just completely rocks.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5hYL7SBxvI

  • Popsmoke

    3 million did not show2 because they ar3e sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. Romney over spent during the primaries and Obama hit him hard with the Richie Rich label when Romney was broke and could not answer. Being a Mormon hurt and Romney never made the folk feel warm fuzzies. Plainly he was not the best candidate…

    • Jill Branson

      some truth to that….

    • Hokma

      I was telling people last night that I would not be surprised if evangelicals stayed home because he was a Mormon.

      But he lost because too many people – including Republicans – depend on the federal government and want the federal government to make decisions and provide for them. I think the Medicare issue scared far more people as well – not matter what their political affiliation.

      Let’s face it. We are far closer to full socialism than we are to being a federal republic.

      • souphands

        Says the genius who doesn’t understand how polls are conducted.

        • Hokma

          The contented sound of ignorance . . . . . chirp, chirp, chirp.

          Back to the basement before your mommy finds out your cage is unlocked.

          • souphands

            Sooner or later you will have to come to grips with reality.

            • Hokma

              scottymac – the only reality is that you are a functionally illiterate moron. Gp back to your basement before your mommy catches you.

  • http://twitter.com/PennsylvaniaRed PennsylvaniaRed

    Picture of Gen. Petraeus with mistress/biographer Paula Broadwell in Afghan capital Kabul

    http://twitpic.com/bbte17” title=”#Afghanistansucks Picture of Gen. Petraeus (left) with mistre… on Twitpic”><img src="http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/bbte17.png&quot; width="150" height="150"

  • jrterrier

    “After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair.” But Petraeus has actually been married for more than 38 years; the wedding was on July 6, 1974. In other words, if you read the resignation letter carefully, he’s telling you that this happened sometime between July 2011 and July 2012, not recently. Why didn’t he resign sooner? Or, on the flip side, why didn’t he try to hang on longer if he’d held on this long already?
    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/09/breaking-petraeus-submits-resignation-as-cia-director/

  • Bigfoot Steve

    neither West nor Walsh managed to rally a surge of “Conservative” to vote for them and keep them in office.

    Yeah, that’s a bit of a stretch. No one surges to the polls to support congressional candidates during presidential elections, conservative or not. If voters aren’t motivated to come out for the guy at the top, they aren’t going to stand in line for hours for some congressional candidates. That’s why turnout in off year elections is so low.

    Nominating a conservative is key, but it’s only part of the equation. It has to be a likeable conservative who appears competent, who doesn’t say stupid things, and one who is willing to FIGHT BACK against the BS of the left. I mean, for goodness sake, Obama said Bush and the republicans caused all our problems(which is a lie), and Romney said “Yeah, we did, but don’t worry I’ll be different.” I knew it was lost at that point.

    Romney was not a true conservative(he was barely republican if we’re being honest), but that’s neither here nor there. He was good enough for this moment in time. The other side called us racists, woman haters, rapists, and everything else under the sun, and many of us sat home and took it.

    This was an election we absolutely could not afford to lose, and anyone who sat home pouting is a complete and utter fool. If we win, it gives a chance to make things right. Not a guarantee, but a chance. Losing gives us no chance
    whatsoever. Now, thanks to you geniuses, there IS no coming back. It’s over. But hey, you showed mittens, didn’t you?

  • Jill Branson

    Actually Larry your numbers are not quite correct as there are still a lot of votes that have yet to be counted on the West Coast and most of those votes will be Democratic and for Obama. According to CNN as of last night California is just 71% reporting, Oregon 75%, and Washington 55%. Colorado is 90%, NM is 91%, IL is 93%, NY is 86%, etc.

    What is interesting is to compare Romney’s total vote count to that of McCain. Again according to CNN and as of last night Mitt Romney is currently at 58,487,232 votes. In 2008, John McCain got 59,456,814 votes. And that was for a guy (McCain) with no money who generated no excitement and had a crappy campaign. And Romney was the guy with a shit-ton of money, and lots of allies with a crap-ton more money, who was supposedly generating a boat-load of excitement and had built an ass-kicking GOTV operation.

    What is also interesting is that post-election analysis is showing that the Democrats actually got much more of the votes in the House than the Republicans, but still lost more seats and Boehner keeps the majority. The Republicans did the same as winning the electoral vote but losing the popular vote in the House. Because of all the congressional seat gerrymandering after the 2010 Census by Republican controlled States the Democrats got slaughter by the gerrymandering. However, it is clear that the House Republicans and Boehner have no popular mandate, so they should what their step.

    • HObama HObamanana

      The House of Representatives is also known as The People’s House. So they do indeed have a mandate.

      • Jill Branson

        Not really if they got less votes in the House elections than the Democrats, even though they won more seats. If they act like idiots many of them could get thrown out because the popular vote is against them and likely would be increasingly against them.

  • piattq

    You are exactly correct Larry. Laura Ingraham was in for Bill OReilly last night on Fox and she was ranting with just about everyone on Romney being a failed candidate and not a true conservative able to inspire turn out. (Not so Huckabee). Forget all the Repubs/conservatives who stayed home—not their fault they were not inspired. Really! They can make that assessment given what was in front of them? Nothing was wrong with their lying eyes? The other point is to think about those 2 or 3 million people. Maybe they are the ones who depend on the MSM nightly news and really did not see much more than the MSM cover up. But the real bottom line is that Repubs did not turn out their voters; they let Dems beat them at that game one more time.

  • http://twitter.com/vitadMD vitadMD

    Mr. Johnson, with great respect and admiration, what you are alluding to is a Tea Party movement conservative or supporter or activist. This movement began during Bush second term in response to issues you mention, inspired by Rick Santelli but the coalition had already begun. Who are they? – Perhaps mostly Republicans and Conservatives of all stripes, but also Independents and Democrats… who feel they are not represented by either party, who know it’s crucial to “conserve” the Constitution as the real social compact which unites and protects all Americans. These are people who believe in law and order, in the representative democracy that supposedly we have, who are awake and engaged seeing through the lies, deception, and manipulation of the media, the establishment politicians and party machines. They fear what has happened to our political process and realize it began long before this president. Being realistic and recognizing the entrenchment of the two-party system, they have tried to work within it. It’s a movement for government reform at every level, for doing something about corruption… hence, it was shunned by establishment Republicans.

    The labels are a problem because not having a powerful voice with which to communicate with the rest of the nation is a problem. It’s an imperfect grassroots movement, independent and critically thinking, perhaps libertarian leaning, NOT represented by ANY of the Republican presidential candidates, but for the most part reluctantly accepted the Republican alternative to creeping socialism, collectivism, and fascism.

    Disclosure: I’m an Independent, a physician, first-generation Lithuanian American whose parents fled Soviet Communism.

    • Hokma

      ” . . . alternative to creeping socialism, collectivism”

      I agree with your assessment but I don’t view it as “creeping.” It is here and will be firmly implanted before Obama leaves office.

      Our federal budget is dominated by social entitlements – they already control every citizen’s retirement (ERISA, Medicare, and Social Security) and with the avalanche being reported or Obama regulatory executive orders on top of what he already has done, they will control the energy industry. They took over management of federally backed student loans in order to begin the take over of all education. And of course Obamacare will result in national socialized medicine before he leaves office.

      We were founded and had run for most of our history as a federal republic where the central government was never intended to have any more power than to maintain a military, defend our borders, maintain an effective monetary system, and resolve disputes between states. That is it. All other powers were with the individual states, cities, and communities.

      Since the implementation of The New Deal more and more power has been taken from states by the federal government and with it more and more of our freedoms.

      This is not hyperbole, but a very strong case could be made that we are much closer to full socialism and eventual communism than we are to once again being a federal republic.

      It is ironic that intially the colonists rose up against the British government over the tyrannical taxation without representation. Several years ago citizens rose up again for the very same reason – the government was placing us in greater debt without asking the People and then enacted a healthcare debacle without a single GOP vote and against the wishes of a large majority of the People.

      • http://twitter.com/vitadMD vitadMD

        You make a good argument for the extent of the creep, also for why the Tea Party movement is named Tea Party. Unfortunately, too many are not knowledgeable about our history or Conservatism. Thank you for reading and responding so eloquently and intelligently to my comment. Would love for Mr. Johnson to continue this conversation as well.

  • Amjean

    Joseph Stalin said, “it doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes”. Its not that the 2 million didn’t vote, its
    massive voter fraud.

    • Renfrew Squeevil

      There you go. Please, please, take this and run with it. Make it the first thing Republicans talk about for the next four years. Don’t do anything but rant about this: New Black Panther Party, ACORN, dead people voting, everything. Hey, maybe you can tie President Obama’s fake birth certificate into it, and then you’ll really win seats out the ass. Seriously, this is the best thing you could do if you want to win in 2014 and 2016. Oh, and talk about rape as much as you can, too. Voters aree going to want to hear all-rape-all-the-time from Republicans, so be sure to bind those all up together.

      • Amjean

        The reason repubs don’t talk about it is because they do it too, albeit on a smaller scale. The democraps are just better at it as they have proven in 2012.
        Don’t you think the voters deserve better?

  • arturo_ui

    My advice to the GOP is very simple, and would be guaranteed effective: Stop hating on brown people. Stop hating on women. Electoral victories follow. See how simple that is?!

    • Hokma

      I can see why trying to demean, intimidate, and victimize a group of people like Latinos and Africans Americans would be conisdered hate.

      So do far left democrats continue to do that?

    • randi

      Why are you Obama supporters so filled with hate?

  • http://lesstalkmoreactivism.blogspot.com/ Canaan

    ‘True Conservatives’ could learn from the gay marriage lobby: Stick to your principles in your grass roots messaging, but Election Day is is about coalition. Before 2004, gays wanted government to impose gay marriage against public opinion. Result: massive backlash. Some nut in NY insisted gays not vote for Hillary Clinton if she didn’t come out for gay marriage. If Hillary had come out for gay marriage in 2004, the Federal Gay Marriage Ban would have passed.

    After the backlash, gays switched to grass roots messaging to sway public opinion. They changed the political math so the weasel-in-chief could safely flip flop. Now even die-hard gay marriage opponents think gay marriage nationwide is inevitable.

    Like the gay wipeout strategy, ‘True Conservatives’ think the answer is to elect only ‘True Conservatives’ so the govt can impose ‘True Conservatism.’ No. Sell ‘true conservativism’ to the grass roots public. But on Election Day, grow the fuck up! What do they want, Barney Frank on the Supreme Court?

  • Renfrew Squeevil

    Damn, Mr. Johnson, some day, your children or grandchildre are going to ask you what you did, and you can show them the thoughtful, well reasoned posts from your site. Think of how proud they’ll be! You’ve set up a site where nuts, cranks, idiots and bigots like I Can’t Take It, et al., can spew their hatred day and night, every day of the year. That’s a legacy to be proud of, eh?

  • jayhg

    Where’s the whitey tape?

  • Barb Bf

    http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2012/11/11/obama_likely_won_reelection_through_election_fraud/print

    ANOTHER POV!!!!! Worth reading the whole article…

    November 14, 2012

    Obama Likely Won Re-Election Through Election Fraud

    By Rachel Alexander

    11/11/2012

    There were many factors that hurt Mitt Romney and favored
    Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election. The Democrats portrayed Romney in the worst light possible; as a wealthy, out of touch millionaire who wanted to return women to the 1800′s. The left wing media predictably did everything it
    could to perpetuate that false caricature. Obama’s race was an advantage; voters of all persuasions, particularly minorities, still cannot get over the allure of the first black president. The 47% of Americans on welfare were predisposed to vote for the food stamp president over Romney, wanting the free goodies to keep on giving, despite the long-term unsustainability.

    In spite of those odds, polls indicated that Romney was going
    to win the election. The economy is close to Great Depression
    era conditions, and unemployment is almost as high as when
    Obama entered office. Economic conditions became so dire after Obama took office it prompted the rise of an entire new
    movement, the Tea Party. Presidents rarely win reelection when the economy is in the tank.

    So how did Romney lose a race that numerous reputable
    polls and pundits predicted would be an easy win, based on
    historical patterns? The most realistic explanation is voter
    fraud in a few swing states. According to the Columbus
    Dispatch, one out of every five registered voters in Ohio is ineligible to vote. In at least two counties in Ohio, the number of registered voters exceeded the number of eligible adults who are of voting age. In northwestern Ohio’s Wood County, there are 109 registered voters for every 100 people eligible to vote. An additional 31 of Ohio’s 88 counties have voter registration rates over 90%, which most voting experts regard as suspicious. Obama miraculously won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland, and received over 99% of the vote where GOP inspectors were illegally removed.

  • Pingback: Moving On To 2016… : NO QUARTER USA NET

  • MsContrary

    I couldn’t agree more. Romney would have been a great President. Furthermore, one should never compare candidates with former Presidents because times keep changing; situations and events are and were never the same for the people compared to one another. I’m focused on today and every day leading up to Election Day in November 2014. That’s all I care about now. Republicans MUST hold the House and take back seats in the Senate. This lame duck session is a very dangerous one. Those who lost their seats are wild cards whether they’re Dems or Repubs. Democrats who won re-election are emboldened and are pushing the meme that they got a mandate, when they didn’t. THE REAL BIG PROBLEM IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE MARXIST STREAM MEDIA. They deal in lies, distortions, disinformation, misinformation and cover ups. Second real big problem are institutions of higher learning and the primary, secondary public school systems. The children are being indoctrinated. Third real big problem is Hollywood and Burbank where propaganda and subtle brainwashing plots are produced. Somehow we have to start making wins in the INFOWARS. Blogs such as this one are one place. Brave visionaries like Glenn Beck and his start up network Mercury One are another. We need more networks of every kind. Social and media. That’s how the Obama Team GOTV. Social networks. Tweets to be specific.