follow us in feedly
Brandalism: Artists take back the streets, one billboard at a time
06:53 pm



The war against advertising has recently taken an interesting turn, with 26 artists from 8 countries, traveling across the UK for 5 days, subverting billboard advertising.

Called Brandalism, or “Taking the piss with a point”, it is a clever mix of vandalism, graffiti and art, and is a direct attack on the corporate branding which has become such a blight on our landscape.

‘Following on from the guerilla art traditions of the 20th Century and taking inspiration from the Dadaists, Situationists and Street Art movements, the Brandalism project will see the largest reclamation of outdoor advertising space in UK history as artists challenge the authority and legitimacy of the advertising industry. We are tired of being shouted at by adverts on every street corner so we decided to get together with some friends from around the world and start to take them back, one billboard at a time…....’

Brandalist work includes a reworked Manchester United soccer player, Wayne Rooney lifting the rewards of looting; health warnings placed on car adverts; knife crime underlining trainer wars; campaigns against the London Olympics reclamation of land. These are powerful and thought-provoking works that engage directly with their audience, which seek “to confront the ad industry and take back our visual landscapes.” Below is a selection of some of the artists’ work taken from the Brandalism site. I say, more power to them.

Find out more about Brandalism and the artists here.
More works of Brandalism, after the jump…
With thanks to Scheme Comix

Posted by Paul Gallagher | Leave a comment
‘Die-hard conservative Republican’: How I Lost My Fear of Universal Health Care
03:52 pm

Class War
The wrong side of history


American Vyckie Garrison, a self-described “die-hard conservative Republican,” moved to Canada in 2008 and was “disgusted” at the prospect of universal health care. Garrison was so far right, she writes at RH Reality Check, that “I believed based on my politics that government mandated health care was a violation of my freedom.”

Until she actually used universal health care, then she dramatically changed her tune:

I started to feel differently about Universal government mandated and regulated Health care. I realized how many times my family had avoided hospital care because of our lack of coverage. When I mentioned to Canadians that I had been in a car accident as a teen and hadn’t gone into the hospital, they were shocked! Here, you always went to the hospital, just in case. And the back issue I had since the accident would have been helped by prescribed chiropractic care which would have been at no cost to me. When I asked for prayers for my little brother who had been burned in a camping accident, they were all puzzled why the story did not include immediately rushing him to the hospital. When they asked me to clarify and I explained that many people in the States are not insured and they try to put off medical care unless absolutely needed, they literally could not comprehend such a thing.

I started to wonder why I had been so opposed to government mandated Universal Health care. Here in Canada, everyone was covered. If they worked full-time, if they worked part-time, or if they were homeless and lived on the street, they were all entitled to the same level of care if they had a medical need. People actually went in for routine check-ups and caught many of their illnesses early, before they were too advanced to treat. People were free to quit a job they hated, or even start their own business without fear of losing their medical coverage. In fact, the only real complaint I heard about the universal health care from the Canadians themselves, was that sometimes there could be a wait time before a particular medical service could be provided. But even that didn’t seem to be that bad to me, in the States most people had to wait for medical care, or even be denied based on their coverage. The only people guaranteed immediate and full service in the USA, were those with the best (and most expensive) health coverage or wads of cash they could blow. In Canada, the wait times were usually short, and applied to everyone regardless of wealth. If you were discontent with the wait time (and had the money to cover it) you could always travel out of the country to someplace where you could demand a particular service for a price. Personally, I never experienced excessive wait times, I was accepted for maternity care within a few days or weeks, I was able to find a family care provider nearby easily and quickly, and when a child needed to be brought in for a health concern I was always able to get an appointment within that week.


I also discovered that the Canadian government looked out for its families in other ways. The country mandates one year of paid maternity leave, meaning a woman having a baby gets an entire year after the birth of her baby to recover and parent her new baby full-time, while still receiving 55% of her salary and their job back at the end of that year. Either parent can use the leave, so some split it, with one parent staying at home for 6 months and the other staying at home for 6 months. I could hardly believe my ears when I first heard it. In America, women routinely had to return to work after 6 weeks leave, many times unpaid. Many American women lost their jobs when becoming pregnant or having a baby. I knew people who had to go back to work 2 weeks after giving birth just to hang onto their job and continue making enough money to pay the bills. Also every child in Canada gets a monthly cash tax benefit. The wealthier families can put theirs into a savings account to pay for college someday (which also costs far less money in Canada by the way), the not so wealthy can use theirs to buy that car seat or even groceries. In the province we lived in, we also received a monthly day care supplement check for every child under school age. I made more money being a stay at home mom in Canada than I do in the States working a close to a minimum wage job. And none of the things I listed here are considered “welfare” they are available to every Canadian regardless of income. For those with lower incomes than we had there are other supports in place as well.

If a woman gets pregnant unexpectedly in America, she has to worry about how she will get her own prenatal care, medical care for her child, whether or not she will be able to keep her job and how she will pay for daycare for her child so she can continue to support her family. In Canada those problems are eliminated or at least reduced. Where do you think a woman is more likely to feel supported in her decision to keep her baby, and therefore reduce abortions?

I should probably mention here that one of Vyckie Garrison’s main problems with universal healthcare (edited out by me, it’s information less relevant to DM readers) was that it would make getting abortions easier. She’s a former adherent to the Quiverfull philosophy of patriarchal Christianity. Re-read the last two paragraphs, with this in mind. She’s not whistling “Dixie” here: She’s a conservative, Bible-believing American who, when confronted with FACTS about socialized medicine and the evidence right in front of her own eyes, came to some very logical conclusions.

Since all of these benefits are available to everyone, I never heard Canadians talking about capping their incomes to remain lower income and not lose their government provided health coverage. Older people in Canada don’t have to clean out their assets to qualify for some Medicare or Social Security programs, I heard of inheritances being left even amongst the middle classes. Something I had only heard about in wealthy families in the USA.

And lest you think that the Canada system is draining the government resources, their budget is very close to balanced every year. They’ve had these programs for decades. Last year Canada’s national debt was 586 billion dollars, the USA has 15.5 trillion dollars in national debt. Canada has about one 10th the population of the US, so even accounting for size, the USA is almost 3 times more indebted. And lest you think that taxes are astronomical, our median income taxes each year were only slightly higher than they had been in the States, and we still got a large chunk of it back each year at tax time.

Canadians are also, on average, now WEALTHIER than Americans are, but if you watch Fox News, you might never be exposed to THAT salient lil’ factoid!

Here’s to open minds! Thank you kindly, Vyckie Garrison!

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
A tale of two cities: Fran Lebowitz rips Mayor Bloomberg a new one
02:14 pm

Stupid or Evil?


Greenwich Village or Logan’s Run?

The mighty Fran Lebowitz takes on Mayor Bloomberg and New York University with the righteous indignation of someone who loves the city passionately and hates the steady shift away from a metropolis known for its cultural, racial and architectural diversity to one of homogeneity, privilege and wealth. She kicks ass and I think she’s absolutely brilliant. Lebowitz IS New York. She’d make a great mayor.

What Lebowitz and many New Yorkers are specifically upset about is NYU’s plan to construct four new buildings in Greenwich Village which will radically alter the area’s landscape by creating six city blocks (1.6 million square feet) comprised of massive concrete structures. The Village is one of the last neighborhoods in Manhattan that has maintained its human scale and these “superblocks” would destroy one of the great cultural communities on the planet, replacing gardens with stone and flooding the area with more people, more bars and more noise - an urban Disneyland for academics and alcoholics.

Anyone who has recently visited the East Village knows just how bad things can get when a neighborhood is overrun by suburban asswipes whose idea of a groovy night out is finding the bar with the cheapest Jagermeister shots. The site of puke-slathered Lana Del Rays wobbling down Avenue B on their Jimmy Choo’s will make you long for the days of garbage strikes and man-eating rats.

You can read more about the struggle to keep the Village safe from the marauding armies of greed who are so arrogantly and wantonly hellbent on turning an historic neighborhood into a Bloombergian hellpit here.

Bravo Fran!

Posted by Marc Campbell | Leave a comment
Unemployed steelworker in anti-Romney ad not voting for Obama, either
06:12 pm

Class War



“We didn’t know who the hell Mitt Romney was when all that stuff started. It wasn’t until later we found out who Romney was. We just knew he was just another guy with money. It wasn’t until his boys came and started gutting the place that we found out he was an asshole.”

—Former GS Technologies steelworker Donnie Box, of Kansas City, Missouri

Although Donnie Box is the star of a pretty darned effective anti-Mitt Romney web ad produced by Priorities USA, that doesn’t mean he’s voting for Barack Obama in November, as Mike Elk reports in In These Times:

For Donnie Box, it doesn’t matter whether Romney had a direct day-to-day managerial role when Bain Capital closed his plant. Box feels Romney was still in a position to change things and that Romney had no problem profiting from his suffering. And Box notes that it was the actions Bain took before 1999, when Romney was indisputably head of the company, that led to the plant closing.

“There is no doubt in my mind when he came in with Bain Capital, he was the President and CEO of that corporation,” Box says. “He was responsible for the people who came in there and started loading up on debt. They knew with that much debt that there was no way that the place could survive.”

The scandal has led to a serious credibility problem for Romney among working-class voters. But being disillusioned by Romney is one thing; voting for Obama is another. And Box, for one, says he won’t be doing the latter.

Despite appearing in a controversial ad for the pro-Obama Super PAC Priorities USA, denouncing Romney’s role in the GS Technologies plant closing, Box, a lifelong Democrat, says he won’t be voting for the first time since 1971 because he has lost faith in politicians.

“I could really care less about Obama,” says Box. “I think Obama is a jerk, a pantywaist, a lightweight, a blowhard. He hasn’t done a goddamn thing that he said he would do. When he had a Democratic Senate and Democratic Congress, he didn’t do a damn thing. He doesn’t have the guts to say what’s on his mind.”

Box’s refusal to vote for Obama shows the challenges that organized labor faces in convincing its members to vote for Democrats. Many union members like Box feel the party hasn’t pushed hard enough for jobs bills or labor law reform while making sure to pass trade pacts, like the South Korea Free Trade Agreement, which the AFL-CIO and the United Steelworkers opposed.

As the son of a life-long union member who retired early in disgust at the way he and his co-workers were being treated—and I’ve briefly been in a few labor unions myself when I was younger—I can easily see why Donnie Box would say “Fuck it” to Obama. Who could blame him? The White House hasn’t done much of anything for the unions (except talk) and labor gets next to nothing out of its unquestioning support for the Democratic Party. Although I believe that it most certainly is worth voting this year, if only to keep the GOP wolves at bay, I fully understand where Mr. Box is coming from and I wouldn’t argue with him that I think he’s wrong, either. Because I don’t.

As far as I’m concerned, the best thing that Obama and the Democrats have got going for them in 2012 is that they aren’t fucking Republicans. That isn’t enough for Donnie Box and god bless him for having the guts to say so.

Read more of Mike Elk’s
Laid Off Steelworker in Anti-Romney Ad Says He Is Not Voting for Obama (In These Times)

After the jump, see what ABC News is calling “The Bain Ad That Romney Should Fear the Most”

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
Witch-hunt: Hillary Clinton should swat the gnat named Michele Bachmann

UPDATE: Respect to Senator John McCain for denouncing Bachmann’s fact-less, pointless, unintelligent attacks on Huma Abedin on the Senate floor today.

And to Anderson Cooper, as well, for his full-throated ridicule of Bachmann (and Louie Gohmert, too). Her nonsense should not and cannot be tolerated by a good society. Bachmann and her idiotic ilk are a cancer on the Republican Party and America itself.

Should there be a minimum IQ test for members of Congress?

Think of it as a prophylactic against idiocy. The type of idiocy perhaps best exemplified by the blinkered queen of the Tea party caucus, MN’s Michele Bachmann. Bachmann’s back in the news for her latest round of pig ignorant neo-McCarthyism, and this time her confused, brain-addled conspiracy theories are directed towards the US State Department.

Bachmann’s latest affront to intelligence, expands on her initial charges against Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin (wife of disgraced former Brooklyn Congressman Anthony Weiner) and others of harboring terrorist sympathy. Last Friday, Bachmann publicized her new 16-page conspiracy theory, written after she was challenged by MN’s Muslim congressman, Rep. Keith Ellison, to put up or shut up with her vaguely worded accusations of alleged Muslim Brotherhood “infiltration” in the ranks of the State Department and national security agencies.

What’s on your tiny mind, Congresswoman?

Via Salon:

In the new letter, Bachmann questions why (Huma) Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the wife of former Rep. Anthony Weiner, was able to receive a security clearance despite having family members that Bachmann believes are connected to the Brotherhood. “I am particularly interested in exactly how, given what we know from the international media about Ms. Abedin’s documented family connections with the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, she was able to avoid being disqualified for a security clearance,” the congresswoman wrote.

As evidence, she pointed to Abedin’s late father, Professor Syed Z. Abedin, and a 2002 Brigham Young University Law Review article about his work. Bachmann points to a passage saying Abedin founded an organization that received the “quiet but active support” of the the former director of the Muslim World League, an international NGO that was tied to the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe in the 1970s through 1990s. So, to connect Abedin to the Muslim Brotherhood, you have to go through her dead father, to the organization he founded, to a man who allegedly supported it, to the organization that man used to lead, to Europe in the 1970s and 1990s, and finally to the Brotherhood.

The next paragraph of the law review article she cites quotes Syed Abedin concluding that the Koran calls for, “multiple ways of life … i.e. religious and cultural plurality among mankind.” Pretty scary Islamo-fascist stuff. It’s also worth nothing that Weiner, Huma Abedin’s husband, is one of the most unquestionably pro-Israeli politicians in America. But Bachmann would have us believe that the security clearance process somehow missed Abedin’s nefarious connections, and thus she knows more than, say, the CIA and FBI, who are involved in the background-check process.

As Jason Linkins quipped on Huffington Post:

“And from there, all connections lead to the obvious Islamofascist puppetmaster: Kevin Bacon, star of Footloose.”

Pretty much…

This shit is getting ridiculous. At what point will intelligent and morally responsible Washington power-players tell this racist, xenophobic, homophobic shithead to get stuffed? Maybe a censure vote? The longer it goes on, well, drats, the longer it goes on. I realize you can’t legislate against stupidity, but for fuck’s sake does this infuriatingly stupid nincompoop drag American politics down to a low, low, mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging level.

To call Rep. Michele Bachmann a fucking moron is to demean fucking morons, everywhere. With this latest affront to intelligence, Bachmann needs to be put in her place.

If congressional weenies won’t do it, I sincerely hope that Hillary Clinton decides to take her dumb ass down over this.

Demonstrably stupid people like Michele Bachmann—that’s not a controversial assessment, she’s got shit for brains and everyone except for the dumbest people in the country know it and have known it for years—are ruining life in America.

Why let them get away with it? Someone should have told Senator Joseph McCarthy to stick a cork up his ass in 1950 and someone needs to tell Michele Bachmann to do the same in 2012.

Responsible people in Washington need to call this Bachmann for exactly what she is, an IDIOT. Why mince words? She’s an idiot, a fucking idiot. That is what she is, her defining characteristic is her STUPIDITY. Her district should be ashamed that an assat like Bachmann wastes their tax dollars like this. It’s shameful.


Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
With Romney holding his nuts in pain will a desperate GOP try to ditch a sure loser at convention?

After the past week of just painfully pathetic public prat-falls capped off by the devastating new Obama TV spot released over the weekend that left Mitt Romney’s patrician glass jaw smashed into tiny bits, you’d have to imagine that the Tea party-led rightwing shock troops, having pinned ALL of their post-2010 electoral hopes and dreams on the deeply flawed shoulders of one Thurston Howell III Willard Mitt Romney, is more than a little worried.

Who wouldn’t be? The man is an excruciating embarrassment as a candidate. Mitt’s a self-parody who jumped the shark before he even became the official nominee! What a “Debbie Downer” on the GOP morale he must be! It’s hard to keep rooting for the home team when the quarterback is such a witless plonker, isn’t it? The GOP is terrific at getting the vote out, but will the faithful line-up to vote for a tax-dodging plutocrat with Cayman Island bank accounts like Mitt Romney? If you know, for sure, that your vote will count for nothing, would you even bother making the effort to vote? If the very act of voting is perceived as a waste of time? What if it’s a little rainy that day? Can even a superior ground game on election day (the GOP always has a better ground game, always—it’s a lot easier when your base voters are easily-herded, authoritarian-loving sheeple) make a difference with Mittens? It will be interesting to see. My gut tells me there will be lower GOP turnout this year than in 2008. Not that much lower, but lower, crucially lower.

Mittens looks like a sad, ineffectual “Richie Rich” who just had his pants pulled down in front of the entire class and then a plate of school lunch spaghetti dumped over his head (Karma’s a bitch, Thurston!). Romney seems undignified, unsure and weak. He’s (quite obviously) the worst candidate one of the two parties has nominated since hapless Democrat Michael Dukakis back in 1988.

THIS bungling sacrificial lamb in khakis is the best candidate all of that sweet, sweet Republican money can buy? Mitt Romney? Seriously?

After last week, it wasn’t just the Democrats and Independent voters who were asking that question, the Republicans are asking it aloud now, too.

Scanning the rightwing blogshere in the aftermath of that weekend YouTube bomb Obama lobbed into Romney’s lap (more a nuclear warhead), it’s incredible to the extent that the rightwing is wringing its collective hands over “the Romney problem”: From FreeRepublic’s redneck red staters to Breitbart editor John Nolte (who called the Obama ad a “kill shot” aimed at Romney), let alone East coast “establishment” Republican stalwarts like William Kristol (the man who extolled the virtues of Sarah Palin to the McCain camp, don’t forget) and the increasingly barmy George Will (Why does anyone care what he thinks? Why the hell did I just mention him if no one forced me to???) Republicans, clearly, are starting to hit the panic button.

Even the dumbest, doofiest Fox News-watching flag-waving, red, white and blue Republican true-believer dipshit can recognize a loser when they see one, smell the blood, and predict the inevitable November outcome as they take a look at Thurston Howell III Mitt Romney. Romney’s GONNA LOSE and the entire country knows it, or at least strongly suspects it. Even Romney must realize his performance is getting panned and why. The guy has NO GAME, zero, none, no charisma, apparently no empathy, just… bales of money. It won’t be nearly enough. I’ve never seen a poorer-looking national candidate in my life. (Michael Dukakis must be watching his fellow former Massachusetts governor with glee as Romney erases his reputation as a nightmare national ticket political punchline with each newly reported misstep and ineffectual response to Obama’s repeated kicks to his balls. (“Is (fill in the blank) the ‘Mitt Romney of 2___?” will be a cliche in the punditry for years to come, mark my words).

So what happens next? Well, this could get interesting.

Memo to the mainstream media: It probably won’t.

Among credible Republicans who is gonna be dumb enough to want the gold-plated booby prize that an open convention—something that was discussed for MONTHS leading up to Romney’s week from Hell—could bestow upon them? Newt Gingrich must be having quite a good “I told you so” chuckle, not that a desperate GOP is (ever) going to be desperate enough to give that slimy amphibian another look.

Cain, Santorum, Perry… you all probably shouldn’t sit by the bat-phone holding your breath, either, fellas.

Who could or would step up for the good of the Grand Old Party, to carry that tarnished brand’s sword in November, even unto certain career-ending defeat, if Romney were to be pushed aside? Besides mentally deficient, unhinged attention seeking halfwits like Sarah Palin, Allen West, Michele Bachmann, Steve King, Louie Gohmert, etc., etc. who is that, ahem, white knight going to be? Well, not one of these folks. It’s useless speculation.

Ron Paul? He’d take the sword into battle, but it will never be offered to him. Not worth discussing him, either. They won’t even let him speak at the convention and that seems to be the big reason he ran, to influence the GOP platform. Not gonna happen.

Rep. Paul Ryan? Rep. Eric Cantor? Chris Christie? Bobby Jindal? Jeb Bush? Scott Walker? Think any one of them is jealous of the nationally televised dick-stomping Mitt Romney is getting? Marco Rubio knows he’s not ready, even for the VP slot. Maybe John Boehner will run? Orin Hatch? Who then? Someone you’ve never heard of? Will James Baker III come out of retirement at 82? John Sunnunu? Is a picture starting to paint itself?

WHO among the Republicans save for Mitch Daniels or Tim Pawlenty—would even have a tiny chance of taking enough blue states to flip the race if pulled in at the last minute to replace Shit Romney? Christie is the governor of one, but as a former resident of the Garden State myself, I wouldn’t even bet on Christie getting a second term. His popularity is already dropping. Besides that, any smart Republican would just stay out of it until 2016, it just stands to reason. This go round is a strategic non-starter.

Thaddeus McCotter?

Fred Karger, maybe?


John McCain?

My point, if there is one, is that the Republicans have no plan B. Any speculation that there will be an open convention, I think, is utter poppycock. There is no one on that team that can beat Obama. There is no one on that team with half a brain that really wants to try. They’re stuck with Mitt Romney, what choice do that have now? I hate to say it—I mean I really, really hate to say it—but Newt Gingrich was 100% right about Mittens and the GOP should have taken his advice and looked for a Romney alternative while there was still time. Not that I think they should have picked Newt (he’d have been slaughtered) but it’s so apparent what a loser Romney is, that, in truth, practically ANYONE would better.

If someone offered you—at a great bargain, too—a lotto ticket guaranteed not have the winning number, would you buy it? Look how many Sheldon Adelson bought and now he wants to buy some more. I say let him!

(I used to think that Citizens United decision was the worst thing that could happen to this country. Now I’m looking at it more as a “give ‘em enough rope” kinda scenario. Many Republicans might tend to agree with me by the time the 2012 election cycle is over. A billion dollars spent advertising a faulty (Fawlty?) product such as the candidacy of a buffoon like Mittens is a billion dollars spent reminding the American voters why they don’t want this blue-blooded nincompoop in the fucking White House. “Hey smell this, it smells like shit” amplified with a billion dollar advertising spend might backfire badly with a derp like Romney topping the ticket…)

The Obama campaign has defined Mitt Romney in the eyes of America as a whiny blue-blood with too much money made from sucking the blood of the little guy. Maybe a felon? Sounds about right to me. That classic commercial is so smart, and so vicious that it is positively thrilling. It’s what the Democratic base wanted to see and what John Nolte fears it was: a “kill shot.” Tell me that Obama doesn’t look like Muhammad Ali about to take down well, take down Thurston Howell the fuckng third? What else can really be said about this situation?

And the best part of it will be the batshit crazy reichwing reaction everyone is bracing for after Romney is crushed in a landslide defeat. How long will it take until after the vote is in before a crazed sheriff from Arizona or a freakish fuck like Rick Scott of Florida is shooting his mouth off on Fox News about election fraud and that’s the next new dumb dumbly dum-dum thing we’ll have to listen to until 2016???

A wasp’s nest got stirred up in 2008 that still won’t get put to rest during the second Obama term, and expect full retard from the GOP in 2016, but I’m getting ahead of myself…

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
Sarah Silverman: ready to scissor Sheldon Adelson for a fat Obama donation (NSFW)
05:38 pm

Pop Culture


Sarah demonstrates
Like so…
The nice girl and her Schlep Labs posse have done it again for America…

After the jump: remembering The Great Schlep…

Posted by Ron Nachmann | Leave a comment
Conservatives troll Condoleezza Rice with unintentionally hilarious forwarded email

Have you seen the “Liz in Ohio” conservatard chain email laying out the case against Thurston Howell III Mitt Romney picking Condoleezza Rice as running mate (Not that this was ever going to happen, of course. The whole “Condi as VP” flap was to distract idiot Fox News viewers the way that you might shake your keys at a cat).

For Dangerous Minds readers without the dubious benefit of a Teabagger relative or co-worker, here’s the note that’s been going around from “Liz in Ohio,” who helpfully provides a link to the “highbrow racist” website Vdare at the very end.

To: Everyone

Please forward this and post it on your websites.

———- Forwarded message ———

I just forwarded this popular chain email to everyone in my address book. Please forward this to everyone you know. Urgent.

———- Forwarded message ———

Say No to Rice!!!

I hereby vow not to vote for Mitt Romney if he chooses the liberal Condoleezza Rice as his running mate.

We thought the open-borders Rubio was bad. Rice is even worse. Check out some of her positions:

On most social issues, Rice is a liberal.

Like Rubio, Rice supports the Third World invasion of the US. Both legal and illegal immigration are driving down American wages, but Rice doesn’t seem to care. Like Cultural Marxists engaged in social engineering, Rice wants to destroy the historic American nation.

Rice is tied to the disastrous foreign policy of the Bush years. Romney should be trying to distance himself from the disastrous Bush years, not embracing them.

Rice is inexperienced, uninspiring and uncharismatic. (In fact, she’s quite unattractive.)

Rice has never held elected office. The selection of her as a running mate would be blatant affirmative action — much like Obama getting the early blessing of the Democratic Party was blatant affirmative action. Aren’t Republicans supposed to be against affirmative action?

If it’s a female that Romney seeks as his running mate, there are much better choices, such as Jan Brewer, who would inspire and energize conservatives.

If Romney is so naive to select someone like Rice as his running mate, he doesn’t deserve conservatives’ votes.

Please take the conservative pledge with me and promise not to vote for Romney — either don’t vote for vote third party — if Romney chooses Rice as his running mate.

Thank you.

Please forward this to everyone you know.

Liz in Ohio

———- Forwarded message ———

NeocCons are Bullying Romney into choosing Rice:

Jan Brewer!!!! (spits out coffee)

Via Wonkette

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
Take the Condi Rice VP rumors with a BIG grain of salt

Although Drudge Report and other rightwing media outlets have been reporting that Mitt Romney is considering former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as his vice presidential running mate (in a vain attempt to drown out the massive Mittstorm Romney currently finds himself in the middle of, perhaps?), Romney himself declared that he would pick only a pro-life running mate at a South Carolina candidate forum in September of 2011:

Moderator: Gov. Romney, will the person you chose as your vice presidential running mate be someone who shares your pro-life and pro-marriage convictions?

Romney: I certainly imagine so, I haven’t made and selections in that regard … [as I look around at the people I would consider] I would expect that they would all be pro-life and pro-traditional marriage … but this is an important enough issue that the person that I would select in that position would share my views on those important issues.

Host: So more than just expectation — would share those views?

Romney: Yes … that person would share my views, yeah.

Someone had better break it to Mittens that Condoleezza Rice is pro-choice.

The rumors that Rice is going to get the GOP VP slot have been seized upon by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Peggy Noonan, the WSJ, WIlliam Kristol and everyone’s favorite dingbat dipshit, Sarah Palin. Truly the selection of Rice would have been a brilliant one, but how is Mittens going to square the fact that she’s pro-life with his pledge and the fact that the religious right would be furious at him???

Here’s what Condoleezza Rice told Washington Times correspondent Bill Sammon after she described herself as “mildy pro-life” to him in 2005.

Sammon asked her “But it sounds like you do not wish to change the laws that now allow (abortion)...”

“Well, I don’t spend my entire life thinking about these issues. You know, I spend my time really thinking about the foreign policy issues. But you know that I’m a deeply religious person and so, from my point of view, these extremely difficult moral issues where we have—where we’re facing issues with technology and the prolongation of life and the fact that very, very young babies are able to survive now—very small babies are able to survive—these are great moral issues.

What I do think is that we should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other. So, for instance, I’ve tended to agree with those who do not favor federal funding for abortion, because I believe that those who hold a strong moral view on the other side should not be forced to fund it.”

Not at all an unreasonable position, but when has the Republican party ever been about reasonable?

When Sammon pressed Rice and told her that in order to become a Republican president, the applicant for the position must be firmly pro-life, Rice replied:

“I’m not trying to be elected.”

And in case Romney didn’t get the message, this morning the Susan B. Anthony List — a pro-life advocacy group — sent TPM a video clip of Romney at that 2011 South Carolina candidate forum. He might have forgotten, momentarily, that he’s supposed to be pro-life, but trust me, the rigthwingers are going to remind his ass, but quick!

Why would Rice want to get herself involved with the clownjob Romney campaign, anyway? Her place in history has already been set. No matter what one might think about her years serving in the Bush administration, she’s not an undignified, or unintelligent person. Mitt Romney may need Condi Rice, but she certainly doesn’t need him!

It’s not been a good week for Thurston Howell III Mitt Romney has it?

And in case you missed it, Rachel Maddow took Romney’s head off last night over the Bain lies. And the Boston Globe refuses to retract their reporting. Big fun.There is no schadenfreude quite like Republican schadenfreude.

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
Forget the Birthers: What is hidden away in Mitt Romney’s tax returns that is SO EXPLOSIVE?
01:05 pm

Class War


If Obama had to release his birth certificate, then why WON’T Mitt Romney release his tax records? (And why the hell haven’t the Democrats made this lingering question into a jaw-breaking, character-defining campaign issue already? It’s so obvious that even a Fox News viewer could understand it).

What is Mitt Romney hiding? I want to know. Don’t you?

Romney claims he will release his 2012 return when he’s “ready,” but the longer he waits, the more the American public is going to demand that he come clean with the exact same information that every other candidate won’t hesitate to provide, several years worth of returns. The way the Romney team is managing public perception of the matter SUCKS and is only serving to stoke the flames of speculation. Is the truth worse? Might be, from the looks of things. That perception, until confirmed or not by release of the returns, is entirely the campaign’s fault.

His own father, Michigan Governor George Romney, famously released TWELVE YEARS of his tax records when he ran for the Presidency in 1968 and yet his son wants to keep his cards close to his chest. Closer than any presidential candidate since the Watergate era? Apparently so. Thus far, Romney has released only ONE complete tax return, from 2010 (“One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show,” said George Romney in 1968).

What bombshells await? We know about the Swiss bank accounts, the Cayman Island accounts, even the one in Bermuda that surprised Mittens himself… what else is Mitt Romney hiding that his tax returns would bring into the light of day? It’s a burning question.

That the Democrats are thus far failing to turn the heat up a little higher on the issue is yet another missed opportunity on their part: If Obama had to produce his long-form to satisfy the braying asses called the “Birthers,” why can’t we “Taxers” see Mitten’s returns?

Turnabout is fair play, right Republicans?

Asking to see Romney’s tax returns is a far, far more reasonable request than the wingnuts clownishly demanding Obama produce his birth certificate (which he DID do). A demand to see Thurston Howell III’s Mitt Romney’s tax returns , however, has no undercurrent of Tea party racism, either.

And just what did John McCain find in the 23 years of tax returns that his VP vetting team saw? Oh yes, if you don’t recall, Romney provided 23 YEARS worth of his tax returns to the McCain campaign in 2008 and soon afterwards McCain rather unceremoniously dumped the idea of running with Romney, and instead choose Sarah fucking Palin?

Romney’s tax returns must be explosive indeed solely based on the circumstantial evidence this historically pivotal cause-and-effect relationship implies!

It just stands to reason. Sarah Palin? Over Romney? How bad was it?

In 2008, the McCain team got 23 years of Mitt Romney’s tax returns. And now, four years later, we have ONE year, 2010’s return. (“One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show,” says the Ghost of Romney’s Past…)

I can’t wait to see McCain put on the spot about the matter. He’s been asked before, but he stonewalled. He needs to be pressed a little harder: McCain is a terrible liar (for a Republican) and often even tells the truth when he can’t stop himself. What did John McCain see in Romney’s tax returns that instantly ended any consideration of Romney as his running mate?

And why after that, have all of these 23 years of tax returns been kept under lock and key since 2008?

PS Romney has long claimed that he resigned from Bain Capital in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. He lied about that, as public records (a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003) state that he still owned 100% of Bain Capital in 2002! What other lies will Romney be caught in? RELEASE YOUR TAX RETURNS, MITT! WHAT ARE YOU HIDING

Read more:
Where the Money Lives, Vanity Fair’s investigation into Mitt Romney’s off-shore fortune

Posted by Richard Metzger | Leave a comment
Page 51 of 142 ‹ First  < 49 50 51 52 53 >  Last ›