"The president succeed by suppressing the vote, by saying to people, 'you may not like who I am and I know you can't bring yourself to vote for me, but I'm going to paint this other guy as simply a rich guy who only cares about himself' ... They effectively denigrated Mitt Romney's character, business acumen, experience."
- Karl Rove
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
51 comments:
Romney painted himself as "simply a rich guy who only cares about himself". Obama didn't even need to do it.
You are absolutely right about republican projection. They accuse the Democrats of doing something illegal or underhanded, and a short time later some republican is caught doing exactly the thing they accused the Democrats of doing.
Karl Rove: "They effectively denigrated Mitt Romney's character, business acumen, experience."
Character? Like the "character" who changed directions, and positions, depending upon the latest poll results? That character?
Business acumen? Like the judgements that produced decisions to bankrupt perfectly fine and sustainable companies, and cause workers to lose their livelihoods, their pensions, their very sense of self-worth and self-esteem? That business acumen?
Experience? Like the practical understanding of the "47 percent" of Americans who only want to live off the dole, and have no ambition or initiative or desire to better themselves? That experience?
Sure, Mr. Rove, Mitt Romney was a perfect gem. So perfect, in fact, why not run him again in 2016? Certainly the next four years will allow ample time to correct the false and jaded image this president created in the minds of so many, so often, and so unsympathetically. Four years should be plenty of time to right the so frequent wrongs.
Don't you think?
I agree. Romney had no character, he had no integrity, vision or moral compass. So I didn't vote for him.
But then there was Barack Obama, who has no charater, he has no integrity. Most transparent administration in history anyone? His vision is failing, and his moral compass ends at his front door as he sucks up to rich donors and then complains about politicians who suck up to rich donors. So I didn't vote for him.
But I be a lot of you did, just because Obama has a (D) after his name.
Which says a lot about you.
But I must say, Romney was a proven loser before he was ever nominated, and made a great tackling dummy for Democrats
Free0352: "...just because Obama has a (D) after his name."
Did you vote for Gary Johnson -- just because he had an (L) after his name?
Leslie,
Obergruppenfuhrer Rove was the last holdout in the Right Wing bubble bunker. His Big Money election buying scam was almost a total failure.
That is a great victory for democracy.
After being so wrong so often, one would think nobody would listen to him anymore... but no, the radical Right are true beleivers, down to the last drop of koolade.
I agree. Romney had no character, he had no integrity, vision or moral compass. So I didn't vote for him.
I agree, but the "libertarian" Kochs voted for Romney, with millions of dollars. I guess those billionaires knew where the big handouts would come from.
Rove felt he could buy an election with cash, twisted truth, base lies..... and is so pissed off that it didn't work.
Free Rove.... remember? You didn't vote.
When is a mandate deemed not a mandate? When the corporate media (i.e. "conservative media") say it's not. It's not when the elected president is a black man. It's not when the elected president is a Democrat. It's not when the will of the people prevails, or when the free speech of corporate money is squelched and defied.
October 6th was a day when democracy beat big money. Will Obama heed this?
That's the question we'll soon find out.
JG,
The media told us Bush's win in 2004 was a clear mandate, but Obama's win this week is not a mandate at all.
How stupid of us to think otherwise. After all, the media tells us we're a "center right" electorate.
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you. But we know that "liberal media bias".
Dave Dubya: "But we know that 'liberal media bias'."
That must be what it is. ;-)
Well I think now we can bury this idea that Voter ID laws suppress the vote. Minorities and old people voted in record numbers. Someone the other day told me we didn't need those laws because we didn't have wide spread voter fraud. I responded
Yeah, because voter id laws worked.
As for Rove, he should quit crying and making excuses for why his predictions were all wrong.
Oh and I couldn't vote for Gary Johnson because the Republicans got him kicked off my state ballot.
So I just stayed home.
Free,
we didn't have wide spread voter fraud... because voter id laws worked.
And we don’t have vampires because hanging garlic over the door works.
Ah, no. We never had widespread voter impersonation fraud. High voter turnout happened despite the GOP suppression efforts.
In other words, the campaign of voter suppression failed to suppress enough votes, while democratic counter efforts to turn out the vote worked.
Republicans got him kicked off my state ballot
See, we told you Republicans are suppressing democracy.
And republicans suppressed Free's vote.
Karl Rove: "They effectively denigrated Mitt Romney's character, business acumen, experience."
Mr. Rove forgot to tune into the Republican Primary debates. Obama repeated a lot of the attacks the GOP introduced against Romney. I wonder why Mr. Rove doesn't give the original authors credit for denigrating Romney's character? Isn't that akin to plagiarism?
I don't know much about the Voter ID stuff. I am from Texas. I will say this, my wife was sent two cards, one from the location she used to live and one from the location she lives in now. I am not sure if their archaic paper system could have caught it she voted twice. I am 100% sure she could have voted twice, though.
Funny thing, though: she only voted once.
hey free, pssst...voter suppression efforts were, ah, suppressed...as illegal...didn't vote because your candidate of choice for President wasn't on the ballot...did you think of WRITING HIM IN! No local or state candidates or issues?
no vote.... no complain. get a life...or at least a intelligent line of reasoning.
John,
She must be a Democrat. If she was a republican she would have voted three times. After all, using republican math, 1 + 1 = 3.
John Myste: "Funny thing, though: she only voted once."
The bigger question is, in my mind, was that one vote counted?
okjimm: "...didn't vote because [free0352's] candidate of choice for President wasn't on the ballot...did you think of WRITING HIM IN! No local or state candidates or issues?"
There were four U.S. House Seats up for grabs in Kansas last Tuesday. I'm guessing the probability is...what, 100% that Free0352 had one of those on his ballot? But he stayed home and didn't vote.
There were 40 State Senate seats being considered in Kansas, along with 125 State House positions on ballots throughout his beloved "fly-over" state, also, and I suspect Free0352 lives in one of those districts whose ballot contained one or both. But he chose to stay home, instead, and didn't bother to vote.
But, there's more...
Kansas voters had a one single measure on their ballot this fall. The measure allowed the state's property tax on boats to be altered. Specifically, the amendment allowed state legislators to classify and tax watercraft on a basis different from other property. The measure didn't change how watercraft was taxed in the state, but rather it allowed a change to be made.
But, Free0352, who has consistently and adamantly railed against taxation by the federal government for as long as I've frequented this blog, chose to stay home and not vote on this "taxation" initiative by his own state. As you said, "no vote....no complain." But, I suppose Free0352 only votes for candidates (and state measures?) that have an "(L)" behind their name.
By the way, it's the one-letter designation for "Libertarian Party", which I know because it was on my ballot. But I didn't realize that at the time, thinking it meant loser, so I skipped over it. ;-)
JG... I take voting very seriously. In fact... I consider the local and state elections to be the most important, in some regards. The impact of a vote for my city counciol, school board DA, judge will be flet by ME usually quicker than a national one. Damn straight I VOTE. I do believe that, since I have been old enough to vote....I have missed no more than a half dozen votes...of any kind, and no presidential or senatorial. Once, I do recall... I missed a local vote due to hospitalization... another, I recall, because I was stuck in some mountains in Montana overly long.
Voting guarantees you the RIGHT to piss and moan and complain about politics...and I will NEVER give up that right!!!
okjimm: "Voting guarantees you the RIGHT to piss and moan and complain about politics..."
Agreed. I vote in all of 'em also, and also agree that it's the small ones -- those of the grassroots or local variety -- that sometimes coil-up and end up biting you in the ass.
I suppose Free0352 is too young and immature to realize that national movements begin small and seemingly inconsequentially, and that it takes resolve, persistence, and the patience of eking-out small victories with a dedicated ground game. But he was too "busy" to be bothered to vote. Instead, he chose to stay home and play with his Xbox.
He bitched and moaned that "his" candidate wasn't on the ballot, but at the very least he could have used the power of the write-in vote, which is to his avail in Kansas, to make a very important political statement. Instead, he chose to remain home and watch TV.
If most of his fellow-libertarians selected the same selfish recourse (which, ironically, is actually fitting and appropriate), I'm confident we'll never have to be concerned with a government dominated by the outmoded and soon-to-be obsolete Libertarian Party.
Wait, was Free playing XBox or watching TV? You are confusing me with your contradictory ESP.
John,
If I'm not mistaken, Free would be playing, and watching, his Xbox through his TV, poor substitute as it is for the thrill of the real kill.
At least that's my understanding of the games kids play these days. Not to disparage our video culture of push button killing that dehumanizes and detaches one in preparation for Operation Iraqi Freedom II and III, along with Operation Iranian Judgment. The next Republican president, should such disaster befall our nation, will most assuredly be a "war president" like the Decider. More wars and more tax cuts for the rich will be just what this country needs, should the recovery and stability of the Obama years take hold.
Dave,
That is called, playing video games, not watching TV, but I get your point. Watching TV is not interactive, but playing video games is. The video gaming, TV watching, current batch of children are far more advanced than prior generations were.
You learn far more from watching TV and you gain more skills from video games than kids playing tag.
I am amazed at the knowledge and ability of many ten year olds today.
I was contemplating that while casting my third vote last week.
Ahh, so that's why I see the puzzled look on kids' faces when I talk about "books" and "libraries".
I'm so not cool.
And republicans suppressed Free's vote
Perhaps, but not with voter ID laws.
So again, can we bury this idea that voter id laws suppress anything.
Even you admit it doesn't.
did you think of WRITING HIM IN!
It isn't much of a boycott then is it? Writing in would be like saying "I think I'll boycott this restaurant by ordering off the menue"
But yeah, how was voting for indefinite detention, the drug war, billions of subsidy for "corporations" and a robust domestic spying machine.
Yeah, way to go voters.
As for my age, dude, I guess 33 is young to you boomers. AKA Worst Generation. I'm pretty proud to not be in the generation whose idea of a good idea is putting their great grand children into generational debt, and who on the side gave the world AIDS and drug abuse.
"did you think of WRITING HIM IN!"
.... I guess you didn't, huh?
what a dumb analogy.
... should have looked at the menu...(not menue)..... but YOU did not! Now, all you have are sour grapes. Can't complain if you don't play the game!
John Myste: "Wait, was Free playing XBox or watching TV? You are confusing me with your contradictory ESP."
It was a long night. Wouldn't it seem reasonable he could have done both?
"You learn far more from watching TV and you gain more skills from video games than kids playing tag."
Free0352 would attest to that. But it doesn't gain more converts to libertarianism.
(John, what sort of "skills"?)
"I am amazed at the knowledge and ability of many ten year olds today."
Yes...in Europe.
"I was contemplating that while casting my third vote last week."
Only three?! No wonder Obama didn't take Texas. Please try harder next time.
"You learn far more from watching TV and you gain more skills from video games than kids playing tag."
Free0352 would attest to that. But it doesn't gain more converts to libertarianism.
(John, what sort of "skills"?)
1. Strategy and planning, such as war games where you manage an economy and have to defend. My generation would reference Age of Empires or something for this.
2. Logic, such as The Legend of Zelda, I believe.
3. Memory, again, the Legend of Zelda.
4. Reasoning and analysis, many of the games.
5. Coordination and multi-tasking.
I am sure there are others. Many of the games are very technical and require a multitude of simultaneous skills. And as for watching TV, the kids who do this learn far more than those on the playground playing with other kids.
Free0352: "I guess 33 is young to you boomers."
I know several mature people younger than you.
"...is putting their great grand children into generational debt."
I don't even have grandchildren.
"...and who on the side gave the world AIDS..."
I've never given anyone AIDS. I've never had AIDS, so I can't give something I've never had. (Gee, I've never even had a STD. Can you say the same?)
"...and drug abuse."
There wasn't drug abuse before my generation? Are you sure? (By the way, I've never been addicted to any drugs -- prescription, or otherwise. How about you?)
John Myste: "I am sure there are others."
Certainly, like multitasking their insulin injections while not spilling their Cheetos all over the couch.
"And as for watching TV, the kids who do this learn far more than those on the playground playing with other kids."
Also agreed. They learn much more antisocial behavior than they ever could though only their playmates.
but YOU did not! Now, all you have are sour grapes. Can't complain if you don't play the game!
Quite the opposite. You voted for the yahoo in office, now you're responsible for him.
I wasn't prepared to take responsibility for either of them.
War is becoming more like a video game with the increasing use of drone. Unfortunately, the deaths are still real.
Jefferson,
I am sorry, but your condemnation of video games and television is not persuasive. I know I have learned lots from television, as have you, anti social behavior not included and I know video games don't make children obese.
John Myste: "I know I have learned lots from television, as have you..."
Agreed. I've learned lots that the programming sponsors wanted me to learn.
"I know video games don't make children obese."
Also agreed. But not spending time on the playground (in favor of playing video games, or watching TV) is a major contributor.
Free0352: "I wasn't prepared to take responsibility for either of them."
That's symptomatic of your nomadic, 13th Generation "slacker" mentality. It fits you perfectly.
Agreed. I've learned lots that the programming sponsors wanted me to learn.
Writers of sitcoms, taken as an example, do not typically write their plots in accordance with sponsors desires to get out their message, Jesus!
John Myste: "Writers of sitcoms, taken as an example, do not typically write their plots in accordance with sponsors desires to get out their message, Jesus!
Possibly true, but even more true, television programming executives will not air, or continue to air, the sitcom (using your example) if the network's sponsors do not find favor with the audience ratings of the show during the time-slots their ads will run. I believe they're still called "Nielsen ratings".
Also, please refrain from calling me Jesus.
Unfortunately, the deaths are still real.
Our deaths are indeed unfortunate. However, when members of the Taliban or AQ die its a good day, and you should cheer every one of them into the grave.
That's symptomatic of your nomadic, 13th Generation "slacker" mentality. It fits you perfectly.
Ah well you know me... We can't all be computer genius philosopher kings.
Perhaps I'll vote next time, should one of the parties offer up a decent candidate. I hear Rubio just took a trip to Iowa. Things are looking up.
//refrain from calling me Jesus.//
well, there is also the good old, "George W. Christ"
When my kids were little...2 or 3 hundred years ago, I rather mandated a time to 'make your own fun' and video games. it seemed to work.
John Myste: "Writers of sitcoms, taken as an example, do not typically write their plots in accordance with sponsors desires to get out their message, Jesus!
Possibly true, but even more true, television programming executives will not air, or continue to air, the sitcom (using your example) if the network's sponsors do not find favor with the audience ratings of the show during the time-slots their ads will run. I believe they're still called "Nielsen ratings".
Right, Jesus, it is the audience that ultimately decides what gets aired, not primarily sponsors. If the show is accepted by the people, it will air. I am glad we agree on the educational value of television.
If the show is accepted by the people, it will air.
Generally yes, but exceptions should be remembered.
Cases like Phil Donahue and guests challenging a president's warmongering, and Bill Maher being similarly politically incorrect come to mind.
Funny how no conservatives have had shows cancelled due to political incorrectness...
Darn that "liberal media".
You're right, Dave. Those are exceptions. Generally speaking, the rule holds true, though. Television has been referred to as "the boob tube," and suck, but it is the thing that makes our ten year-olds developed way ahead of a ten year-olds in the days prior to television.
Like the curriculum or not, television is a very informative classroom.
John Myste: "...it is the audience that ultimately decides what gets aired, not primarily sponsors. If the show is accepted by the people, it will air."
and...
"I am glad we agree on the educational value of television."
I see. So if the majority of people accept something, it automatically is deemed to have educational value? Is the converse true? If that same majority rejects something, does that something lack educational value?
"...but it is the thing that makes our ten year-olds developed way ahead of a ten year-olds in the days prior to television."
Possibly...or it could be indoor plumbing. ;-) Or, a host of other things.
I suppose it depends upon your definition of "developed".
"Like the curriculum or not, television is a very informative classroom."
As is the street corner...
I never understood the term "boob tube" for a television. It does not look,anything like a boob, especially the current crop of flat panels. ;)
Jefferson, stop acting nutty.
see. So if the majority of people accept something, it automatically is deemed to have educational value? Is the converse true? If that same majority rejects something, does that something lack educational value?
I never suggested that if the majority of people accept something it therefore has educational value. You introduced that idea just now and I soundly reject your idea. I said that television has educational value because you learn a lot of things from it and you responded with the unsupported assertion that you learn what sponsors want you to learn. I rebutted that the audience, not sponsors, make a show succeed or fail, and somehow you came to this absurd conclusion that does not follow.
"...but it is the thing that makes our ten year-olds developed way ahead of a ten year-olds in the days prior to television."
Possibly...or it could be indoor plumbing. ;-) Or, a host of other things.
Have you learned more from television or indoor plumbing. Stop acting silly! You know you have always heard and learned things you did not know from television, especially as a child. While I do indoor plumbing as needed and have learned a small amount from it, there really is no comparison.
"Like the curriculum or not, television is a very informative classroom."
As is the street corner...
Yes, the street corner is also educational. Agreed.
Jerry,
Take a two children and put one in an environment where he plays with other children during his leisure time and give him a stack of books, which are very slow ways to learn and then put the other child in front of a television and give him video games for his spare time.
It will not be the television child who is a comparative boob in ten years.
But I agree, it is the flat panel display device, and we should call it such.
Oh, sorry John, I got my boobs confused.
John Myste: "Have you learned more from television or indoor plumbing. Stop acting silly!"
John, I concede, I was being silly.
When defining "educational value", one can mean positive educational value or negative educational value.
I agree.
I also concede it's up to the individual to make that determination.
Would you agree?
So, if you will, please allow me to rephrase my earlier statement to okjimm:
"Instead, [Free0352] chose to remain home and play tag."
This just in:
Videogame http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4651 and the Illusion of Freedom
I also concede it's up to the individual to make that determination.
Would you agree?
I will not dispute it.
So, if you will, please allow me to rephrase my earlier statement to okjimm:
"Instead, [Free0352] chose to remain home and play tag."
Free is so silly.
Post a Comment