May 29, 2011
— Gabriel Malor Mitt Romney will "officially" roll out his campaign on Thursday by focusing it on what every political commentator has said, evar, about campaigns against incumbent presidents: "This election is going to be a referendum on the president and his handling of the economy."
Romney’s goal, according to advisers, is to keep his eyes on the bigger prize and to run his own race, not one dictated by the other GOP candidates or by the round-the-clock media culture. His hope is to convince Republican voters that, whatever flaws they may see in him, he is still the strongest candidate for the general election.A series of interviews with Romney’s top advisers reinforced that message. “The economy is not just a talking point,” said campaign manager Matt Rhoades. “It’s the real deal. He [Obama] took his eye off the ball, doing all these other things. People are hurting out there. He’s the boss.”
With this stunning insight into presidential politics held firmly in the candidate's mind, Romney is going to stand out from . . . nobody.
Economy, economy, economy is a great message for the general election. But Romney isn't running in the general election yet. He's supposed to be telling us why he's better than the other Republican candidates who, BTW, will be repeating the same "it's the economy, stupid" line. So, where's the contrast? Sure, he thinks he's better on the economy than the other aspirants, but does anyone believe that Romney's reputed business judgment will be the first thing that comes to GOP primary voters' minds?
Oh, and lest you think the Romney team learned something from Huckabee's disgraceful Mormon-baiting in 2008, I'd worry:
Four years ago, he made a bid for social conservatives that took him off his core strength — economic issues. His advisers say that won’t happen this time. They believe he has no need to re-litigate social issues and say he has found his comfort zone with the economy and with a campaign of a different style and pace. He is, said several advisers, “less frantic.”
Now, there are no advisers actually quoted in the WaPo piece for the truly alarming pieces of that paragraph, so maybe this is getting a little gloss. If it's not, I've got to wonder if Romney's advisers slept through the flak Mitch Daniels got for his "social issues truce."
This whole Jedi mind trick --- if you just talk about the economy, everyone will only think about the economy --- is an awful idea. Guess what, champs, neither the other GOP campaigns, nor the Democrats and the MBM, are going to talk only about the economy.
RomneyCare will come up. As will Romney's occasional lapses with respect to socially conservative ideals. As will his unwavering support for ethanol subsidies a.k.a. federal price interventions. Romney can pretend that his position on these issues isn't going to motivate opposition from many GOP primary voters, but I bet he doesn't for very long.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
07:11 AM
| Comments (210)
Post contains 511 words, total size 3 kb.
Confucius say: Man who talk from both sides of mouth have forked tongue.
Posted by: De' Debil Hisself at May 29, 2011 07:18 AM (H+LJc)
Posted by: pep at May 29, 2011 07:19 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Tonya from Venezeula at May 29, 2011 07:20 AM (u/t9n)
Romney Care IS about the economy.
What is killing the US economy is a combination of high taxation, and too much Government control through Regulation... which is exactly what Romney care did to healthcare in his old State...
He still believes in Fed or State control of the economy... he just wants to be the one pulling the strings (like most of the other Repubs in Washinton).
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 07:20 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: CAC at May 29, 2011 07:21 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: chemjeff at May 29, 2011 07:21 AM (7mSYS)
He sure as hell ain't going to get me and it isn't because of "Mormon" and it isn't because of social issues.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 07:22 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Tonya from Venezeula 2012 at May 29, 2011 07:22 AM (u/t9n)
Posted by: Mitt "Corn Boy" Romney at May 29, 2011 07:24 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: vanderleun at May 29, 2011 07:25 AM (cswem)
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 29, 2011 07:26 AM (BjP5v)
At least she has no place to go but up, I think he is the opposite. He has relatively high unfavorable ratings for someone who is still not known by about 20% of the public. I can't even imagine the Romney commercials in the general.
He is a paper tiger.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 07:27 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: Mitt "Corn Hole" Romney at May 29, 2011 07:28 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: Ron Jeremy at May 29, 2011 07:29 AM (zgZzy)
http://bit.ly/kRM8li
Posted by: vanderleun at May 29, 2011 07:29 AM (cswem)
Hows about, "The administrations Wall Street ties and corrupt Fed operatives have robbed the taxpayers of trillions of dollars that will never be recovered and future generations will be working to repay as debt slaves in perpetuity."
Hows about, "The administrations internationalist cronies have so stacked the deck that they will own everything within a generation and there will be no more Land of the free."
What Romney is has nothing to do with his religion, he's a sellout and insider who would see you all destroyed as long as he get his chance to be a top tier elite.
Posted by: De' Debil Hisself at May 29, 2011 07:30 AM (H+LJc)
Um, NO! This is a critically important issue and must dominate the news cycle for a week, even at the cost of crowding out other news, no matter how embarrassing.
Posted by: Debbie Wasserman-Schulz at May 29, 2011 07:30 AM (6TB1Z)
You mean like Huma?
Posted by: Sox at May 29, 2011 07:31 AM (IR0R1)
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 07:33 AM (pW2o8)
Posted by: Mitt "Corn Pone" Romney at May 29, 2011 07:34 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: vanderleun at May 29, 2011 11:25 AM
If you want a No Weiner Zone, there are plenty of sites, particularly in the MBM that are strictly enforcing them.
Otherwise, buy yourself some bandwidth and build a blog
Posted by: kbdabear at May 29, 2011 07:35 AM (vdfwz)
For the life of me I don't understand how Romney and Weiner play can dominate the site when there are stories like
"Horse herpes outbreak forces rodeo queens to ride stick ponies"
out there just waiting to be told and reported on in depth by some reporter who is willing to be a stick pony for a rodeo queen.
The grisly details and video are at
http://bit.ly/jFlBF2
Posted by: vanderleun at May 29, 2011 07:36 AM (cswem)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 29, 2011 07:38 AM (ql12X)
Posted by: erg kilowatt MFA DDS USMC at May 29, 2011 07:38 AM (lT0LC)
Guys, call our people with Media Matters and MSNBC and get the zone flooded with this!
Posted by: Politico at May 29, 2011 07:40 AM (vdfwz)
Weiner hacked? Or Weiner whacked?
And yes, Andrea, Sarah was invited to Rolling Thunder.
Posted by: Minnie Rodent at May 29, 2011 07:40 AM (S3rrR)
I think they put too much emphasis on his speeches which are huge flip-flops from his actual record. There is no conservative to him at all.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 07:43 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Minnie Rodent at May 29, 2011 11:40 AM (S3rrR)
It sounds like Chris Wallace found this out post haste after receiving mega emails citing three different links that corrected the always-acidic Andrea Mitchell's breathless report.
Posted by: RushBabe at May 29, 2011 07:44 AM (Ew27I)
Mitt Romney cares about fluffy kittehs and puppehs!
Mitt RomneyCares!
Posted by: Dan the Mitt Spam Guy at May 29, 2011 07:45 AM (vdfwz)
LOL, didn't do my Dr Detroit today.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 07:45 AM (M9Ie6)
But Romney isn't running in the general election yet. He's supposed to be telling us why he's better than the other Republican candidates
Exactly.
Romney, the underdog, needs to tell us why he is superior to obvious front runner, Governor Buddy Roemer, who has been polling well ahead of the retread candidates, not to mention other popular Tea Party folks.
As for me, I haven't been convinced by Romney, and plan on vigorously supporting the best qualified, and biggest rock star in the race here in SC next year.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 29, 2011 07:48 AM (dWPyO)
Mitt Romney is my choice for the republican nominee because of his support of ethanol, universal health care, and unbridled support of media.
Posted by: Andrea Mitchell, Greenspan's Main Squeeze at May 29, 2011 07:49 AM (cwFVA)
I was under the impression that ethanol subsidies were really the mandates, not so much any deductions...
Posted by: KG at May 29, 2011 07:51 AM (4L0zr)
@AceofSpadesHQ Ace of Spades @LukeStibbs my twitter handle plus @gmail.com... I don't like to write it out, because the hack3rz may see it and send pensises
Posted by: kbdabear at May 29, 2011 07:51 AM (vdfwz)
There was actually a 45 cents/gal tax credit for refineries/distillers in the Bush Tax Cut extension bill.
That is in addition to the damn mandates.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 07:52 AM (M9Ie6)
I disagree that the field should beat each other up during the primary, and THEN go after Obama in the general. Their focus should be the abject failure of the Obama reign and how the Republican candidate -- any Republican candidate -- will do better. Take shts at the rest of the field over how they will fix everything, but Obama is the problem, and the Republican party is the solution.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 07:53 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 11:53 AM
Your actual results may vary.
Posted by: TV commercial disclaimer voiceover guy at May 29, 2011 07:57 AM (vdfwz)
Posted by: Nozzle, the artist formerly known as the DNC at May 29, 2011 07:59 AM (6jBlD)
Posted by: TV commercial disclaimer voiceover guy at May 29, 2011 11:57 AM (vdfwz)
Yeah, there is a lot of hoping and praying in those comments, but it's going to be the Republican party or nothing.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 08:00 AM (LH6ir)
RE: Weiner Waivers
Representative Anthony Weiner announced today that he has secured 1200 applications for a waiver to the new HealthCAre Act.
These waivers are exclusive to Congressman Weiner's office and can only be applied for Via his Facebook account.
The applications are available in the right hand column in the link "Weiner's Waivers"
Weiner Waivers will be available until June 15th or until demand exceeds supply.
Demand for Weiner Waivers is expected to be high so do not delay.
Posted by: De' Debil Hisself at May 29, 2011 08:01 AM (H+LJc)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 11:53 AM (LH6ir)
Ah yes, the vote me me because the other guy is worse Campaign...
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 08:04 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: No Whining at May 29, 2011 08:06 AM (IQNXl)
Not exactly a smart way to gain loyalty and support.
Posted by: Fritz at May 29, 2011 08:07 AM (AN8d5)
Yeah, there is a lot of hoping and praying in those comments, but it's going to be the Republican party or nothing.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 12:00 PM (LH6ir)
Hmmmm... I think I said that once...
Posted by: Nathaniel Bedwetter, Chairman, Whig Party at May 29, 2011 08:08 AM (NtXW4)
Did you read the IBD link I provided?
It doesn't cut air pollution. In fact, a study in Environmental Science & Technology concluded that ethanol can make the nation's smog problem worse and that its expanded use "may be a greater overall public health risk than gasoline."
It may add to greenhouse gas emissions: A study in Science a few years ago found that widespread use of ethanol "will probably exacerbate global warming" when everything involved in its production is taken into account
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 08:09 AM (pW2o8)
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at May 29, 2011 08:09 AM (7Ahkq)
Ah yes, the vote me me because the other guy is worse Campaign...
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 12:04 PM (NtXW4)
I'm not happy about it either. And if you have a better idea I'm all ears.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 08:10 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Pippa, Simona, Ana, and that other chick at May 29, 2011 08:11 AM (/hy2+)
If you listened to Romney's health care speech, he thinks he has it figured out.
He thinks his health care position along with support for 'comprehensive immigration reform', and soon to be found moderate social issue positions can help him win the general with his economic argument.
He just knows that there is no way primary voters will let him get through with those positions after swinging so much back and forth in his political career and the 2008 primaries.
We'll see if he can make it eight months without having to defend all of this. I don't think he can, so that it why I'm more worried about the rest of the field right now.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 08:12 AM (VoSja)
Hmmmm... I think I said that once...
Posted by: Nathaniel Bedwetter, Chairman, Whig Party at May 29, 2011 12:08 PM (NtXW4)
Hey! Give me a realisitc option and I'm in. But third party politics doesn't cut this cycle, and that's not brilliant analysis, that's just obvious.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 08:12 AM (LH6ir)
#69
For example, I completely expect Romney to walk back his abortion and gay marriage positions to federalism for abortion and civil unions.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 08:13 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: chemjeff at May 29, 2011 08:15 AM (kG4+M)
Posted by: Datechguy at May 29, 2011 08:17 AM (6GDH3)
Posted by: Steve In Tulsa at May 29, 2011 08:20 AM (f7ylG)
MTBE (additive to gas promoted by Atlantic Richfield in the early 90's)- methy tert-Butyl Ether is not toxic in the ppb range. It just makes the water smell and taste bad. It is much more water soluble than the typical BTEX in gasoline, so it had a bigger plume underground when there was a leaky underground gasoline tank (like those were all supposed to be fixed, huh?), and easily got in to ground water and wells. There was one well in California that actually had parts per thousand amount of MTBE in it. That's a lot.
Ethanol is extremely water soluble (it's in Vodka!), but nobody is complaining about it polluting ground water. It also has a lower BTU/caloric value than gasoline, and is debatable whether it costs more to produce than it is worth- consumes more energy to produce than it delivers. The subsidies/tax credts do help corn farmers get a better price and bigger market for their corn and have in some cases dropped the amount of farm subsidies/crop insurance in corn growing areas.
Some day, cellulosic ethanol (made from waste agri by-products) will be a reality, but not today or next week or next year.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:22 AM (sJTmU)
This.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 29, 2011 08:23 AM (/hy2+)
Why would Romney even need to strike such a hard a definitive position for ethanol when he isn't even sure if he is going to seriously campaign in Iowa?
It just seems at times that he can't help but pander.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 08:23 AM (VoSja)
Yeah, there is a lot of hoping and praying in those comments, but it's going to be the Republican party or nothing.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative)
"Nothing" sounds like the abyss we are about to plunge into.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:24 AM (sJTmU)
"Nothing" sounds like the abyss we are about to plunge into.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 12:24 PM (sJTmU)
No arguments from me. But what is your solution? I don't have one, and I am not being a smart-ass here.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 08:27 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Cicero at May 29, 2011 08:28 AM (Txl/u)
Posted by: Steve In Tulsa
Yeah, the logic of the price supports for ethanol over oil development in the lower 48 and Alaska eludes me, too. Bubba Clinton had the opportunity in the early 90's to set the priorities for either Ethanol (made from biological product, like corn, that ADM supported) or Methanol (made from coal, that Dupont and others supported). Note - Dupont has a process to make methanol from coal, and then octane (gasoline) from methanol.
He chose Ethanol, supposedly because ADM came across with bribes/contributions to the DNC faster than the Methanol guys. And that is why we are where we are. Ain't that a stinker of a reason?
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:29 AM (sJTmU)
Posted by: Public Service Message at May 29, 2011 12:18 PM (IhHdM)
And yet... we used Oil based products for transportation all those years, with ethanol not even being widely available..
Could there have been good economic reasons for that?
What next? Go back to Wood fueled Steam Locomotives for our Trains? After all, they came first too!
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 08:29 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Mary Cloggerstien from Brattleboro, VT at May 29, 2011 08:30 AM (rWSsG)
I just cannot vote for aome one who supports burning our food over developing our oil fields.
Isn't corn a crappy source of nutrition?
Isn't most of it just processed for sugar or fed to stock?
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 08:31 AM (kjI0h)
I've heard about those things. Is it like a Twitter? My grandson made me a Facepage last week.
Posted by: Concerned Huckabee Voter at May 29, 2011 08:31 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: Free Headlines to Good Owner at May 29, 2011 08:31 AM (BjP5v)
If elected presdent I will devote all of my time and energy into realizing the dream of converting dicpics into a clean, renewable source of energy.
Posted by: Mitt Romney, Mad Scientist in the Laboratory of Democracy at May 29, 2011 08:31 AM (Txl/u)
1. Gun Control
2. AGW scam
3. Socialized healthcare
4. Amnesty/open borders
Romney fails on all four of those.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 08:32 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 12:29 PM (sJTmU)
My favorite plan is to use Nuclear and Hydro for Electricity... Compressed Natural Gas for cars (cleaner and America has LOTS of Natural Gas, and the technology is ready to go). and use oil based products for Ships and Planes...
With estimates of HALF of the Corn grown in America going to ethanol production, and with the Historic evidence that higher food prices lead to Revolutions in the world.... how can we say we are out to either help the poor, or stabilize world peace?
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 08:33 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Free Headlines to Good Owner at May 29, 2011 08:33 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: Free Headlines to Good Owner at May 29, 2011 08:34 AM (BjP5v)
Isn't corn a crappy source of nutrition?
Isn't most of it just processed for sugar or fed to stock?
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 12:31 PM (kjI0h)
Key is that there is only so much Farm Land, and so much Water to use on that land...
So, if you are using that land, and water, to grow Corn for Ethanol, it is not being used for OTHER food products.
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 08:35 AM (NtXW4)
No arguments from me. But what is your solution? I don't have one, and I am not being a smart-ass here.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative)
I agree, and I was trying to be just a bit of smartass.
I mostly worry about my kid's future. I will probably never be able to retire, I'll just work 'till I drop or get too old and sick. But I wish they were going to live in a country that didn't embrace the corporatist fascism and statist vulgarity that is being championed by Obumbles and his lackeys in the Imbecilic Media and Asshole Academia.
There's no one out there that will take a strong stand against Obama that is electable. Romney is definitely electable, but is a political schmuck. He is "statist lite".
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:35 AM (sJTmU)
Methanol has it's own set of significant problems too. It is corrosive and requires retrofitted fuel systems.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 29, 2011 08:35 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 08:36 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: YRM (Go Heat, Go Canucks) at May 29, 2011 08:37 AM (UzBwz)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 29, 2011 08:37 AM (5CusZ)
Posted by: erg kilowatt MFA DDS USMC at May 29, 2011 08:38 AM (lT0LC)
Posted by: Public Service Message at May 29, 2011 12:05 PM (IhHdM)
MTBE. Methyl-tert-butyl-ether. I was one of the gummint workers who oversaw cleanups. The MTBE wasn't the problem, it was the underground storage tanks (UST). Every single UST is going to leak eventually. That's the problem. Last I heard, MTBE wasn't as harmful as first thought.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 08:39 AM (1fanL)
So, if you are using that land, and water, to grow Corn for Ethanol, it is not being used for OTHER food products.
Yes. But the argument needs to reflect this, imho.
I agree that we need to be growing less of the shit. I agree that trying to make fuel out of the stuff is a waste of time and money.
I just can't stand the 'Stop Burning Food' argument. It is lacking.
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 08:41 AM (kjI0h)
My favorite plan is to use Nuclear and Hydro for Electricity... Compressed Natural Gas for cars (cleaner and America has LOTS of Natural Gas, and the technology is ready to go). and use oil based products for Ships and Planes...
Posted by: Romeo13
CPG (Compressed Propane gas) is used/mandated for use by taxis in Beijing because the air pollution there is so bad.
Yeah, CNG would be a great clean auto or fleet fuel (for trucks, buses, etc) because it burns so clean. More nuclear with new technology reactors would solve a lot of electricity generation problems.
Ain't gonna happen. The NIMBY's, Greenists and the general public attitude that has been created by the Luddites precludes the obvious, logical answers to problems. We can't even use Yucca Mountain for the purpose that it was built even though it was the studied and promised solution.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:43 AM (sJTmU)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 08:43 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: the Charlie Daniels of the torque wrench at May 29, 2011 08:44 AM (le5qc)
Posted by: Running Hobo at May 29, 2011 08:44 AM (l1oyw)
He backed ethanol subsidies in '08, so can't repudiate them now. Another flip-flop.
Posted by: pep at May 29, 2011 08:46 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative)
NIMBY! RINO!
Just kidding.
Everything has problems, but the point would be to produce methanol in the short run as a fuel additive and build up the infrastructure to catalytically convert methonal to gasoline. It could be done, and at $4/gallon for regular gas, would do better than break even, I'm sure.
But those sweet agri-state electoral votes are might tempting.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at May 29, 2011 08:47 AM (sJTmU)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 08:48 AM (mHQ7T)
But the things you mentioned (sugar and animal feed) are still food and go to produce food, unlike burning it in an engine.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 29, 2011 12:43 PM (G/MYk)
Yup. One big reason why meat is more expensive. And everything with corn syrup. And chips. Corn is a big ol' food source.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 08:48 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: Free Headlines to Good Owner at May 29, 2011 08:50 AM (BjP5v)
1. Gun Control
2. AGW scam
3. Socialized healthcare
4. Amnesty/open borders
Romney fails on all four of those.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 12:32 PM (M9Ie6)
I might be inclined to go 4,3,1,2 only because they'll have no chance at taking our guns even with legislation, we'll just all be outlaws. Otherwise I'd agree that he flunks those 4, and I say that as a former Ma resident during Romneyrama.
Posted by: ontherocks at May 29, 2011 08:50 AM (HBqDo)
Posted by: JackStraw at May 29, 2011 08:50 AM (x+EIF)
Posted by: YRM (Go Heat, Go Canucks) at May 29, 2011 08:50 AM (UzBwz)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at May 29, 2011 08:51 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 08:51 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at May 29, 2011 08:53 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at May 29, 2011 08:54 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 08:54 AM (mHQ7T)
WTF? The guvmint spent millions on cleaning up something that would be gone in a month?
Posted by: Public Service Message at May 29, 2011 12:50 PM (IhHdM)
Damn. I didn't know that. In fact, now that I think about it, I don't believe it. I worked in the field in 1995-1997, and it was a pretty big deal, because when gas leaks underground, it settles on the water table and starts spreading. And the MTBE apparently spreads faster than any other consitituent. If the half-life was that short, we wouldn't have been able to detect it across huge areas over many years. So I can't believe that, but I still have a vague memory of it not being too harmful. Compared to the other stuff in gas, anyway.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 08:56 AM (1fanL)
Not saying he's on my list of "in a perfect world" candidates, but he seems like someone that could beat Obama. He would be one of the harder candidates to Alinsky.
Posted by: Jose at May 29, 2011 08:56 AM (WTNJJ)
Posted by: JackStraw at May 29, 2011 08:57 AM (x+EIF)
What does this have to do with corn?
Posted by: Mitt Romney at May 29, 2011 08:57 AM (BjP5v)
I'm more worried about Romney on health care. I still don't think the waiver thing makes any sense. Is he just going to issue a waiver that lets states do whatever they want? I doubt it.
He'll probably give waivers saying you have to jump through the following hoops (provide universal or near universal coverage, don't burden hospitals with unpaid care, etc.), and then say they can do what they want to meet those goals.
The only effect of that would be legitimizing states that wanted to be more liberal than ObamaCare currently allows.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 08:57 AM (VoSja)
What do you know, prole?
Posted by: Mikey "No-Salt for You!" Bloomberg at May 29, 2011 08:59 AM (Ew27I)
But the things you mentioned (sugar and animal feed) are still food and go to produce food, unlike burning it in an engine.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 29, 2011 12:43 PM (G/MYk)
Certainly. I just think it reduces the argument to phrase it as such.
To me it is becoming the 'Drill, Baby, Drill' of the Ethanol debate... I fear the opposition isn't touched by it.
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 08:59 AM (kjI0h)
Can't make heads or tails of this. But I'll guess that it actually resides in the soil, where it doesn't biodegrade. It doesn't mix with water, it floats on top of it, so you might have to do some mechanical mixing to get it to biodegrade in water.
Hell, I don't even know what "half-life" means in this context. It ain't radioactive.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 09:01 AM (1fanL)
That isn't even possible. At best he could allow exemptions for states that meet the same goals with different means.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 09:01 AM (VoSja)
Isn't corn a crappy source of nutrition?
Isn't most of it just processed for sugar or fed to stock?
Posted by: garrett---
Corn looks pretty nutritious to me. And, as you point out, it's important as feed for the animals we eat.
I don't see the justification for continuing to supplement an industry that hasn't yielded the benefits that were touted back in the day.
Someone up thread was saying s/he's pro-business. I'm pro-business... but by that I mean establishing a business climate that enables competition so the businesses succeed based on their innovation and efficiency. 'Seems to me that these subsidies are just propping up one industry over a much more effective one.
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 09:03 AM (pW2o8)
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 09:03 AM (VoSja)
Certainly. I just think it reduces the argument to phrase it as such.
To me it is becoming the 'Drill, Baby, Drill' of the Ethanol debate... I fear the opposition isn't touched by it.
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 12:59 PM (kjI0h)
That's no higher than third on the list of arguments anyway, I think. First would be that it takes more energy to produce than you get out. And that deserves a fucking eleventy!!11! Second would be that it's worse for global warming than fossil fuels, once you get done counting the farmland and the processing.
No, fourth. Because third is that it's fucking retarded.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 09:04 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 29, 2011 12:37 PM (5CusZ)
Hmmm... Gas lines in the 70s don't count? Remember when we could only buy gas on alternate days?
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 09:04 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:05 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: StrangernFiction at May 29, 2011 09:06 AM (dKCBV)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at May 29, 2011 09:07 AM (qvify)
Like a google screen grab of the day the fb scandal broke and yesterday (hell, even today) about Weiner's weiner? (ala news articles)
Posted by: momma at May 29, 2011 09:08 AM (penCf)
Hmmm... Gas lines in the 70s don't count? Remember when we could only buy gas on alternate days?
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 01:04 PM (NtXW4)
Wasn't that a government-caused shortage? Price controls?
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 09:09 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:09 AM (mHQ7T)
No, fourth. Because third is that it's fucking retarded.
I completely agree.
I just wish there was a better way to phrase the argument.
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 09:09 AM (kjI0h)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 29, 2011 01:06 PM (G/MYk)
Dude. I'm stealing the shit out of that.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 09:10 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:10 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 29, 2011 09:11 AM (ITaIZ)
I'm not pimping for Romney (and things like this ethanol subsidy crap make it harder and harder to envision voting for the guy in the primary), but I think Romney is not really a pro-amnesty guy.
This comparison of Huntsman and Romney seems to provide hard source links on both of them. Huntsman is the amnesty guy.
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 09:11 AM (pW2o8)
President Obama to Tour Tornado-Ravaged Joplin, Missouri
Check out 1:03. 'They are so busy rebuilding that no one is talking about the President's visit'
Ha ha ha ha ha!!!! No shit? Really? There isn't excitement over the {res. coming to town a week later? They really aren't dipping their balls and milk makers in pudding waiting for the ONE?
Posted by: momma at May 29, 2011 09:13 AM (penCf)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 29, 2011 09:14 AM (ITaIZ)
Wasn't that a government-caused shortage? Price controls?
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 01:09 PM (1fanL)
There were two shortages, one was caused by a combination of price controls and an embargo by Saudi Arabia and the second was caused by an embargo I think. I can't remember though.
Ethanol isn't going away as the ethanol mandates are put in place by the states not the feds. If we quit subsidizing it we will pay for it at the pump. Either way we will pay for it.
I don't like any subsidies, if we are going to get rid of one let's get rid of all of them. Unfortunately even if we did get rid of all of them that isn't going to fix our problem.
Posted by: robtr at May 29, 2011 09:16 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: Bugler at May 29, 2011 09:17 AM (VXBR1)
Here's the deal for me...I'm through being an enabler for the R establishment and their non-conservative "conservatives". Want me to vote, contribute, etc? Then stop lounging on the couch with Gran Nan, stop signing and then defending an obviously socialistic government intrustion into health care (even at the state level). And stop seeing government as an answer to problems best left to individuals and the free market.
And btw, this excuse Mitt trots out that "states are the laboratory of democracy", might be applicable if the experiment didn't expand the power of the state government over its citizens exponentially. Mitt see government as a solution, not a problem for nearly every situation.
And for those who may say, "you're willing to have Obama for 4 more years over Romney?" I answer with this...If Mitt wins the nomination, I hope he is BLUDGEONED endlessly by the MFM and Obama over Romneycare and how similar it is to Obamacare.
Maybe then, the fng R establishment will see we can't win by being demo-light. Driving into the abyss in 4th gear as opposed to 6th, still gets us to the same destination.
Posted by: The Hammer at May 29, 2011 09:18 AM (32ubA)
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 09:18 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: JackStraw at May 29, 2011 09:20 AM (x+EIF)
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 01:01 PM (1fanL)
Half life is just a term for how long something lasts. You say how long it takes to reduce the total by half. With nuclei, this happens by decay. With dougnuts in the office, its from your greedy-ass coworkers.
Posted by: Oldcat at May 29, 2011 09:20 AM (CN+Qv)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:20 AM (mHQ7T)
Corn looks pretty nutritious to me. And, as you point out, it's important as feed for the animals we eat.
Thanks for that link...that is the opposite of what I recall being taught about the nutritional value of Corn.
Admittedly, I only took one 'Nutrition' course at the University of Arizona...if you were to believe the source material therein, Corn was basically a worthless crop (as human food).
Posted by: garrett at May 29, 2011 09:21 AM (kjI0h)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:21 AM (mHQ7T)
According to that site I linked he was in favor of that bogus 2005 comprehensive immigration bill. That may be wrong but that is what they say. I noted that they has some stuff about Palin that was not correct so they may be wrong on him too.
Note that they rated Palin further to the left than Romney so I am not sure what kind of game they are playing.
But even if they are wrong he stills fails 3 out of 4.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 09:22 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:24 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Racefan at May 29, 2011 09:24 AM (gQKlc)
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 09:25 AM (M9Ie6)
What are your sources?
The source I linked cited a veto threat on drivers licenses for illegals (in 2004; the bill never got to his desk) and an actual veto of in-state tuition for illegals while he was governor. Two years later, he threatened to veto another attempt at in-state tuition for illegals so the bill went nowhere.
I'm not pimping for Romney, but it would be helpful to have data to support assertions about him being pro-amnesty.
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 09:26 AM (pW2o8)
I'll go look at your link. I missed it.
Well, dudes/ettes, I gotta do some packing. Have a good one!
Posted by: Y-not at May 29, 2011 09:28 AM (pW2o8)
Posted by: George Orwell at May 29, 2011 09:30 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: chillin the most at May 29, 2011 09:31 AM (6IV8T)
Posted by: chillin the most at May 29, 2011 01:31 PM (6IV8T)
if Bush would have done it...
i'm surprised he's going into a state that voted against him in 08 (and will prob do so again in 2012)
Posted by: YRM (Go Heat, Go Canucks) at May 29, 2011 09:32 AM (UzBwz)
Posted by: George Orwell at May 29, 2011 09:36 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 29, 2011 01:06 PM (G/MYk)
Yeah, I'm waiting for this to play out in court...
Background.... US Navy Retired, which means trained every stinkin duty day in how to fight fires aboard ships...
Putting water on an oil or gas fire is that absolute last thing you do, as it does nothing more than spread the fire... you use AFFF FOAM to fight fuel fires...
Sooo... they used WATER to fight the fire on the oil rig... which eventualy flooded one of the chambers keeping the Rig Afloat, which caused it to sink, which twisted and sheared the cable... which caused it to be unfixable.
Now, by Federal law, once on scene, the Federal Government is in charge of all at Sea Fire Fighting.... ergo, it was THEIR decision to use water to fight a Fuel Fire... which sunk the rig.
Our own Government was at least 1/2 the problem in that disaster...
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 09:40 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: FUBAR at May 29, 2011 12:36 PM (1fanL)
Hey, I have a purple gremlin...wanna see some pix?
Posted by: @ADub at May 29, 2011 09:40 AM (32ubA)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:40 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: chillin the most at May 29, 2011 09:41 AM (6IV8T)
Posted by: Public Service Message at May 29, 2011 01:35 PM (IhHdM)
Since ethanol makes shitty gas that's only bought when people are forced to after being subsidised, who gives a rats ass if its produced at all?
Posted by: Oldcat at May 29, 2011 09:41 AM (CN+Qv)
Since ethanol makes shitty gas that's only bought when people are forced to after being subsidised, who gives a rats ass if its produced at all?
Posted by: Oldcat at May 29, 2011 01:41 PM (CN+Qv)
More so... as a Charter Member of DAMM (Drunks Against Mad Mothers) I have to state that using Alcohol for FUEL is just plain Evil, and Against the Laws of God and Nature.
Alcohol should be Drunk, in Large Quantitys of Mass Inbidement! Not Abused to Power your Suburu!
Posted by: Romeo13 at May 29, 2011 09:43 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 01:40 PM (mHQ7T)
heh, this should be fun, the commenter you replied to is um...well let's just say he's a true believer w/o thought of victories and leave it at that
Posted by: YRM (Go Heat, Go Canucks) at May 29, 2011 09:44 AM (UzBwz)
Posted by: chillin the most at May 29, 2011 01:41 PM (6IV8T)
if Obama wins MO in 2012, we're fucked, no way he wins that state even if he wins the election. they just reputiated Obamacare and there's a troubled incumbent Senator there ripe for the picking. The Gov might be re-elected but it will be as meanigless as West Virginia voting for Manchin and then voting for Dubya and Mac.
Posted by: YRM (Go Heat, Go Canucks) at May 29, 2011 09:46 AM (UzBwz)
Posted by: Racefan at May 29, 2011 01:24 PM (gQKlc)
Yeah and they used it for fuel too in their Pilgram Scooters.
Posted by: robtr at May 29, 2011 09:47 AM (MtwBb)
You don't remember the 'good old days' when you turned the key to shut off your engine and it kept running, or when you stepped on the gas you got a steady 'ping' and no acceleration? It has a purpose, we've tried other chemicals (including lead) over the years and they've all had issues. I don't know that 10% ethanol is the 'magic number' to retard pre-ignition and I suppose it's less then that with todays engines and computer firing systems, but I'm sure it's not zero.
Posted by: Public Service Message at May 29, 2011 01:48 PM (IhHdM)
I remember "the good old days" of about a year ago when I could by 100% gasoline -- zero percent alcohol. My engine didn't ping or diesel and my mileage and acceleration were both better than they are today.The "magic number" for ethanol in gasoline is ZERO.
Posted by: Ed Anger at May 29, 2011 09:56 AM (7+pP9)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 09:56 AM (mHQ7T)
Man with forked tongue has happy wife though.
When you've got a debilitating disease, you can't exactly be choosy.
Posted by: Mitt's Wife at May 29, 2011 09:57 AM (wOaLi)
Romney=pussy.
Posted by: Barbarian at May 29, 2011 09:58 AM (EL+OC)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 10:00 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Randolph Duke at May 29, 2011 10:05 AM (YGNmh)
Romney=pussy.
Posted by: Barbarian at May 29, 2011 01:58 PM (EL+OC)
check out the pic of Sara on Drudges page now.............. yep, i would hit it.............
Posted by: Racefan at May 29, 2011 10:07 AM (gQKlc)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 10:07 AM (mHQ7T)
Yes Huntsman is a real conservative Republican
That's why Think Progess and the MFM loves him so muchAs for your tone kiss my ass and fuck off.
Posted by: Vic at May 29, 2011 10:07 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Bugler at May 29, 2011 10:08 AM (VXBR1)
check out the pic of Sara on Drudges page now.............. yep, i would hit it.............
Posted by: Racefan at May 29, 2011 02:07 PM (gQKlc)
You betcha.
Posted by: Barbarian at May 29, 2011 10:08 AM (EL+OC)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 10:09 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 10:10 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: John P. Squibob at May 29, 2011 10:11 AM (/U/Mr)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 10:12 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Randolph Duke at May 29, 2011 10:38 AM (YGNmh)
Remember when leftard Bill Gates bought 8million dollars worth of Ethanol based stock as a good deed?
Remember when we were supposed to buy plastic bags to save trees?
In a few years will they be blaming conservatives for global warming?
This list could go on forever and way back in history, after all they blame the party of Abraham Lincoln for the KKK.
Posted by: Shiggz at May 29, 2011 11:05 AM (mLAWK)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 11:07 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at May 29, 2011 11:09 AM (BjP5v)
Posted by: docweasel at May 29, 2011 11:34 AM (G92eR)
He did make those votes, but his positions on national immigration reform have changed again and again.
He supported Kennedy-McCain immigration reform in 2005. All of the tough talk on immigration came during the second half of his term. He didn't start talking about border security and people going back to their home country and 'waiting in line' until the primary.
Not even six months after the election, he was already saying that Republicans needed to pass 'comprehensive immigration reform' (Kennedy-McCain type legislation) before the electoral campaign began. Romney urged Republican congressmen on multiple occasions to pass immigration reform before the 2012 election.
Posted by: Paper at May 29, 2011 11:51 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at May 29, 2011 12:06 PM (qvify)
Posted by: richard mcenroe at May 29, 2011 12:07 PM (qvify)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at May 29, 2011 12:43 PM (mHQ7T)
If the only issue the GOP can seized on from this 3 year reign of out of control tyranny is "spending", then it hasn't been paying attention. We need a warrior for 2012, Romney's an accountant.
Posted by: sartana at May 29, 2011 12:57 PM (/IW23)
Which candidate is it who is running on social issues again? None of them? So, Daniels only voiced the truth about this election. All the candidates agree on the social issues. So no one has an upper hand on that front.
Another truth? There is so little difference between the politics of the candidates that no one stands out as being more or less conservative--socially, fiscally, or any other way.
So the Primary, is mainly about competence in running their campaigns, and about their experience dealing with problems like the ones the country faces. And about who can make us feel confident that they can handle the job well.
Romneycare used to seem insurmountable... until the other candidates came along with their baggage too. Now it is just one issue, which Romney has addressed brilliantly. Nobody is forcing you to move to MA, so your displeasure at that state's decisions is duly noted, but irrelevant. The issue is Obamacare.
Romney will issue waivers for Obamacare on the first day he is in office to all the states. Poof! Obamacare gone, simple, elegant and over. As far as the executive branch at least. When the repeal gets to his desk, Romney will sign it.
He has another plan very similar to what Ryan proposed, and Obama rejected... also, simple and elegant.
Now, Romney might not turn out to be the choice in the end. I may decide someone else is better for the country... he could really mess up some how. Or someone else may really shine.
But so far so good Romney. Romney's competence is showing.
Posted by: Petunia at May 29, 2011 01:43 PM (9OZkG)
Posted by: GK Chesterton at May 29, 2011 01:49 PM (zbclw)
Posted by: sartana at May 29, 2011 02:00 PM (/IW23)
However, the catchphrase for the 2012 election will not be "competence", but Vengeance!
Posted by: sartana at May 29, 2011 02:06 PM (/IW23)
229
"However, the catchphrase for the 2012 election will not be "competence", but Vengeance! "
No, because that is what 2008 was about. Vengence for Bush v. Gore in 2000 on the part of Democrats. And vengeance for McCain against Bush in the Primary of 2000 as well. There were lots of scores that were trying to be settled in 2008. And that got us a long way toward bankruptcy. Morally as well as financially.
It is time to move past vengeance and on to competence.
Besides, revenge is never as sweet as you think it will be. Revenge leaves one empty and devoid of a way forward. It is better to let by-gones be by-gones.
(I don't know what all the symbols do at the top. Is there a way to quote better?)
P.S. I'm glad to hear Pawlenty had a good interview.
Posted by: Petunia at May 29, 2011 02:57 PM (9OZkG)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 29, 2011 03:55 PM (r4wIV)
No general ever rallied his armies by proclaiming "Competence!". You don't see it. Romney doesn't get it. He's a technocrat, not a soldier.
Posted by: sartana at May 29, 2011 04:09 PM (/IW23)
Yes we can! Hope! Change! Vengeance!
I actually think that was part of Obama's campaign last time... how about:
Reparations!!!! That's one the Dems like too.
I hope the people actually running the campaigns have a little better idea than that.
Posted by: Petunia at May 29, 2011 06:26 PM (9OZkG)
Posted by: fd at May 29, 2011 06:40 PM (8oxWV)
Posted by: corsets at May 30, 2011 05:31 AM (/0AJa)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2344 seconds, 338 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Barbarian at May 29, 2011 07:14 AM (EL+OC)