Quotes of the day

posted at 9:01 pm on May 13, 2012 by Allahpundit

A top Democrat on Sunday defended Mitt Romney’s character, saying that despite recent reports that Romney was a bully as a young man attending prep school, he believes that has little to do with the man Romney is today.

“There’s not a single thing that I know about Mitt Romney in his adult life which suggests this kind of discrimination or this kind of prejudice. And so I don’t believe it was a telling moment in terms of who he is today,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said on CNN’s State of the Union.

***

“When you see somebody who is simply different taken down that way and is terrified and you see that look in their eye you never forget it. And that was what we all walked away with,” Phillip Maxwell said.

In what now appears to have become a debate within their own family, Peter Maxwell said his brother, with whom he speaks with frequently, has a tendency to “expound on things.”

“He kind of gets into the emotions of a situation or a moment in time and loves to expound on things,” Peter Maxwell said of his brother. “I’m not necessarily saying exaggerate, but wants to take things to a higher level and he made a comment the other day, ‘Oh God, today they would consider that almost assault and battery.’ And I said, ‘You sound like a prosecutor in Northern Michigan.’ … I said, ‘Come on, ‘What really was it?’ And he said, ‘The kid had long hair and it wasn’t really what people were into at the time.’ And I said, ‘Let’s kind of look at it that way. Let’s not make it a national media event for an incident that happened in 1965.’”

***

“Who sent the e-mail?” I asked Wright.

“It was from one of Barack’s closest friends.”

“He offered you money?”

“Not directly,” Wright said. “He sent the offer to one of the members of the church, who sent it to me.”

“How much money did he offer you?”

“One hundred and fifty thousand dollars,” Wright said.

***

Making Americans feel uncomfortable with Romney, in other words, won’t be enough if the economy keeps sputtering along. What Obama needs, instead, is to make voters fear a Romney presidency, even more than they fear four more years of high deficits and slow growth. And a re-election campaign that focuses on gay marriage, or the Dream Act, or birth control, or how Romney treated his dog and high school classmates is unlikely to stoke that kind of fear.

What might? Well, in a pocketbook election it helps to focus on pocketbook anxieties. It’s true that every day the White House spends talking about social issues is a day it isn’t stuck talking about the economy. But it’s also a day when it hasn’t talked about how Mitt Romney wants to take away your retirement security to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

This is a predictable Democratic argument, and a demagogic one. But it’s an argument that might actually make economically stressed Americans afraid of what a Romney presidency would bring.

***

The attack on Mr. VanderSloot is also notable for its focus on his wife’s contribution to the anti-gay-marriage cause. Gay-marriage activists are winning the debate in much of the country, but as they do they are becoming more intolerant.

After California voters approved Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage in 2008, opponents published the names of donors, who were later linked with zip codes and Google Maps. Donors reported getting death threats. Boycotts were set against businesses, and activists encouraged customers to call and harass business owners. Among the activists’ arguments for why Mr. VanderSloot is antigay is that his wife donated to the campaign for Proposition 8…

Democrats and their left-wing allies should understand that Republicans and Mormons will not be the only targets. If Democrats think it is “legitimate” to prowl and publish the divorce records of Romney donors, no one should feign shock if some right-wing investigator is soon doing the same to Mr. Obama’s bundlers and super PAC donors. A President who claims to want “civility” in political discourse will reap what he sows if he plays by Nixonian rules.

***

Via CBN News/The Brody File.

***

Via the Daily Caller.

***

The following is a statement from Frank VanderSloot:

Extreme, far left blog sites have recently chosen to hammer Melaleuca and me personally because I had the audacity to support a conservative candidate for President of the United States. They chose to misconstrue the facts and post false and damaging data about us, and then criticized us for asking these sites to take down the false information. For those who are interested in the truth about us, we provide the following facts addressing the accusations…

In the case of any company, many livelihoods are at stake. Melaleuca employs over 3,000 people worldwide. And thousands more rely on us to send them a check in support of their independent businesses each month. Damage to Melaleuca results in damage to their lives also. When we defend our company, we are also defending them and their income. We agree that we need to do that fairly and responsibly. But it is simply unfair to accuse us of bullying people into submission.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 1:59 AM

Agreed. One of the sweetest things my mom did for my dad:
She created & printed her own card for my dad’s 71st b-day.
She listed 71 reasons (71!) that she was thankful to be married to him. We made her read them aloud. It was an act of pure love and it touched us all, deeply.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:04 AM

Cindy Munford on May 14, 2012 at 1:54 AM

LOL! I’m one of the worst offenders when it comes to blog posts (which is very ironic, as my work requires writing, but I am very careful with proofing that before submitting it). So please don’t take what I wrote as a comment about you! That is why I differentiated between posts & formal writing. On blogs, we’re in a rush (especially when we do it at work, which I sheepishly admit I frequently do) and we don’t proof read. Typos, poor sentence structure can happen to anyone. But, heck, it isn’t like we are writing briefs to submit to the SCOTUS, we don’t need to take as much care.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 1:56 AM

Ha! I wonder how many people these days even know what a dangling participle is.

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 2:04 AM

r keller on May 14, 2012 at 2:01 AM

As much as I like that thought pattern, I simply cannot accept the premise that Obama thinks/knows he has lost this. It’s not in his nature. He’s never really had to experience a loss like this, so I don’t believe that he thinks it is even a remote possibility.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:09 AM

Really going to sleep now, good night and sweet dreams everyone.

Cindy Munford on May 14, 2012 at 2:09 AM

She listed 71 reasons (71!) that she was thankful to be married to him. We made her read them aloud. It was an act of pure love and it touched us all, deeply.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:04 AM

Well, Gracie, you know I’m a dude. But, that’s quite touching and (personally) I wish I had a relationship like that. Good on your folks!

PS–71 is a lot!

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:11 AM

Goodnight, Cindy.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:11 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:04 AM

That is priceless!!..:):)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:12 AM

I can’t stay up but my contribution to the nights music is in honor of Donald (Duck) Dunn the bass player for Booker T & the MGs, who passed away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHq4laFwAEM

Cindy Munford on May 14, 2012 at 1:21 AM

That’s sad. :(

He gets my vote for the best pop music bass player in the 60s. His versatility was outstanding, which is one of the reasons I rate him 1st.

Bizarro No. 1 on May 14, 2012 at 2:13 AM

…the premise that Obama thinks/knows he has lost this. It’s not in his nature. He’s never really had to experience a loss like this, so I don’t believe that he thinks it is even a remote possibility.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:09 AM

This is a really good point. If you’d never been told that you were wrong, would you see it coming?

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:15 AM

This is a really good point. If you’d never been told that you were wrong, would you see it coming?

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:15 AM

Exactly. I’m sure he’s frustrated, but only because (IMHO) the masses are not overflowing stadiums and feinting right and left. He probably gets angry when he feels under-appreciated. Thus, his snippy remarks to any journalist that dares ask a serious question. AND the reason for the scarcity of official Preezy Press Conferences. He just sticks to safe and snuggly one-on-one interviews with sycophants.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:20 AM

Barf, I’m sick of this already. I’d rather chit, with a little chat thrown in for good measure.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:22 AM

Some tunage. :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:24 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:24 AM

Weird. I’ll try again.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:26 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:24 AM

Your “barfage” didn’t lead anywhere.

Correct your tunage.

In the meantime, I suggest you boogey-woogie.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:31 AM

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Yeah, sorry. I reposted above. :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:33 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:26 AM

Nice..Spin this one when you get a chance!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

Sadly, you are correct, there is a lowered standard for English grammar these days. Sentences ending with prepositions, improper use of subjective & objective pronouns, dogs and cats living together. :-)

The worst one, IMO, is the improper use of the subjective “I” with a preposition instead of the objective (and proper) “me,” as in “This is between you and I.” It is like fingers on a chalk board (I actually even had trouble writing that just now). And it is everywhere — not just people making the mistake during informal conversation (which is bad enough and I have to bite my tongue not to correct them) but people saying it frequently on TV & in movies too, which means someone actually wrote a script like that and no one, not the writer, not however many people read the script before it was filmed, etc. was even aware of the mistake. It kills me. I will never, ever evolve into acceptance of that one.

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 1:45 AM

I agree with the second paragraph, but the “rule” so many of us were taught about dangling prepositions is flat-out false.

From Oxford Dictionaries: Were you taught that a preposition should never be placed at the end of a sentence? There are times when it would be pretty much impossible to organize a sentence in a way that would avoid doing this, for example:

in some passive expressions:

√ The dress had not even been paid for.
X Paid for the dress had not even been.

√ The match was rained off.
X Rained off was the match.

in relative clauses and questions that include verbs with linked adverbs or prepositions:

√ What did you put that there for?
X For what [reason] did you put that there?

√ They must be convinced of the commitment they are taking on.
X Of the commitment they are taking on they must be convinced.

There’s no necessity to ban prepositions from the end of sentences. Ending a sentence with a preposition is a perfectly natural part of the structure of modern English.

Bizarro No. 1 on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

Exactly. I’m sure he’s frustrated, but only because (IMHO) the masses are not overflowing stadiums and feinting right and left. He probably gets angry when he feels under-appreciated. Thus, his snippy remarks to any journalist that dares ask a serious question. AND the reason for the scarcity of official Preezy Press Conferences. He just sticks to safe and snuggly one-on-one interviews with sycophants.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:20 AM

He’s been this way since he entered office.

He’s a scumbag, plain and simple.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

In the meantime, I suggest you boogey-woogie.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Yeah, good one. Let’s hit the dance floor. :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Nice..Spin this one when you get a chance!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

Adore that song. :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:39 AM

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

Love that song.
(There’s ongoing confusion (in my mind) over The Verve, and The Verve Pipe.

Listen to MY LINK–DO!!!

PS–Dire, Love the Verve!

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:44 AM

He’s been this way since he entered office.

He’s a scumbag, plain and simple.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

Hear!..Hear!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:45 AM

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:44 AM

OK, RC, did you see where I corrected my “barfage?”
(Really? Barfage? Now that’s just hurtful to make fun of my brain fart. lol)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:46 AM

r keller on May 14, 2012 at 2:01 AM

As much as I like that thought pattern, I simply cannot accept the premise that Obama thinks/knows he has lost this. It’s not in his nature. He’s never really had to experience a loss like this, so I don’t believe that he thinks it is even a remote possibility.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:09 AM

Thanks for the link to the Tammy Bruce piece, r keller. Either she or 4Grace is correct, but it could be a combo of both, i.e., he doesn’t think he’s really going to lose — I agree it isn’t really in his nature to doubt his own greatness and thus far in his life all he’s had to do is show up, say some words & have what he wants handed to him on a silver platter — but is setting up his plan B, just in case.

However, I mostly find myself in agreement with Tammy Bruce. The first thing I thought when the great evolution was announced was “gay for pay.” The fact is, despite the overwhelming support he gets from the LGBT community, Obama has always (until now), publicly, run away from them. He has never once marched in a gay parade (contrast with Hillary Clinton who marched in gay parades 3x while her husband was POTUS), he campaigned with James Meeks & Donnie McClurkin during the 2008 primaries (two figures who are akin to Satan within the LGBT community), and famously (at the time) refused to have his picture taken with San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome when Newsome began allowing SSM to take place in the city. That is why his strong support within the gay community has always puzzled me, but, as I’ve said before: words, not actions, have always been enough for Obama. The same thing goes with this b.s. evolution. As we’ve discussed on HA before, his personal evolution puts him where Dick Cheney was 8 years ago & doesn’t actually help get SSM legalized.

Before the announcement, though, the LGBT community (and supporters of same) were turning their back on him for his lack of support and many were not donating for his re-election, or giving less than expected. He needs the money, so he decided to woo them back (again, just words, but words are enough) in an effort to raise the money and excite the base to win (which could happen) or, at the very least, cement his gay icon status (which was at risk).

I wrote on the Newsweek cover thread that Obama has always been obsessed with his legacy and being “better” than Bill Clinton (the last Dem. POTUS to win re-election since Truman). His “legacy” on healthcare reform (something Clinton famously failed to do and is the reason why Obama didn’t give a d*mn about doing anything his first 2 years in office but getting that POS Affordable Care Act passed, to “out do” Clinton on that) is falling apart. He’s got to secure his legacy somewhere else. Even though Clinton was humorously called the “First Black President” Obama actually *is* the first black president. He’s got his iconic status secured within the AA community and nothing he does — and I mean nothing including skinning live puppies on TV — is going to put that at risk. Now, being the “First Gay President,” he gets to be “on the right side of history” (rolls eyes) too. If, in fact, 100 years from now SSM is legal in every state, all the history books will not only point back to Obama not only as the first black POTUS (and leave it at that because his actual presidency, as Bruce notes, was an unmitigated disaster) but will also point back to Obama & say he was the “first” sitting POTUS to express support for SSM.

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 2:48 AM

I haven’t listened to these guys in a long time. They were sort of hit and miss for me. But, I like this one OK.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:48 AM

OK, RC, did you see where I corrected my “barfage?”
(Really? Barfage? Now that’s just hurtful to make fun of my brain fart. lol)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:46 AM

Ok. Probably not fair. But…

This:
Some tunage. :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:24 AM

was your link.

As usual, I was joking around. But, it really went nowhere.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:52 AM

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Nice..Very nice!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:53 AM

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:52 AM

I know you were joking and I saw that the link was bad–after I failed to use that ingenious invention called “preview.” Haha

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:56 AM

Nice..Very nice!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 2:53 AM

Love that one.

(But, I love The Verve, too!! :) )

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:57 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:56 AM

So, what were you hoping to post, there??!! (I’m dying to hear it!)

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:58 AM

I loved this gal’s music, back in the day. Unique voice.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:59 AM

OK, my last post was way too long, especially this late at night & has some big old mistakes in the final paragraph. Must be time for bed. :-)

Good night all.

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 3:00 AM

My favorite (obviously) by The Verve

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:01 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 2:48 AM

Ahhh the 80′s..Do you remember this one??!!??..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:02 AM

So, what were you hoping to post, there??!! (I’m dying to hear it!)

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 2:58 AM

I re-posted it at 2:26.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:02 AM

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 3:00 AM

Enjoyed it!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:03 AM

RED CROW: This was it.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:04 AM

‘Night, Dark Star.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:05 AM

My favorite (obviously) by The Verve

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:01 AM

I love both versions. Sweet tune.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:08 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:04 AM

God Bless! I’d have a hard time saying anything against Pearl Jam! (Though I’d like to.)

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:09 AM

Ahhh the 80′s..Do you remember this one??!!??..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:02 AM

I DO remember that one!

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:10 AM

God Bless! I’d have a hard time saying anything against Pearl Jam! (Though I’d like to.)

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:09 AM

Ha, I hear you. So, what do you think of my song at 2:59? Were you a fan of her music?

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Ha, I hear you. So, what do you think of my song at 2:59? Were you a fan of her music?

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Two Thumbs up!!.Tracy Chapman rules!!..This is a classic!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:16 AM

OK, I obviously have no theme, just randomly choosing songs I like.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:19 AM

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:16am

Okay.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:19 AM

Two Thumbs up!!.Tracy Chapman rules!!..This is a classic!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:16 AM

I couldn’t decide between that one and the one I chose. Both are awesome. A+

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:23 AM

OK, I obviously have no theme, just randomly choosing songs I like.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:19 AM

Love it.
Also, I (hate) dislike Tracey Chaapman.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:23 AM

Love it.
Also, I (hate) dislike Tracey Chaapman.

RedCrow on May 14, 2012 at 3:23 AM

LOL, that’s OK. I’m not a fan of her offstage persona, but I really like her singing & writing skills.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:26 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:23 AM

Let me go out on a limb here..I think you will like this one!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:29 AM

LOL, that’s OK. I’m not a fan of her offstage persona, but I really like her singing & writing skills.

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:26 AM

Ditto for me!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:29 AM

Let me go out on a limb here..I think you will like this one!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:29 AM

Isaac was getting his funk on! :)

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:33 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:33 AM

Issac was all about funk!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:38 AM

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:44 AM

Nice!!..:)

Dire Straits on May 14, 2012 at 3:48 AM

Probably too slow for RC’s taste, but maybe Dire likes it?

Seal it up

4Grace on May 14, 2012 at 3:52 AM

Oh, for eff’s sake, does anybody really give one flying crap who Romney bullied in High School? I threatened a girl in HS myself, don’t even remember what the issue was, and I’m still embarrassed by thinking about it today. I’m more worried about Romney vetoing to repeal ObamaCare than I give a crap what he did umpteen years ago!

sage0925 on May 14, 2012 at 4:30 AM

From Oxford Dictionaries: Were you taught that a preposition should never be placed at the end of a sentence? There are times when it would be pretty much impossible to organize a sentence in a way that would avoid doing this, for example:

in some passive expressions:

√ The dress had not even been paid for.
X Paid for the dress had not even been.

√ The match was rained off.
X Rained off was the match.

in relative clauses and questions that include verbs with linked adverbs or prepositions:

√ What did you put that there for?
X For what [reason] did you put that there?

√ They must be convinced of the commitment they are taking on.
X Of the commitment they are taking on they must be convinced.

There’s no necessity to ban prepositions from the end of sentences. Ending a sentence with a preposition is a perfectly natural part of the structure of modern English.

Bizarro No. 1 on May 14, 2012 at 2:35 AM

So, I can’t sleep and I sneak back on here & what do I see? An assault of bad writing. LOL!

Yes, Bizarro, all of the above expressions ending with prepositions are acceptable for informal speaking & blog postings (which, to be fair, is something I did say was perfectly acceptable & that I do myself). However, none of them are acceptable for formal writing IMO. Passive voice for formal writing? Really, have the standards been set so low? LOL

In fact, for formal writing all of those sentences can easily be re-written to make them stronger sentences without ending in prepositions; the examples of the rewrites given are just silly. To avoid ending “The dress had not even been paid for” with “for” the alternative is not Paid for the dress had not even been; the alternative is changing it to active voice with the subject as the person not paying with the dress as the object instead of the dress as the subject, as in “She had not even paid for the dress.” Active voice is actually considered a stronger sentence structure than passive voice for formal writing purposes even though we speak in passive voice all the time & it is perfectly acceptable for speaking.

I’ve never heard (or used) the expression “rained off.” In that case, I would have written “The match was cancelled due to rain.”

Likewise, “What did you put that there for?” is fine for speaking, but I would never have that sentence in formal writing — I would rewrite it & take the prepositional phrase out all together, as in “Why did you put that there?” In fact, I think I would be more apt to say that as well. The rewrite example, again, is just silly.

The last example is the most difficult one. It could definitely be rewritten for formal writing, but I would need more details. I actually think that last example is weak not merely because it ends with “on” but because I don’t see that it is telling me anything, only raising question. If people are already taking on a commitment, why do they need to be convinced of it? The sentence doesn’t convey a complete thought, IMO, at least not by itself. But with more information, it could definitely be rewritten in a stronger way than the example given.

So that’s 2 pedantic posts from me today. Given the time though, I’m going to count this one for 5/14 and the last one for 5/13.

And now, I’m really going to try to get some sleep. Good thing I don’t have work tomorrow!

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 5:30 AM

What Obama needs, instead, is to make voters fear a Romney presidency, even more than they fear four more years of high deficits and slow growth.

They are succeeding. During a phone conversation with my mother yesterday, she bemoaned the sorry state of the economy and how tough so many people have had it for the past few years. Then she said that she feared that Mitt Romney might actually be elected this year. I was gobsmacked. I asked her if she remembered who has been president for the past 3-1/2 years. She said she didn’t want to talk about that and changed the subject. The good news is that she’s too old, blind and frail to go out and vote.

swinia sutki on May 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM

Mornin’, Peeps!

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 6:36 AM

Mornin alt

:)

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:42 AM

Lsm won’t touch the rev wright story, sweep that one under the rug

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:43 AM

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:42 AM

Early voting starts today-GO CRUZ!-and I leave for St.L on Thursday. Can you say ‘Busy’? Sure you can. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 6:45 AM

swinia sutki on May 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM

To counter that fear allow me to suggest something a bit more encouraging.

This past week, in a casual conversation unrelated to politics with one of my clients, the mother-in-law of a top New York Jewish Financier who is a top Democrat fundraiser ( you’d know his name ) mentioned that, if Romney “gets in, the market (the real estate market, that is) will soar”. Her tone was hopeful.

Now, if that’s her view, I can’t imagine that isn’t also the view of those she is most likely to associate with.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 6:50 AM

I thought this poll was interesting:

Gallup

According to Gallup Obama has lost his net approval rating in all but a hand full of states. This could mean disaster for him. I hope.

Terrye on May 14, 2012 at 6:52 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 6:45 AM

indeed, with a smile on :)

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:57 AM

Of course, Dark Star would probably prefer that last sentence be written: of those with whom she is most likely to associate. ;)

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 6:57 AM

dear leader really thinks he’s king doesn’t he…

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:58 AM

the squirrel campaign…cripe

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM

morning joe hyping up obama’s ad attacking mitt and bain capital…the nastiness getting nastier….

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:13 AM

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 6:57 AM

17 hours on a bus. Yea. Me. ///

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 7:15 AM

morning joe even calling the obama attacks on donors sleezy…wow

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:18 AM

I think the Morning Joke crowd are handling “The First Gay President” cover by ignoring it. I got bored with them and tuned to Fox News where Gretchen had a moment – she was doing some type of move talking about her feet or something and her dress is way too short and hiked up and we got a camera upshot. She hurriedly adjusted her short dress down. Oh Gretchen, hope I’m the only one who saw that but I doubt it. Add about two inches to the hemline, hun.

Marcus on May 14, 2012 at 7:19 AM

By desperately trying to fire up his Far Left Base, Scooter has illuminated his own divisiveness.

kingsjester on May 14, 2012 at 7:19 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 7:15 AM

get your kindle/ipod ready :)

how was little alt’s graduation?

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:19 AM

Marcus on May 14, 2012 at 7:19 AM

they didn’t talk about it in the first segment?

———————————–
mika and rattner were quick to defend obama attacking the donors though

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:21 AM

For the third year in a row, a narrow majority of Americans consider gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable, signaling that this is the new “new normal” in public opinion, according to a new Gallup Poll released Monday just days after President Barack Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76264.html#ixzz1uqHv1ujd

really?????who did they poll

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:21 AM

Nope. I saw the first segment and you should watch it when it replays in 30 minutes or so. Bad blood between Mika and Joe from what I saw. She started right away with the new Obama anti-Romney ad and he interrupted her and took over. She looked mad to say the least.

Marcus on May 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM

The good news is that she’s too old, blind and frail to go out and vote.

swinia sutki on May 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM

Did you happen to mention the Obama death panels?

Happy Nomad on May 14, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Marcus on May 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM

You’re in TX-right?
Early voting starts today!

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Oh, for eff’s sake, does anybody really give one flying crap who Romney bullied in High School?

sage0925 on May 14, 2012 at 4:30 AM

It’s a stupid story because it goes nowhere. If the Post was able to make the case that this was an early indicator of a grown man that bullies his employees, family, and associates- that would be one thing. But that connection isn’t there. Which is all the more curious the WaPo decided to spend 5400 words on the incident.

Happy Nomad on May 14, 2012 at 7:29 AM

Marcus on May 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM

will do, i;m sure valerie sent her marching order to show that bain attack ad on every msdnc show today…and they will

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:35 AM

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:26 AM

That is my impression as well based on conversations with young New Yorkers.
They have no objective moral center and their default philosophy is driven by the culture unbeknownst to them.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:41 AM

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:41 AM

wow

just plain sad…

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:45 AM

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Its most troubling aspect is that it makes them susceptible to any demagogue who knows how to frame the debate in the right way. And our current crop of demagogues know just how to do that.

The young have no standard for comparisons between truth and error but instead use currently fashionable sentiments as their moral compass. A try trouing development as far as the future is concerned.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:53 AM

Truly troubling

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:53 AM

indeed…

*sigh*

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Democrats can now check off these pieces of BS:

1) First black President who wasn’t black.

2) First gay President who is, at best, a beta male metrosexual.

There is a difference between what they say and what the actual fact is, and no twisting of ‘culture’ to include these Presidents into those categories will work.

Now if Obama and Biden want to divorce and make open a bromance that has been ongoing for a few years, that might be something different.

Until then I’ll believe my lying eyes, tyvm.

ajacksonian on May 14, 2012 at 8:03 AM

Its most troubling aspect is that it makes them susceptible to any demagogue who knows how to frame the debate in the right way. And our current crop of demagogues know just how to do that.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 7:53 AM

The most troubling aspect to me is our capacity to ignore history. Jeebus, people, it’s like the 1930′s never happened.

Extrafishy on May 14, 2012 at 8:04 AM

*sigh*
cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Pray hard.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 8:04 AM

Extrafishy on May 14, 2012 at 8:04 AM

Right. What’s that quote about those who fail to learn the lessons of history? Only, the lessons get progressively more intense.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 8:07 AM

marcus, mika’s face

priceless…heh

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 8:12 AM

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 8:04 AM

will do

cmsinaz on May 14, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Their consciousness, having been effectively and deliberately scrubbed free of any Biblical reference points ( Western Civ’s previous paradigm) is now in moral free fall and anything goes. And given mankind’s history, anything will go.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Some of the leftie talking heads actually think they can get in front of a camera and stretch that hair cut thing, if it even happened the way it was reported, as proof if Mitt was a bully then, he’s a bully now. It was so easy to batt down even BOR did it right. How much longer until Preezy Behalf uses the FBI to dig for a little dirt. Clinton did it. I’m surprised more of Mitt’s donors aren’t being hit by boycotts.

Kissmygrits on May 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Ha! I wonder how many people these days even know what a dangling participle is.

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 2:04 AM

If I saw one, I’d know it.

Freelancer on May 14, 2012 at 12:15 PM

The last example is the most difficult one. It could definitely be rewritten for formal writing, but I would need more details. I actually think that last example is weak not merely because it ends with “on” but because I don’t see that it is telling me anything, only raising question. If people are already taking on a commitment, why do they need to be convinced of it? The sentence doesn’t convey a complete thought, IMO, at least not by itself. But with more information, it could definitely be rewritten in a stronger way than the example given.

So that’s 2 pedantic posts from me today.
Given the time though, I’m going to count this one for 5/14 and the last one for 5/13.

And now, I’m really going to try to get some sleep. Good thing I don’t have work tomorrow!

Dark Star on May 14, 2012 at 5:30 AM

Let me be clear (0bamessiah is so quotable, isn’t he?!), those examples in my post came from the Oxford Dictionaries site I linked to (look, the “rule” was broken again!) There are definitely better examples than the ones they presented – I agree with you that most of theirs were not very good.

I just saw this, which helps explain a lot: “The proscription against preposition stranding in English was created by John Dryden in 1672 when he objected to Ben Jonson’s 1611 phrase, the bodies that those souls were frightened from. Dryden did not explain why he thought the sentence should be restructured to front the preposition.

There are many sentences which are awkward if they do not end with a preposition. Winston Churchill’s rejoinder to the “rule” was something along the lines of, “That is nonsense up with which I shall not put.” Sentences which end with “cheer up”, “talking about”, etc. are very common, and I can’t see how they wouldn’t pass the ‘proper/formal English’ acceptability test.

Since our language does have a structure which is studied and taught, and since you weren’t being schoolmarmish, I disagree with you that you were being pedantic – being precise while sounding educated is much preferable to the alternative… :)

Bizarro No. 1 on May 14, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3