This American Election: Now What?

Well that didn’t go as expected. *shrug* Sometimes you’re the sculpture, sometimes you’re the bird, and sometimes you’re just a pile of shit.

The final episode of This American Election will air in just one hour. Join Anthony and me as we discuss what went down and where we go from here. What else do we want to talk about? This is an open thread.

About Woke Lola

Bitch, please.
This entry was posted in 2012 Elections. Bookmark the permalink.

136 Responses to This American Election: Now What?

  1. nerdle says:

    Well, I was looking through the morning news and recall seeing an article on Obama’s approval rating. They were saying how he’s gone up to whole points, bringing it to 52%. The funny thing is that they described it as “soaring.”

    I just thought, yeah, that’s soaring. Like how a bird soars at 52%. Or like an airplane that’s only at 52% altitude after takeoff. It’s soaring real high there, buddy.

  2. Totally forgot the link. Fixed it, but here it is again:

    Chatroom is now open. Epic rant coming you won’t want to miss.

  3. sorry, Refresh for chat

  4. DeniseVB says:

    Tingles apologized for thanking Sandy on Obama’s win. Disgusting.

    Fox would be thrown off the air for this 😦

    • cj says:

      He’s a disgusting piece of sh*t. He can apologize all he wants, but who thinks something like that, much less says it? There’s no excuse.

  5. britgirls says:

    Listening in. You have a great voice, Lola.

  6. cj says:

    Dammit, I missed the first half. Will try again when the show is over..I’d rather hear the whole thing from start to finish.

  7. Karma says:

    I can’t get my password but I completely agree Anthony.

    Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi…I almost wrote that under your ‘Not Ready to Make Nice’ post.

  8. Karma says:

    Lost the sound and refreshed the page…nothing.

  9. votermom says:

    what an idiot
    You get nothing, sweetie. And you sold our daughters down the river for it.

    • DM says:

      She makes me ill. And I’m not talking metaphorically. I really felt sick to my stomach when I read the tweet.

    • Karma says:

      Does she really think that Obama is going to do any of those? He could care less, women aren’t his priority, ever. She was used and will be discarded like everyone else in Obama’s climb up the ladder.

      This is his last step, he isn’t turning around to help women. Maybe his wife, or Val Jar, but only because it would benefit him. That’s it.

      • Constance says:

        At least she is standing up saying women decided the election. I have heard several panels of men discuss how Hispanics, 10% of the population decided the election and how both parties need to figure out what they can do for these voters if they want to win elections. NO! Women voters are 54% of the voters, we decided the election and both parties better figure out what they can do to win our votes. I am sick of “legitimate rape” and transvaginal ultra sound discussions from Republican candidates and I am also sick of the reproductive rights fear mongering and “lady parts” crap from Democrats. I also resent the Juliaizeing of women by Democrats. Both parties need to figure out a new way to work for women voters.

        • Jadzia says:

          Seriously. You know what kind of pandering would make me CONSIDER going back to the Democratic Party? Things like REAL and ENFORCED equal pay laws (and quit the BS about Lily Ledbetter bc I know what a fucking statute of limitations extension is, and I also know that it has nothing to do with substantive rights), REAL and ENFORCED protections against discrimination against women in the workplace (especially mothers, and don’t get me started on that, because I experienced workplace discrimination with every one of my pregnancies), and REAL maternity leave like they have, oh, in every other fucking country in the civilized world. Real child care solutions wouldn’t hurt either–we’ve got them in France (which I get is a different country) and they are not compulsory, but they sure do help keep women in the workforce (and provide decently paid jobs to other people, mostly women, in the education sector, and I won’t bore you all with the details but suffice it to say that some of it is public and some is private).

          And that’s just the pandering on “women’s” issues. As far as issues that affect everybody but keep women’s boats afloat too: JOBS JOBS JOBS. The dignity of work. If I had to choose only 1 scenario, I would choose a a job and a kid over an abortion and unemployment. My ovaries declared independence from the Dems a long time ago.

        • Jadzia says:

          So what’s on everybody else’s list?

        • lyn5 says:

          I’m not going back.

  10. britgirls says:

    Great show Lola and Anthony! 🙂

  11. Karma says:

    Great show. Unfortunately the site would just open another chat room instead of letting me re-register, but the sound did return.

    Hopefully, there will be a next time but I did bookmark Anthony’s link.

  12. DM says:

    The Republican Party has the districts to keep its stronghold in the House, but it will have difficulty gaining senate seats to get control the senate if it continues to have its radioactive social agenda. I’m convinced that Romney lost his bid for the presidency mostly because the Republican Party is still radioactive from the 2008 financial crisis. But secondary to that, women flocked to the Democrats. With candidates like Akin and Murdoch it was easy to sell the idea that Republicans want to take away women’s rights.

    • votermom says:

      They lost the Latino vote big time.

      • DM says:

        Men and women want the same thing, and there’s no reason for the women vote spread between the two parties.

    • yttik says:

      I don’t think so, DM. I really liked McCain and Romney. And there’s the problem right there! I’m a liberal Dem, of course they appealed to me. For the last two elections the R’s ran candidates that were so moderate they had to try and appoint authentic conservatives as vp’s just to give themselves some credibility. It didn’t work, conservatives stayed home. R’s will continue to lose until they figure out how to appeal to conservatives and not to moderates like me.

      • I think this is right. I was reading the link below earlier, and it said the same thing, and suggested that once conservatives were on board, they could be used to make the argument to moderates and independents instead of appealing directly to them.

        I think the flip side of this is that we need to convince people to get off the fence. There is nothing cool about maintaining independence based on what happened in the past. It’s the quickest route to ineffectiveness in fact.

        That doesn’t mean people have to commit to one party or the other, but this idea that neither party is worthy at every given minute is quite bogus, too. Generally speaking, one candidate is better. Play poker. Go all in for that game. So maybe you’re disappointed sometimes, but we need to help people see how good it feels to make an actual commitment again. I regret nothing of my support for Romney. He was clearly the better candidate. Stop playing small is my advice. Unless you’re 20 and hot, you’re cool to no one but your damn self.

        Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t feel insecure around you.

        ~Marianne Williamson
        (who is Christain, and while I am not, she nevertheless speaks truth here)

        • DM says:

          I liked Mitt and was very happy to support him. I would not have voted for a Santorum type. I’ve flippantly said that I would vote for Santorum to kick Obama out of the WH, but I doubt that I would. I think if it had been Santorum and Obama, I would have skipped the president voting selection.

        • What I’m talking about doesn’t equate to accepting Santorum. It equates to transforming the GOP so he’s George Wallace circa 1976. Remember George Wallace in 1976? He tried, my lord how he tried, but the party had already left him behind. We’re already halfway there, at least.

      • Jadzia says:

        I was just thinking that yesterday! If McCain and Romney appealed to ME, it’s likely that the Republican base felt differently. : )

    • djmm says:

      Well said, Anthony. It is too bad, as Romney did not necessarily deserve the party he had to dance with. If he had won, I think he could have moved them towards the center.


    • angienc says:

      Number 1 reason Romney lost — by long shot — is that there is no longer a fair press in this country. If they actually covered Obama with the same rigor they covered Bush or even Clinton (while he was in office), Obama’s approval would be around 30%. Point.Blank.Period.

      Sure, the 2 reasons you named are secondary issues, but they don’t matter in the grand scheme of things when the MSM is basically Pravda.

      • Erica says:

        THIS times 1000!

        • Karma says:


          The media propped up Bush 2 and the Iraq war, just like they propped up Bush 3. And frankly, I doubt the media will turn on Obama like they did Bush 2. Obama will be just as pampered into his last day in office as Bush 2 was in selling WMD and the Iraq war to the masses.

          Whoever the media chooses will be next president. And that will be the crony capitalist who does their bidding. Frankly, I don’t think there is a party to reform or take over or anything without the media blocking that effort completely.

          And that’s why the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Obamacare, because it was a big business case. It’s done. Our rights are bought and sold by TPTB and they own the media.

          I don’t see a way around it. The internet can’t reach voters who are too busy to research the truth for themselves. And even worse, there are large amounts of people on the internet spewing the media’s talking points without thinking about what they are really saying. They have the time and access to research the truth and don’t bother.

      • I’ll agree that it’s the number 1 issue, but I don’t think the economic pain distribution can be discounted. Certain classes at either end of the spectrum were exempted from economic pain. The stock market boomed will disability payments and food stamp rates climbed during Obama’s tenure.

        Only the middle class got squeezed and only part of that. The union class, for example, was protected. And I think all of that was by design. These social issues arguments can matter much more to people who haven’t seen a dramatic change in their quality of life. That matters.

        But it’s too late now, We will all see a profound change in our quality of life now. The stock market tanked today. The fiscal cliff is looming. Social Security and Medicare are set to be “renegotiated.” If there’s any silver lining here it’s that these protected classes deserve what’s coming because they built it. Cynical, maybe, but I’ll take what I can get.

      • lyn5 says:

        The MSM are saying that Obama turned into a street fighter to win. Yeah, that’s more like a trash talker. I agree with a guy who tweeted that Obama was re-elected because of the “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

    • Constance says:

      This is a problem Republican men just don’t get. If you require women to buy very expensive health care policies and then exempt birth control you are exempting the only health care many young women seek or need. And of course there is the issue of how dumb do you have to be to consider birth control a “women’s issue” when it is clearly a human issue. The Republicans men and media blowhards need to figure this out because they have severely damaged the Republican brand with women. The only reason I could consider Romney/Ryan is because of age I have freedom from reproduction. If I were young I wouldn’t vote for anyone who made me buy hundreds of dollars of health care I likely couldn’t ever use. The Dems will also force you to buy the health care but at least it will pay for the health care you use. Sadly no amount of sitting around talking with a bunch of guys and a few women chosen to join the men’s club because they act like imitation males will help resolve this problem for the Republican brand.

  13. myiq2xu says:

    Those 2012 Election Numbers – I Think An Apology Is Owed To Sarah Palin…

    Obama/Biden 69,456,897
    McCain/Palin 59,934,814

    Obama/Biden 58,702,702
    Romney/Ryan 56,455,982

  14. DM says:

    • DM says:

      Something to be grateful for: FL was not a deciding state.

      (CBS News) MIAMI- The only mystery left in the presidential election is Florida. Votes there are still too close to project a winner.

      Ninety-seven percent of the vote has been counted and there is only a 45,000-vote difference between Gov. Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama of the total 8 million votes cast.

  15. DM says:

    Myiq, here are the 2008 and 2012 for the most critical states:

    McCain OH 2,501,855, FL 3,939,380, NC 2,109,698, VA 1,726,053 IA 677,508, CO 1,020,135

    Mitt OH 2,586,467, FL 4,096,346, NC 2,275,853, VA 1,772,304 IA 727,928, CO 1,125,391

    In all the states that were critical, Mitt significantly superseded McCain/Palin votes. Mitt may have received fewer votes overall, but that’s because people in TX may not have voted in the same numbers that they voted in 2008.

    • yttik says:

      I don’t think like a conservative, so I can see how I would miss this, but many red state Republicans stayed home this time because they thought Romney was too far left. More of them turned out for McCain because Palin was on the ticket and Palin was an outspoken conservative.

      “..people in TX may not have voted in the same numbers that they voted in 2008.”

      And as a couple of people in Texas have said today, “so which Democrat won?” If you’re a conservative who thinks your choices are the left or the far left, you stay home.

      • DM says:

        But if conservatives from AL, TX, etc staying home made no difference in the election.

      • DM says:

        TX went to Mitt. One or two million more votes in TX would not have changed the outcome of which candidate received the TX electoral votes. People know the game and show up when it’s critical. The Republican voters showed up in the critical battleground states, but the higher number of voters did not shift to whom the electoral votes went. Republicans need to appeal to people in OH and VA and do not need more conservative voters in TX

        • yttik says:

          States are not really red or blue, they’re shades of purple. Conservatives outnumber liberals by quite a bit, so you have to ask yourself why cons stay home. Even blue states will go red when a conservative runs, for example, Reagan.

          Republicans, conservatives did not show up in high enough numbers in the states that mattered. Why? Because they thought the choice was between two Democrats, apparently.

          I don’t know how I missed it. Here I’ve with other liberals, former Dems, discussing how appealing the Republican candidate is! WTH is with that? He’s not supposed to be appealing to ME! If I like the candidate, he’s not conservative enough to appeal to conservatives. Duh! I feel so silly to have missed this. The Tea Party has been screaming it from the rooftops. Sarah Palin has been hammering it home. The Republican establishment did not listen. Again. And they lost.

          The middle, moderates, people like me, are such a tiny minority, you can’t win elections by courting our favor.

        • DM says:

          ytik, you may be right. The Republicans should double down and become more conservative. Reagan took CA too. I want to see the results when Santorum is the nominee.

        • djmm says:

          Um… Regan could not win in today’s Republican party — far too liberal for them. And Nixon was even farther to the left.

          I think the far right needs to get out more. Note that Mitt won a couple of states where the extreme right candidates for Congress were voted out. Not many independents would have gone for Santorum and Republican candidates need the independents.


      • Note that even though that was the case, Romney still split the vote almost evenly. That means the broad middle found appeal, but not enough. If the GOP doubles down on social conservatism to keep their religious base, they will lose what they gained.

      • DM says:

        ytik, MI, WI, PA, MN are mostly white voters. There are no big Hispanic or Black voters in those states. The Republicans cannot blame the minorities for losing those states.

        • DM says:

          I had hopes that because whites were leaning in big numbers for Mitt, he could pick up WI and PA. It didn’t happen. The Republicans need to get the message that the religious and social conservative agenda will keep the party out of the WH. If the Republicans move to a more moderate stance, TX and AL may become more competitive for both parties, but it will also make WI and PA more competitive.

        • 49erDweet says:

          I disagree a little. For too long Repubs have studiously avoided serious efforts going after the Mexican-American vote, though Cuban-Americans somehow have been deemed acceptable. Shared family values in most Hispanic homes should have made them prime recruitment candidates three or more decades ago, but to the GOP’s shame obviously haven’t.

  16. threewickets says:

    Johnson the former Republican got 1,200,000 votes yesterday. Jill Stein got less the 400,000. Romney lost by total 350,000 votes in FL, OH, VA, CO, NV. Convenient for Obama.

    • threewickets says:

      Some more on that from the radical left of all places.

      • threewickets says:

        I have couple of friends who are top Johnson activists, and they sure walk and talk like Obots to me.

      • Karma says:

        That thing is grim and I haven’t finished reading it yet.

        Seriously, I was considering voting only due to living in CA and to benefit their govt funding for the next election. But never would have considered it if I lived in a swing state and even abandoned that thought in order to boost Mitt’s popular vote count.

    • threewickets says:

      But hey, we should probably move on. 🙂

    • DM says:

      I think most of the third party voters are very liberal voters, especially the Stein group. Those voters would not have voted for Mitt.

      • threewickets says:

        I guess. But take Florida for example where they’re still counting. Romney is down 40k votes, Johnson got 50k votes, and Jill Stein barely got any…a few thousand.

        • threewickets says:

          Didn’t Johnson get most of the Ron Paul vote. Paul did give Johnson his public endorsement and said he’d vote for him.

        • DM says:

          I think so. Ron Paul and Johnson had similar policies. I’m a libertarian on many issues. When I took the test, it came out that Johnson was the candidate that I had the most affinity with. Mitt and Obama were identical. I agreed with them 55% of the time. But then I don’t trust anything Obama says.

        • threewickets says:

          Yeah, I think Team Obama wins using everything they have in their arsenal. This really hit home for me watching Howard Dean talking about Ohio. Was like he was saying: “We fixed Ohio so Obama would be absolutely sure to win. So if he happens to lose, it means somebody is fixing what we already fixed.” Lol, it’s the just way the mafia does business and talks. Anyway, I’m glad those Chicago crooks are done with presidential electioneering. Or who knows, maybe they’ll help Andrew Cuomo next. Seems a natural fit.

  17. insanelysane says:

    Our Governator Arnold was a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I was against him when he ran in the recall against Grey Davis and at the beginning of but turned out he was a Republican I really could support.
    ( Disclaimer: I don’t give a damn about the politicians personal life as long as it is all legal. No details needed. None of my business.)

    • DM says:

      The candidate I would have voted for his policies would have been Gary Johnson. I liked everything about him, except that he was a third party candidate.

  18. myiq2xu says:

    If you are wondering what I have been doing, I am re-reading Dune for the first time in many years.

    It’s hard to believe it was first published in 1965.

  19. DM says:

    ytik, here is what’s happening in the heartland of, as votermom calls it, Omerica. The landscape is moving away from the religious social conservative as young people accept diversity that includes gay marriage:

    But across the country, voters affirmed changes in social policy that show a culture changing along with it.

    The trend is troublesome for Republicans, who nominated in Mitt Romney a candidate who was more socially moderate than his rivals for the GOP nod and who tried in the campaign’s closing days to reach out to the broader electorate.

    “The country is changing and the people our party appeals to is a static group,” GOP strategist Mike Murphy said.

    Younger voters and minorities came to the polls at levels not far off from the historic coalition Obama assembled in 2008.

    Voters also altered the course of U.S. social policy, voting in Maine and Maryland to approve same-sex marriage, while Washington state and Colorado voted to legalize recreational use of marijuana.

    In the heartland, where the conservative Christian tradition runs deep, Minnesota voters defeated a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. In Iowa, where opponents of gay marriage ousted three state Supreme Court justices two years ago, a fourth judge beat back a similar attempt Tuesday, and Republicans intent on pursuing a constitutional ban failed to gain the single seat they needed.

  20. The rant from tonight’s show, in case you missed it.

    • DM says:

      I’m not sure there are enough of us to change the Republican

      maybe it was time to double down on the GOP, to bark the extreme religious right and the elites right out of it, to teach Tea Partiers that the bullshit socialist rhetoric they love so much is not going to fly

    • DM says:

      Lola, it would take a leader and a movement to change the Republican Party.

      • Constance says:

        Well if Republicans stick to the “legitimate rape” BS and forcing women to pay for health coverage that excludes the only health items they require, then it is possible they enjoy losing and wallowing around in despair and being powerless.

  21. Constance says:

    Republicans just need to rephrase their health care stance to read, each person can choose whether they include birth control coverage in their health policy, the Government, Employer, and heads of other peoples religions will have no say over any individuals health coverage. Then let people who don’t want birth control coverage pick policies that have no coverage, these will probably be more expensive because more babies will be born to these people and adding children to insurance groups is far more expensive than paying for birth control. People who want a policy with birth control can pick one. Then declare this a win for religious men’s freedom and for employers and for women. Case closed and sell it hard.

    • simofish says:

      Why should I pay for someone’s birth control when they don’t pay for my heart medicine? Seriously !

      • lyn5 says:

        I don’t understand the obsession with birth control. I paid for it all my life, and I made sure I never got pregnant. I think it’s called personal responsibility. My reproductive freedom starts ansd ends with me.

      • Erica says:

        There are several valid medical reasons to take oral contraceptive pills, and viagra is covered, so I’m all for covering OCP. That was one of the things Hillary fought hard for in the past. But now it’s a talking point football. Comprehensive care for women should (imo) cover OCPs, heart meds, pulmonary meds, cancer care, palliative care, etc, etc, etc. We all have different needs and limiting OCP prescription coverage arises form thinking of men as the norm and women as the outsiders.

  22. angienc says:

    It’s really interesting to slice & dice the who, what, where, when & why but it’s all useless. If a man like Mitt Romney — who has the exact skill set needed to turn the economy around, who is moderate on social issues & who doesn’t have a whiff of scandal in his personal life, could not win this election against the SCoaMF with 23 million unemployed, prices rising due to the devalued dollar, ready to be more “flexible” to our enemies (and yes, Russia is our enemy –unlike the stupid progs, the Russians are looking out for themselves), and 4 dead in a terrorist attack in Benghazi — NO ONE could have.

    And, as I pointed out above–that is 100% due to the corrupt MSM. People want to point to the 47% tape but that’s bullshit — Romney does *not* say on that tape what the MSM says (and most people believe he does). Furthermore, that tape cuts off in the middle of those comments –it is admitted by Mother Jones that there is footage missing, which they claim is “accidental”– but accident or not, it is completely outrageous that the MSM would promote and sit idle as Obama used a tape that was compromised in such a way. That’s just fucking basic journalistic credibility standards I’m talking about here. Furthermore, Obama ran *several* ads (such as Romney wanting to “overturn Rove v. Wade) and made several statements (such as Romney wanted to “liquidate” the American auto industry) that were out right lies with the most cut & spliced, distorted soundbites as to be laughable. And that isn’t even mentioning their failure to accurate cover Obama’s actual record on the economy, Obamacare, Benghazi, etc.

    The problem here was *not* Romney or the GOP for that matter. The problem was the corruption in the media and also the fact that 60 million people are quite happy to let the government tell them what to do in exchange for “free stuff.” The tipping point has already been reached– it may have already been reached in 2008 such that Obama’s win wasn’t due to Bush fatigue (as I had always thought). More people are dependent on government than are not because that is human nature with our history of kings, dictators, etc.Having liberty takes work –our founding fathers when they fought for & gave us this republic were taking a gamble that when a day came where people had to choose liberty or enslavement to the government, we’d choose liberty. It took us 200 years, but they lost that bet.

    • gram cracker says:

      Honk!!! Angienc, once again you are spot on but it sure is depressing to think that people now want to come here to get a handout instead of a hand up.

    • Karma says:

      I completely agree.

    • DM says:

      Angienc, history was not my major, but I’ve read some history, and being the opinionated person that I am, I think you may be giving up on our liberties a little too early. We’ve had very close encounters with dictator like presidents. I’m not an admirer of Lincoln because I find his presidency too authoritarian, despite the end of slavery in the South. President Wilson was also a bad president with an authoritarian bent. The media acting to protect a president is not very new. I know you feel GWB got a raw deal from the media, but I’m not in total agreement with that because for the first four years of GWB’s administration, the media covered for him. The Hearst newspapers were very powerful too. We’re bloated in so many ways, from being overweight, to spending too much, 300 million population, on and on. We may have to break up our union in such a way that we get more state rights and less federal government. It won’t be easy to shrink the federal government because it’s the nature of governments to expand, but when necessity demands it, stuff happens.

      Bottom line: I’m not giving up on the liberties established by our constitution.

      • angienc says:

        Bottom line: you’re too late. They’re gone. We have no free press & a nation of sheeple. You can *think* whatever you want — they are gone. The government can now tell us what we have to buy and, with the unionized health care workers (yes,that’s also in Obamacare — funny how the press doesn’t mention that) we will shortly be at more than 60% of the workforce in the public sector.

    • Erica says:

      And the great thing about enabling millions and millions to receive government “free stuff’ is it creates an almost guaranteed constituency for the dems. One that is dependent and whose members will have to have a mental sea change to step out of dependency.

    • 49erDweet says:

      Romney ran as a gentleman, and assumed voters would appreciate that and respond to him. Zero ran as a mugger. and assumed the more mud he could throw the more that would stick – and voters would be turned off by the mud.

      Zero guessed better.

    • DM says:

      I think those tweets are jokes.

      • lyn5 says:

        Jokes can be truthful.

      • angienc says:

        They aren’t jokes — the Obama campaign–without the benefit of the MSM “factcheckers” (who were very, very concerned that the truthful Romney Jeep ad gave the “wrong impression” and was therefore false) told people that Romney wanted to take away their foods stamps & welfare-and to “put them back in chains.” One of my mom’s students told her just that today: “I’m glad Obama won because Romney was going to take away my mom’s food stamps.” The young lady was 100% sincere.

        That’s why they call them FEAR tactics.

        • Erica says:

          This election was just a giant, corrupted, swirling super nova of sh!t. Just like 2008, crass over class, what a coincidence.

  23. gram cracker says:

    My daughter’s husband said that his K Street law firm will be hiring more lawyers to handle the increased work load they anticipate as a consequence of Obama’s reelection. They expect there will be more regulations enacted under an Obama administration. Oh goody, more lawyers needed to advise clients about job killing regulations!

  24. gram cracker says:

    Bacon, booze and the Crawdad Hole have been my solace today. Thanks for the mostly obot free refuge. Hitting the sack now, see you later.

  25. angienc says:

    Oh, btw– that’s the reason the whole “the people have spoken” argument is BULL FUCKING SHIT.

    Without a fair press, it is inaccurate to say the people have spoken– the people don’t know what the fuck they just voted for (or in the case of the 8% indies all the polls showed Romney winning — they stayed home because they didn’t know what was at stake). That isn’t “the people have spoken.”

  26. angienc says:

    PPS – the maker of that anti-Muslim film has been sentenced to a year in prison.

    Nobody in the land of the free — at least not those whose power comes from the First Amendment (i.e., the MSM) — gives a shit.

    “The future must not belong to those who slander the ‘prophet’ of Islam” trumps free speech now.

    • Karma says:

      The last two presidents completely destroyed the Constitution and the masses cheered.

      Is there anything left? No wonder gun sales are through the roof.

      • angienc says:

        To be fair, the masses didn’t cheer for Bush — the MSM surely didn’t & a lot of he reason Obama got such big numbers in 2008 is because many who had voted for Bush in 2004 did *not* come out in 2008 because they were disgusted by the policies in his 2nd term.

        • Karma says:

          I probably should have been more specific and I understand the point you are making as well. Brevity doesn’t serve this topic well.

          However, there were a lot of Republicans cheering the terrorism effort and spouting off that the Patriot Act wouldn’t hit them because they weren’t doing anything wrong. Noting the govt claims that it wasn’t pointed at us but rather off shore. And remember that was first signed shortly after 9/11, so the media, and even some Democrats were fine with the bill. The push back came later.

          I was on political boards with Republicans and Democratic and there were only a few of us who had problems with that bill right off the bat.

          However, both sides have cheered their guy chipping away at the Constitution, and for a while Bush had Democrats cheering too.

    • Erica says:

      I know, it’s really appalling. They can say it’s parole issues, but one year? Obama in fine form. Didn’t he tell us straight up he’d stand with the Muslims if push came to shove? Hey MSM, can you hear him now?

    • simofish says:

      Fuckers ! All of them – they are fuckers !

  27. DandyTiger says:

    Interesting article from slate. Basically saying to Republicans to cheer up because we actually elected a moderate Republican:

    • Karma says:

      So will they ever admit that Romney is actually more liberal than Obama? /s

    • angienc says:

      I’m done with all media — internet sources like Slate included, FOX, all of them. FOREVER not just for the next couple of weeks.They don’t get my clicks or views. They & their journolisto corrupt tactics to reelect Obama can kiss my ass.

  28. DandyTiger says:

    Another article, a letter to Obama from an anarchist. Basically now that we’ve re-elected you, please actually listen to us. Sad. Why on earth would he listen to you now?

  29. Erica says:

    Good night, night owls.

  30. Karma says:

    Boeing is laying people off and closing it’s CA facilities. Twitchy sums it up better than the actual article.

Comments are closed.