Gary M Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 and while Staten Islanders beg for food, gas and clothing, Mayor Bloomberg has time to talk about “climate change.” begging for food? Martin Bashir bashes Mitt for collecting food. http://weaselzippers.us/2012/10/30/msnbcs-martin-bashir-ridicules-romney-for-collecting-food-and-supplies-for-hurricane-victims/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 begging for food? Martin Bashir bashes Mitt for collecting food. http://weaselzippers...ricane-victims/ Martin's plagiarizing Andrea Mitchell's (non) story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 (edited) http://freebeacon.com/post/35057729004/victorias-secret-angels-turn-on-power When the New York Army National Guard’s 69th Infantry Regiment found itself in the midst of a hurricane without power, it turned to an unlikely source to save the day: lingerie purveyor Victoria’s Secret. As they had done for the last three years running, the lingerie company was holding its annual television event at the Regiment’s historic armory, located at 25th street and Lexington Avenue in Manhattan. For the show, the producers had hauled in eight massive 500 kilowatt generators. Of course, the producers said, we’d be happy to help. Hours later, the lights flashed back on. “We were dead in the water until Victoria’s Secret showed up,” says Capt. Brendan Gendron, the Regiment’s operations officer. The 69th asked the designer to come to its aid in delivering food to devastated New Yorkers, a service the company was happy to perform: The troops also needed help distributing food. The Federal Emergency Management Agency had begun bringing tractor-trailers’ worth of emergency provisions to the armory. It was up to the troops to break up the pallets, load them in military trucks, and bring them to the seven distribution centers in Manhattan where the Salvation Army would hand out meals to Hurricane victims. One problem: the 69th didn’t have a fork lift. So again, they turned to the Victoria’s Secret crew. We repeat: It was the 69th.  Leadership! Edited November 5, 2012 by Oxrock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 If that is true, then it's only because Democrats lost control of their party after 2004. Hell, we already had signs of it prior = Howard Dean "Aaeeeeeeiiiiii" You can't possibly be so obtuse that you don't see the connection. Pushing too far in one direction, gives rise to pushing in the other. There would be no TEA party, if there was no plausible need for one. Ironic, isn't it, that Romney's campaign found new life when he re-created himself, yet again, as a centrist Republican...maybe there was a need for one, but many people, even Republcans don't want it defining their party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 (edited) Pretty quiet in around here today. I think the Romney-philes are not feeling so confident anymore. Edited November 5, 2012 by gringo starr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 Pretty quiet in around here today. I think the Romney-philes are not feeling so confident anymore. We'll see come tomorrow night. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 5, 2012 Share Posted November 5, 2012 Ironic, isn't it, that Romney's campaign found new life when he re-created himself, yet again, as a centrist Republican...maybe there was a need for one, but many people, even Republcans don't want it defining their party. If I understand you right...then they are simply wrong. It's not hard to see why. The best definition of this country's election-crushing, never mind winning, majority is "financially conservative, but pragmatic, and, socially moderate". The first party to prove that this is their agenda, and lay claim to this mantle...wins. And, probably continues to win, for a whole lot of elections. Right now, we have both parties merely getting portions of that majority, and trying to force the edges of that majority into their portion. People don't like that, which is why we don't have larger turnout. Obama has been doing this more than Romney for the entire cycle, and even after the 1st debate. This all goes back to Nixon...who was the key proponent of "get the base first, show off the energy, then, tell the middle you are winning, and try to draw them in". This is precisely Obama's game plan. Especially, with help from the media, the "tell them you are winning" part. The trouble is...he hasn't been able to show off the energy, and the reality of early voting has undercut that argument....so few believe him when he says he is winning. That's why we have ties in polls, and is also why Obama isn't polling at 50%...even with D+7 polls. This is also the biggest reason why this year's turnout, overall, is probably going to be less overall, with everybody, than in 2004, never mind 2000 and 2008. That's if you believe the "undertow" theory. So far? The data supports that theory. Obama's support isn't what it was. How far has he fallen? That is the question that will decide the race. If you believe Gallup? Farther than any Democrat in the history of political science and opinion polls. If you believe(d) Axelrod...Obama should have improved on his early voting #s. He patently has not...no matter what the spin is about registration. Registration...is not voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Pretty quiet in around here today. I think the Romney-philes are not feeling so confident anymore. Jobs. We have businesses and jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts