After Pissing Off Everyone Overseas Romney Pisses Off Everyone in Iowa

DES MOINES—When Mitt Romney arrives for a fundraiser with local Republicans Tuesday evening, one topic sure to come up could put his efforts to win Iowa this November at serious risk.

Last week, as Romney was winding up a rocky overseas tour, his campaign made front-page news when a spokesman for the GOP candidate told the Des Moines Register Romney opposes a renewal of a tax credit for wind energy suppliers, which is set to expire at the end of this year.

"He will allow the wind credit to expire, end the stimulus boondoggles, and create a level playing field on which all sources of energy can compete on their merits," Romney spokesman Shawn McCoy told the Register. "Wind energy will thrive wherever it is economically competitive, and wherever private sector competitors with far more experience than the president believe the investment will produce results."

It's a stance that isn't surprising, given that Romney regularly mocks President Barack Obama's investments in green energy as a waste of time and money when the nation faces both an energy and fiscal crisis.

But McCoy's comments immediately caused a stir in Iowa, which is home to more wind energy jobs than any other state in the country. And it unsettled many of Romney's top Iowa supporters, who publicly complained they had been caught off guard by his campaign's policy decision.

On Capitol Hill, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley trashed the former Massachusetts governor's campaign for not talking to him first. "Nobody consulted us on this," Grassley told Roll Call.

Meanwhile, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad suggested in an interview with Radio Iowa's O. Kay Henderson that "a bunch of east coast people" were behind Romney's position. Like Grassley, Branstad said he wanted to speak to Romney directly so that he could be "educated" on wind energy, which he noted has strong bipartisan support in the state.

"I understand why they are very critical of the whole thing that was done by the Obama administration with regard to the stimulus and some of the money that was wasted on Solyndra, and some of these green energy projects didn't make sense," Branstad told Radio Iowa. "The tax credit, however, is a much different thing, and it way preceded Obama, and it was actually something that Sen. Grassley authored and has made a real difference over time."

They are all over Iowa,and spreading over Minnesota.

Rupert Murdoch who has developed a keen global view of how the political system works, commented on Romney's numerous problems in running his campaign.

He said that President Obama will be very hard to beat unless Romney drops old friends from his team that are not helping him and hire a new team.

He needs a new team of real pros who really know how politics work!

. . . But the question is, can a clown just stop wanting to hang out with his clown buddies?

Having Romney visit Iowa should increase their wind power by more than his policies will reduce it.

Romney is winning. Romney will defeat Obama easily. Most of the polls are rigged. The latest Pew Research poll dramatically over sampled Democrats (813 Democrats to 459 Republicans).

The Democrat turnout in 2008 was rated as D+8; that was a very good turnout. The latest Pew poll is using a D+19 rating for Democrats. They're assuming that Obama is going to get his voters to turn out at a dramatically higher rate than last time. This is in spite of the fact that Republicans are showing a 12% higher enthusiasm rating for Romney.

Even the less biased polls are using D+10 and D+11. They also assume that Obama is going to get a better turnout than last time. They have to use these inflated numbers in order to show that Obama is winning. The samples should be based on the assumption that Obama's support has softened, as evidenced by voter enthusiasm.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...w-Boosts-Obama

The only loser this election cycle is the American public with the crappy choices we have.

After Romneny loses the election in November and he will and not only lose it , but he will lose badly.

He will lose it by historic proportions.

The way things are going for the clown, he is going to make a big mistake in just selecting a vice president and come out looking even dumber than McCain did for selecting that airhead Palin.

. . . After that turmoils settles, you can go sit your dumb ass in the corner and contemplate how you could even think, much less say such idiotic things.

Romney is winning. Romney will defeat Obama easily. Most of the polls are rigged. The latest Pew Research poll dramatically over sampled Democrats (813 Democrats to 459 Republicans).

The Democrat turnout in 2008 was rated as D+8; that was a very good turnout. The latest Pew poll is using a D+19 rating for Democrats. They're assuming that Obama is going to get his voters to turn out at a dramatically higher rate than last time. This is in spite of the fact that Republicans are showing a 12% higher enthusiasm rating for Romney.

Even the less biased polls are using D+10 and D+11. They also assume that Obama is going to get a better turnout than last time. They have to use these inflated numbers in order to show that Obama is winning. The samples should be based on the assumption that Obama's support has softened, as evidenced by voter enthusiasm.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...w-Boosts-Obama Originally Posted by joe bloe

Charles Krauthammer: Romney's trip was excellent




Soon that initial stumble was transmuted into a metaphor for everything that followed. The mainstream media decided with near unanimity that the rest of the trip amounted to a gaffe-prone disaster.
Really? The Warsaw leg was a triumph. Romney's speech embraced Poland's post-communist experiment as an example of a nation committed to limited government at home and a close alliance with America abroad, even into war zones like Afghanistan and Iraq, at great cost to itself and with little thanks. Without any overt criticism of the current president, Romney set out a foreign policy of greater appreciation of American allies.

Yet all we hear about Warsaw is the "gaffe": two phrases uttered by an aide. At The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, reporters hurled questions of such journalistic sophistication as, "What about your gaffes?" To which Rick Gorka suggested that the reporters kiss his posterior. The other offense was Gorka's correlative directive to "shove it."

The horror! On the eve of the 2004 Democratic Convention, Teresa Heinz Kerry offered precisely that suggestion to an insistent Pittsburgh journalist. Not only did she later express no regret, but Hillary Clinton reacted with: "Good for you, you go girl."

So where's the Romney gaffe? Is what's good for the Heinz not good for the Gorka?

And at his previous stop in Jerusalem, Romney's speech was a masterpiece of nuance and restraint. Without directly criticizing President Barack Obama, Romney drew distinctions expressed in the code words and diction of Middle East diplomacy.

He declared flatly that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. The official Obama position is that Israel's capital is to be determined in negotiations with the Palestinians. On Iran, Romney asserted that Israel has the right to defend itself. Obama says this as boilerplate, but Romney made clear he means it — that if Israel has to attack, the United States won't flash the red light before nor punish Israel afterward.

What about the alleged gaffe that dominated reporting from Israel? Romney averred that Israeli and Palestinian economic development might be related to culture. A Palestinian Authority spokesman obligingly jumped forth to accuse Romney of racism. The American media bought it whole, even though Romney's assertion was a direct echo of the U.N. Arab Human Development Report, written by Arab intellectuals and commissioned by the U.N. It asserted that "culture and values are the soul of development," and went on to report how existing cultural norms — "including traditional Arab culture and values" — are among the impediments to Arab economic progress.

The report deplores the corruption, repressive governance and lack of women's (and human) rights as major contributors to backwardness in the Arab world. Is there any question about Romney's assertion? PLO/PA corruption is a legend. Palestinians are repelled by it. Romney's point was to highlight the improbable emergence of Israel from resourceless semi-desert to First World "startup nation," a tribute to its freedom and openness.

Look at how Romney was received. In Israel, the prime minister expressed a welcome so warm as to be a near-endorsement. In Poland, Romney received an actual endorsement from Lech Walesa, former dissident, former president, Cold War giant, Polish hero. Yet the headlines were "shove it" and "culture."

Romney's trip was a major success: one gaffe (Britain), two triumphs (Israel and Poland) and a fine demonstration of foreign policy fluency and command — wrapped in a media narrative of triviality.

Charles Krauthammer writes for The Washington Post.

Still believing the main stream media Louise? How sad. A mind is a terrible thing to waste you know. Romney gave a great stemwinder in Warsaw. Said he had concerns over the Olympics in London and it turned out that he was right.

The conservatives want to get rid of subsidies and at times the democrats want them gone as well. You might get what you want this time.

What was it Rush said in '08?something like till your side wins shut the fuck up...

Charles Krauthammer: Romney's trip was excellent

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER | The Washington Post

At the outset of his recent foreign trip, Mitt Romney committed a gaffe. In answer to a question about the Olympics, he expressed skepticism about London's preparations. This confounded and agitated Romney supporters because the question invited a simple paean to Olympic spirit and British grit, not the critical analysis of a former Olympic organizer.

Soon that initial stumble was transmuted into a metaphor for everything that followed. The mainstream media decided with near unanimity that the rest of the trip amounted to a gaffe-prone disaster.
Really? The Warsaw leg was a triumph. Romney's speech embraced Poland's post-communist experiment as an example of a nation committed to limited government at home and a close alliance with America abroad, even into war zones like Afghanistan and Iraq, at great cost to itself and with little thanks. Without any overt criticism of the current president, Romney set out a foreign policy of greater appreciation of American allies.

Yet all we hear about Warsaw is the "gaffe": two phrases uttered by an aide. At The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, reporters hurled questions of such journalistic sophistication as, "What about your gaffes?" To which Rick Gorka suggested that the reporters kiss his posterior. The other offense was Gorka's correlative directive to "shove it."

The horror! On the eve of the 2004 Democratic Convention, Teresa Heinz Kerry offered precisely that suggestion to an insistent Pittsburgh journalist. Not only did she later express no regret, but Hillary Clinton reacted with: "Good for you, you go girl."

So where's the Romney gaffe? Is what's good for the Heinz not good for the Gorka?

And at his previous stop in Jerusalem, Romney's speech was a masterpiece of nuance and restraint. Without directly criticizing President Barack Obama, Romney drew distinctions expressed in the code words and diction of Middle East diplomacy.

He declared flatly that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. The official Obama position is that Israel's capital is to be determined in negotiations with the Palestinians. On Iran, Romney asserted that Israel has the right to defend itself. Obama says this as boilerplate, but Romney made clear he means it — that if Israel has to attack, the United States won't flash the red light before nor punish Israel afterward.

What about the alleged gaffe that dominated reporting from Israel? Romney averred that Israeli and Palestinian economic development might be related to culture. A Palestinian Authority spokesman obligingly jumped forth to accuse Romney of racism. The American media bought it whole, even though Romney's assertion was a direct echo of the U.N. Arab Human Development Report, written by Arab intellectuals and commissioned by the U.N. It asserted that "culture and values are the soul of development," and went on to report how existing cultural norms — "including traditional Arab culture and values" — are among the impediments to Arab economic progress.

The report deplores the corruption, repressive governance and lack of women's (and human) rights as major contributors to backwardness in the Arab world. Is there any question about Romney's assertion? PLO/PA corruption is a legend. Palestinians are repelled by it. Romney's point was to highlight the improbable emergence of Israel from resourceless semi-desert to First World "startup nation," a tribute to its freedom and openness.

Look at how Romney was received. In Israel, the prime minister expressed a welcome so warm as to be a near-endorsement. In Poland, Romney received an actual endorsement from Lech Walesa, former dissident, former president, Cold War giant, Polish hero. Yet the headlines were "shove it" and "culture."

Romney's trip was a major success: one gaffe (Britain), two triumphs (Israel and Poland) and a fine demonstration of foreign policy fluency and command — wrapped in a media narrative of triviality.

Charles Krauthammer writes for The Washington Post.

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Krauthammer looks like his hair stylist is the head embalmer at Laurel Land. That dyed hair and the skin tone are priceless. FAUX must be over its "salary cap"!

All that substance, and you criticize his hair. That's about par for you Stevie.

Again, watch the caffeine. It really makes you sound stupid.