which is hard for stingy hearted leftists to comprehend much less imitate...very weak post...scrambling because lefties know the polls are skewed using 2008 data...which is a train wreck for b.o.
Mitt Romney Politicizes Sandy Relief Efforts for His Own Gain
Linda
2012/10/30 19:12:13
|
|
|||||
|
57 votes
|
|
40% | ||
|
56 votes
|
|
39% | ||
|
30 votes
|
|
21% | |||
During the second presidential debate, President Obama accused Mitt Romney of
politicizing the Libya attacks for his own personal gain. It was an accusation
that the former governor vehemently denied, but one which also rang true. When
Sandy was beating on the East Coast's door and edging toward the eastern shores
of Lake Michigan, Romney claimed he would suspend all campaign efforts in Ohio
out of respect for victims of the superstorm.
That couldn't be further from the truth. A previously scheduled campaign
event set for today in Dayton was scrapped, true. But in its place is what is
billed as a "storm relief event." According to the New York Times, the
event is being held in the same place with the same celebrity guests, and the
same campaign music will be used as previously planned. The only difference is
that attendees are being asked to bring donations of canned foods the campaign
will distribute at a later time.
So, Mitt will appear on camera, at a previously canceled campaign stop,
smiling benignly, waving to his supporters, and trying to pass this off as
something that isn't a campaign event? Please.
Not only that, but the GOP hopeful, in a bid to appear presidential, called
governors of states affected by the superstorm. Of course, he only called
Republican governors, calling them "hurricane governors." He didn't call
Democratic governors to offer his good wishes and help. It's been reported that
the Republican campaign is picking up supplies and distributing them to folks in
need, but even the Red Cross (which Romney did not consult) has said that
anything other than manpower and money will hamper relief efforts.
The Red Cross lays it out in its website, stating:
"Items such as collected food, used clothing and shoes must be sorted,
cleaned, repackaged and transported which impedes the valuable resources of
money, time, and personnel."
To add even more insult to injury, New Jersey governor has given high praise
to President Obama, calling his reaction and conversations with the president
"outstanding." He also said he didn't give a damn what Romney thinks about FEMA
or relief efforts right now.
Ouch.
It's ironic that during the biggest storm in recent history that the former
Massachusetts governor still believes that FEMA should be dismantled and
privatized. Privatizing FEMA would be even worse than privatizing prisons. All
you have to do is look at privately-owned prisons for proof that profits take
precedence over human lives. What would happen if FEMA were privatized but folks
in poor areas couldn't afford to be saved? Would they charge them and bill them,
or leave them to die?
Mitt Romney's motives during Sandy have been questionable at best, despicable
at worst. He has not earned the right to become the president of the United
States.
Top Opinion
-
jerry 2012/10/30 22:00:52Romney isn't politicizing the Sandy relief efforts, but only helping out of t...
+26Romney's charity is WELL known...even libs cannot deny the man has given HUGE amounts to charity....It's who he is....
which is hard for stingy hearted leftists to comprehend much less imitate...very weak post...scrambling because lefties know the polls are skewed using 2008 data...which is a train wreck for b.o.
All she knows about Romney is what the DNC tells her. Not the truth!
You would turn a blind eye to George Bush who was the real architect behind the killing of Bin Laden, and yet, Obama has repeatedly used that for his own political gain when we all really know that all he had to do was jump in the drivers seat and pull the lever. A high school sophomore had the courage required to perform that task, therefore we all know who the real credit goes to.
Secondly, as to Benghazi, I really don't think you want to get in to that. If anything evidence seems to be mounting as to what transpired there and it is placing Obama on a corruption level surpassing Water Gate. These Embassy people were needlessly sacrificed because Obama and Hillary Clinton couldn't afford to have anything sticking to them, one for his final month of campaigning for a re-election bid and one for her own Presidential aspiration in 2016.
What some people can't stand, I suppose, is that their hero is being seen as a less than palatable icon to the American public based on his domestic and foreign policy failures, some of which, in the case of Benghazi, borders on the criminal, and "that" is what's resonating.
I think the election results will bear this out when the dust settles.
Yes, we will see it all in the elections. Mitt isn't looking too good right now. He's losing his points..
Btw, it would appear Rasmussen seems to be at odds with your little assessment:
Thursday, November 01, 2012
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 49% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 47%. One percent (1%) prefers some other candidate, and three percent (3%) remain undecided.
The Gallup poll showed that Obama won with a 10 margin in independent voters in 2008, but now, as this campaign draws to a close, Romney is leading by a percentage point. Romney is currently doing better with independents than Obama did in 2008. Obama won independents by 8 in 2008, while Romney is currently leading by 10.6 points on average.
"Things" Linda, are actually not looking very good at all for you. The tipping point will be those independents and middle class.....and the middle class have suffered under Obama during the last four years. While close, I'm predicting that Romney will grab the brass ring for this election....yet in my own mind, I have to actually wonder who the heck wants it?
If you care to have a reasoned debate on this matter, then I will be happy to prove you wrong, just like I always do.
And if you wish to trade insults, I think I'll still win, but you are pretty good at insulting people.
:-)
You have yet to prove me wrong on anything. But you can try and defend voodoo economics if you want.
I don't insult, just point out the obvious.
Unless you feel that a person's labor has no value other than that it belongs to the collective, I can't see how you can defend your position.
With the decline in education and infrastructure the poor will get poorer while the rich richer.
I feel that the government doesn't need any more money, since they waste so much of it.
Let me ask you sonething, since I believe your stance is to to help the less fortunate.
How much do you do and give to help the less fortunate than you are?
If you kept more of the money that you earned, wouldn't you do more to help others?
Or is your position that others should do the helping?
I have consistently written my reps urging them to end the war on drugs and cut way back on military spending. But so many are afraid of imaginary threats so the wasteful spending goes on.
But instead of giving the gov money to take care of you, why not just take care of yourself? that way, everyone benefits, since the gov doesn't get a cut to waste.
As for the vets, why is Mr. Obama making vets that were promised health care pay more for it?
He's cutting money to Tri-care, which takes care of vets, but he's not cutting the benefits of civilians that are in military support.