audience Archives - Where Is The Outrage?

Rachel Maddow destroys Mitt Romney, why? (Update)

Last night, Rachel Maddow took her opening segment and simply roasted and toasted Mitt Romney. My question is why?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Mitt Romney is not a strong candidate. He has never been a strong candidate. The whole Republican field is weak. Each of the candidates has huge flaws. This is no secret. Anyone who’s been following the campaigns can, off the top of their head, name tons of flaws that each of these candidates has. Yet, for some reason, Rachel Maddow decided that she needed to shine the spotlight on Mitt Romney.

You do not have to be a political junkie, as I am, to be able to understand that Mitt Romney has changed his position on several major issues. The healthcare law that he instituted in Massachusetts is basically the same law that President Obama tried to institute across the United States. This is a fact. Yet, somehow Mitt Romney has tried to parse this into something that it isn’t. If you remember that whole brouhaha over whether Mitt Romney really hunts or not and what he hunts, well, that was craziness. That was not some tricky question. Instead, that was Mr. “I’m awkward” Romney just trying to fit in. He doesn’t. He’s uncomfortable in crowds. He’s uncomfortable talking in front of people. Yet, here he is, running for president.

I love Rachel Maddow. I think she is the brightest woman on television. I just don’t understand what is to be gained by telling liberals, her audience, that Mitt Romney is who we think he is. I’m just saying. Okay, Mitt Romney has proven over the last several years that he will do anything, say anything and be anybody in order to become president. Okay, now it’s out there.

Update: Yesterday on NPR they introduced a segment by asking the question, “How would President Romney handle Afghanistan?” What? President Romney? A chill went up my spine. Now, I understand what Rachel was talking about. Think about it. President Romney. He can’t settle on one position for anything. Even Clinton was better at standing firm than Romney. There is almost no subject in which Romney hasn’t changed his position in some sort of major way. So, Romney on Afghanistan? My goal is for us, the American people, not to go through a Romney presidency. The fact that he is talking about doubling down, no, tripling down on Afghanistan…doesn’t make any sense to me. We need to get out. We need to leave a force that is large enough to crush any terrorist camp or outpost that pops up. That’s it. We need to come home. I’m not sure what Romney’s position is and whatever it is I suspect that it will change… with the wind.

By ecthompsonmd|2012-03-24T14:27:07-04:00March 24th, 2012|Afghanistan, Party Politics|4 Comments

Frank Luntz on Occupy Wall Street

This is big. Republican talking points on Occupy Wall Street.

From TP:

– Don’t Mention Capitalism: Luntz said that his polling research found that “The public…still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we’re seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we’ve got a problem.”

– Empathize With The 99 Percent Protesters: Luntz instructed attendees to tell protesters that they “get it”: “First off, here are three words for you all: ‘I get it.’ … ‘I get that you’re. I get that you’ve seen inequality. I get that you want to fix the system.”

– Don’t Say Bonus: Luntz told Republicans to re-frame the concept of the bonus payment — which bailed-out Wall Street doles out to its employees during holidays — as “pay for performance” instead.

– Don’t Mention The Middle Class Because Americans Don’t Trust Republicans To Defend It: “They cannot win if the fight is on hardworking taxpayers,” Luntz instructed the audience. “We can say we defend the ‘middle class’ and the public will say, I’m not sure about that. But defending ‘hardworking taxpayers’ and Republicans have the advantage.”

– Don’t Talk About Taxing The Rich: Luntz reminded Republicans that Americans actually do want to tax the rich, so he recommended they instead say that the government “takes from the rich.”

By ecthompsonmd|2011-12-01T16:22:37-04:00December 1st, 2011|Economy|Comments Off

Let ’em die?

I’m not sure about you, but I was shocked when Ron Paul, a physician, was asked about a patient without insurance who was seriously injured. There were at least a few people in the audience who yelled, “Let ’em die!” I commend Ron Paul for not playing to the crowd.

Think Progress interviewed several students on the conservative and religious Liberty University campus on this scenario. I’m very happy to hear their answers:

KEYES: (editor’s note: Keyes is the TP interviewer) In the debate on Monday, there was the question of whether or not a 30 year old who doesn’t have health insurance and gets in a major accident, we ought to just let him die or we ought to provide care for him. What do you think would be the Christian thing to do?
STUDENT 1: Definitely to give him care, no matter what your age is.

KEYES: What do you think the Christian thing to do there is?

STUDENT 2: If he didn’t have health insurance?

KEYES: Yeah.

STUDENT 2: I would say take care of him.

KEYES: Do you think it’s un-Christian to be letting uninsured people die? What would you do?

STUDENT 3: Why would someone let anyone die just because they can’t pay for something? That’s the thing I don’t understand. Me and my family, we’re financially impaired right now, we’re in a shelter. We have insurance and all that, but at the same time for those who don’t have insurance, what’s the point of killing someone, taking a life, just because they can’t pay for something? It’s like going to a hospital, charging millions of dollars to have an operation to save someone’s life, they can’t pay for it, okay so we’ve got to kill them? We can’t save a life because they can’t pay for it? That doesn’t make any sense to me, I don’t understand.

KEYES: Do you think that’s a Christian thing to let an uninsured person die?

STUDENT 4: Absolutely not. I don’t see how that’s Christian in any way. I mean “Christian.” I think everyone has the right to life, including I don’t agree with capital punishment, I think that those people also have a right to life.

KEYES: What do you think the Christian thing to do there would be?

STUDENT 5: I believe provide care for him. I believe we should provide some care for him.

KEYES: What do you think, do you think that it would be Christian to let uninsured people die?

STUDENT 6: I don’t think it is. I think that they should work towards making sure that people no matter what should live.

STUDENT 3: I bet if Jesus came back right now, all them politicians, all them doctors who had to do something like that would probably give their life to Christ because they felt so bad about themselves. Because they knew that they took a life just because someone couldn’t pay for it.

By ecthompsonmd|2011-09-16T17:35:16-04:00September 16th, 2011|Healthcare, Party Politics, Religion|Comments Off