Home » campaigns

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

Citizens United and the Supremes are making it rain up in here!

The Supreme Court, in their infinite wisdom, decided that Citizens United was okay. Money is speech. Speech is money. Corporations are people, so… you get the idea. It should be no surprise to you that our campaigns are awash in secret money (moolah, cash, dough, greenbacks…)

From WaPo:

More than a third of the advertising tied to the presidential race has been funded by nonprofit groups that will never have to reveal their donors, suggesting that a significant portion of the 2012 elections will be wrapped in a vast cloak of secrecy.

The bulk of the secret money spent so far has come from conservative groups seeking to propel a Republican into the White House, advertising data shows. Millions of dollars in additional spending from both sides has poured into legislative races, such as the Senate contest in Massachusetts, that could help determine which party controls Congress in 2013.

The flow of funds is part of a wave of spending by outside groups that has quickly come to dominate the 2012 presidential contest, particularly by so-called “super PACs” that have few limits on their activities.

But unlike super PACs, politically minded nonprofit groups are under no obligation to disclose the corporations, unions or wealthy tycoons bankrolling their advertising, much of which is almost indistinguishable from regular political ads run by campaigns. (more…)

By |2012-02-07T06:08:29-04:00February 7th, 2012|Elections, Supreme court|Comments Off on Citizens United and the Supremes are making it rain up in here!

What happened to Maverick McCain?

Personally, I think it has something to do with older politicians. They just don’t recognize that the field has changed. In the late 1980s and early 1990s you could say one thing on Monday and say a completely different thing on Friday and almost nobody would pay attention. For that matter, once Walter Cronkite stepped down, it seemed like America lost its memory. We can’t remember squat. Politicians took advantage of our collective memory deficit disorder. John McCain was one of those politicians. Now, we have the Internet, blogs and the Rachel Maddow Show.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

How can John McCain say he doesn’t consider himself a maverick? That was his campaign slogan. More correctly, that was his campaign image. This is the same image that he crafted for the 2000 campaign. In spite of the fact that we really can’t find much evidence that McCain bucks the party line, he has run multiple campaigns on the idea that he is an independent voice in the Senate; conservative, yet independent. I guess somebody has come up with some polling which has suggested that his “maverickiness” may be holding him back. Wouldn’t this technically be called a flip-flop? I think I have a new campaign slogan for John McCain — the anti-maverick. I like it.

By |2010-04-07T05:28:28-04:00April 7th, 2010|Elections, Senate|Comments Off on What happened to Maverick McCain?
Go to Top