Lessons from State of the Union

(These are my own humble, not a professional anything responses to last night’s speeches. Grains of salt and all that.)

• Those politicians seated on the aisles who get to shake hands with all the entering dignitaries and, more importantly, get their faces on camera a LOT? Some poor interns from their offices pretty much warmed those seats all day to secure those. Cracks me up how folks who will stand on that same House floor with cameras rolling and call the President all sorts of names and accuse him of all sorts of anti-American shenanigans – and yet there they are on SOTU night, copies of the speech in their hands asking for his autograph like some sort of geeked out fan as he goes by. Lordy.
• Whenever the White House in the future – ANY White House – provides an enhanced live feed of the speech complete with charts and supporting statistics – watch it. Those charts and statistics help to illustrate where that particular President is coming from in terms of his policy proposals. Agree or disagree, they help to bring you to an understand of why he or she (someday, I hope!) thinks that issue is important. Also, they sneak in some pretty cool and often funny pictures (like the one last night of POTUS and McKayla Maroney doing the “I’m Not Impressed” scowl.)

• You can get a pretty good idea of what the President wants to emphasize by looking at the guest list for the family box where the spouses sit. Whoever, is with them will be featured and probably named in the speech and tied back to one of the policy initiatives POTUS wants to highlight. 
• I thought this SOTU followed up nicely on his inauguration address. He kept consistent with his visions on where he would like to see his second term focus. What I wish is that EVERY policy idea he outlines would be followed up with “And I’ve appointed “x” or tasked “y”" to start hearings/meetings to write up the legislation” similar to what he did with regards to gun violence after Newtown. Or else, cite the specific legislation that is already making it’s way through Congress so that people can petition their representatives to vote on it or keep it moving. There were a few direct examples like that but not all and not the majority and that left me feeling like the proposal was way too much rhetoric and not yet enough action.  Which, I suppose, is true of every SOTU but is certainly something that feeds into the “All talk, no action” impression that the majority of the public has about DC.
• Now, this one is IMPORTANT – a CRITICAL lesson we must ALL learn! Ready?…….Mamas – do NOT let your babies grow up to give the response to the SOTU! Got that? Really, I mean it. Ever since I’ve been paying attention to this speech, the response has been just awful. Often it is awful in substance, or awful in delivery, or…well..both! Of course most recently this sorry task has fallen to the GOP, but even the last couple of Democratic responses that I recall were sorely lacking. I do not understand how a supposedly polished politician who has won elections and therefore most likely given a stump speech or twelve can STILL be so so so unprepared to give a PREPARED statement on TV. In a controlled environment! For just 5-10 minutes! With no applause or heckling (that they can hear anyway!)
• My one particular takeaway from the Marco Rubio response was this – no, not the water thing, I actually listened to it on a radio re-broadcast so I wasn’t distracted by those things – the GOP though, has still not learned it’s lesson from the 2012 election. That response sounded like a word for word repeat of a Romney stump speech from the last campaign. You  know, the one they lost? Yup, the response was completely filled with the same perspective/attacks on Obama and his policies and then the same, rejected solutions. Guys? It’s not that the messenger (Romney) was weak, it’s that your IDEAS are weak! Having a fresh faced young hispanic senator repeat the same thing didn’t make it go down any better. Even WITH an awkward gulp of water

When will the GOP learn?

Hey hi – I didn’t disappear – I just didn’t want to, you know – GLOAT too much after the election

Instead I have been watching and wondering what sort of reaction would occur on the right. Would they continue to just insanely ignore all facts n the ground and still try to spin the results to avoid those realities? Or would there be some cracks in the bubble?

There have been a *few* cracks. Mostly just the folks who already occasional showed some signs of reason & ability to criticize the GOP. Those people have rightly exposed the media bubble and voiced the need for a re-assessment of policies proposed, not just HOW messages are delivered.

The vast majority though are still encased in fantasy-land.  Blaming things like Hurricane Sandy and the lack of real voting restrictions efforts to be put in place in time. Yes, there are some in the GOP who are being much more open about the fact that their voter suppression efforts WERE designed to keep Democrats specifically away from the voting booth. Somehow, that is more honorable than actually admitting your policies and candidates might be…you know…BAD!

No where is this more evident though, than in Michigan. A state that has districts that have been so gerrymandered that even though it overwhelmingly went for Obama and even though the total votes cast for Congress were also heavily Dem, they still send more GOP reps to Congress than Dems. HUH? Yeah, all about how district lines are drawn folks. Beyond that though is their state government. Currently still dominated by the GOP thanks to the 2010 elections (NEVER ignore the mid-terms Democrats! This is what happens!)

The message sent in November was that the voters FAVOR Democratic policies as laid out by Obama. It wasn’t just HIM, it was what he spoke about specifically that brought them out. Michigan state government though, didn’t quite get that. Governor Snyder who as recently as February stepped back from any union busting legislation (having seen the reaction in Wisconsin and across the country to efforts there)…well, AFTER a pretty clear national referendum in support of unions – he decided that Right To Work laws are suddenly fine and dandy and when both houses of the state legislature passed them, he signed it within hours. Gosh, no fast tracking  there! Next up? Abortion! Let’s restrict access to it as MUCH as possible without quite crossing the Roe v Wade line. Also….go ahead and bring your guns to schools and day care centers. That would be cool. There’s more, but you get the point.

The GOP reaction in Michigan to voters telling them they don’t LIKE those policies? Tough noogies! We are still in power and as long as we are, we don’t care if this isn’t the stuff we ran on, we are going to do it anyway because we CAN. So There!

I think that’s what makes me most angry – even if you can say that Michigan voters got themselves into this mess by voting for these candidates – I do know that NONE of them campaigned on these issues. Union busting and abortion and gun laws were NOT on the agenda in 2010. So why have so many in the GOP legislated on them? It’s a bait and switch.

I just look at all this as such a huge waste of time and money. Michigan voters are fighting mad. Now they have to find legal ways to challenge all these laws and/or repeal them. They will most certainly vote a lot of these folks out of office and then that new administration will have to write new laws to fix these bad ones.

I try not to be TOO cynical when it comes to politics and I absolutely HATE conspiracy theories, but MAN it is getting harder and harder to not believe that so much of what they DO once in power is more as a pay back to a big money donor than it is to benefit the people they represent. And when it turns out that ONE particular set of billionaires (Kochs) and their public policy institute (ALEC) happened to WRITE and then fund the campaigns to get those laws put into place?

Well….speaking of not being able to see reality….perhaps I SHOULD be more cynical about all this!

Voter suppression is a disgrace to our democracy

While I am encouraged that the media has covered this quite a lot this election cycle (well, except for Fox of course because they are not really news)….I am way more enraged that there is anything TO talk about.

First of all there were attempts to require ID to vote across many states. This seems innocuous until you think about the many reasons why people might NOT have a currently valid photo ID – such as my older son who doesn’t have a driver’s license and whose state photo ID card expired recently – even though he has been legally registered to vote since he was 18 and has voted every election, he would be turned away this year if we lived in a voter ID required state. There are a LOT of examples for varying reasons of folks who don’t have photo ID and would not have had the time to get one by tomorrow.

In most cases the voter ID laws were struck down by higher courts because their primary impact is to disenfranchise citizens.

Since the confirmed cases of actual voter fraud are less than 1/10 of a percent nationally this seems like complete overkill. More people would LOSE their ability to vote in just this one election than any proven fraudulent totals over the last four Presidential elections.

So it’s good that those laws were challenged and watered down or delayed or struck down entirely.

But wait – that is not the only effort to suppress the vote that has been going on.

In the last few weeks there have been huge problems with early voting. Some of the most critical swing states – Ohio and Florida – made efforts over the last decade to ease up long lines on election day and opened polling places for in person voting for up to 24 days at a time. Allowing for multiple weekend voting and spreading out the crowds. Makes sense right? Voting in person ONLY on the 1st Tuesday in November is ludicrous in 2012. It is one of the most outdated rules we have clung to over the decades and states that have taken steps to change the process are to be applauded. Voting by mail (as Oregon does) and allowing permanent absentee status without conditions (as many states such as CA do) expands the potential participation rates in elections.

Growing up I always heard people lament how low turnout would be and it seems only logical that expanding the days/times/methods of voting is one of the best ways to increase that.

Unfortunately, Ohio and Florida this cycle have taken steps to roll BACK early voting access. In Florida the number of early voting days were reduced, then subsequently added back at the lat minute in certain precincts when lawsuits were filed. And yet people stood in ridiculously long lines – up to 8 hours! to cast their ballot.

In Ohio steps were taken to make the actual ballot used more confusing for early voters thereby increasing the chances that a voter would end up having to vote “provisionally” which then increases the changes that those ballots wont be counted at all. So you stand in the long lines and think you have voted only there is a good chance it wont be counted.

I have YET to hear a logical reason why ANY of these efforts is needed. None. Anyone looking at this would see only one reason why you it would happen like this – those state officials are TRYING to suppress voter turnout and invalidate the ballots of as many voters as possible.

WHY?

Let me digress for a second to pull from a blog post by Steve Benen on the MaddowBlog:

This should not be easy.

This affects every voter, regardless of party or ideology, but because Republicans benefit more from lower turnout and higher disenfranchisement, this is a purely partisan scheme to rig an election in the GOP’s favor.

OK, you’re thinking, early voting in Florida has been disgraceful, but at least voting on Election Day itself will be smoother, right? Wrong — due to Republican budget cuts, there will be fewer polling precincts this year than four years ago, meaning more long lines.

I’ll just conclude with Rachel’s conclusion: “[I]t is frankly an outrage that there are forces at work in our politics right now that not only make this type of situation possible, but that make it inevitable — who see problems like this and go out of their way to try to make it worse…. If you are one of those people being forced to stand in those long lines tonight or tomorrow or on Election Day, honestly, your country needs you to do it. Your country needs you to do it, not only because it’s your civic responsibility, but also because there are people trying to profit politically off of you not doing it.”

 

And then a quote from Rachel Maddow directly “I did not grow up with the expectation that casting a ballot was supposed to be an endurance sport.”

Voting is a right, not a privilege. There is NOT rampant voting fraud that needs to be fixed.  Voting should be EASY, ACCESSIBLE and COUNTED consistently every single time.

Oh…well, there is this one minor detail we should consider here that was alluded to in the quotes.

ALL the states creating these problems? Voter ID laws, early voting cutbacks, provisional ballot rules – ALL have Republican Governors and Secretaries of State.

Because if you cannot convince citizens to vote for you based on your POLICIES, then the next best step is to just stop the people you don’t like from casting their ballot at all.

Presidential Debate #2

What a difference two weeks, a town hall format and a much better moderator and set of questions makes!

Obama was so much better and on point this time. He didn’t let Romney get away with ANYTHING. Neither did Candy Crowley. Her follow up questions to both candidates were very strong. Her on the spot fact check on the Libya section was fabulous and it was about time a moderator took charge like that.

I was very pleased to see Obama challenge Mitt on his changes in position from the primary to the general. I was REALLY pleased to see him bring up the times Romney referred to “self deportation” as a viable immigration policy and also how frequently he brought up Romney’s pledge to pull Federal money from Planned Parenthood and how Obama tied that to the overall health of women and the impact it would have on women’s economic standing.

When Romney slid in yet another line about Obama going on “an apology tour” I was LIVID and tweeted so. I normally don’t like to show such anger at an opponent, but that line always makes me spitting mad because it is SO DAMN offensive and WRONG. Fact check after fact check has proven it wrong and yet he uses that line.

While Obama didn’t charge back on that one (letting it lay there is fine because it is really so stupid), he DID get visibly angered at Romney’s assertion/implication that the White House and the State Department employees had purposely made misstatements about the embassy attacks on Benghazi. He rightly told Romney – looking him directly in the eye with a quite a glare – that he was offended by those accusations. I loved that!

I know if you follow me on twitter you saw me so frequently say that I thought Romney’s plan is basically “magic pixie dust” – that’s because he still never stated anything close to a specific detail of what he would do. He just kept declaring “I know how to do it! I know how to create jobs! I know how to grow the economy!” How, how how? I still am not closer to knowing HOW.

Of course the best part was how Obama dropped the 47% statement at the end in a perfect moment of closure. That was an easy mark for him to hit and that he never hit it in the first debate was a clear mistake.

I firmly admit that Obama lost that first debate.

I strongly believe he won this one.

Will the GOP admit their guy was weaker this time? No way. They NEVER admit a mistake. C’est la vie!

And the big takeaway this time? Not Big Bird…(though Obama did awkwardly slide that in)…no…the internet meme that sprung up almost INSTANTLY was this one:

 

I’m pretty sure Mitt Romney’s statement that he asked his staff to bring him “binders of women” to choose from for his cabinet in Massachusetts will haunt him for a looong time.

Or, at least as long as this tumblr keeps getting submissions: http://bindersfullofwomen.tumblr.com/

Yep, not sure Romney did himself any favors with women this time:

Romney’s lazy mendacity on Obama, trade agreements

Romney’s lazy mendacity on Obama, trade agreements.

Steve Benen has been Chronicling Mitt’s Mendacity on a weekly basis. This particular lie was so so so mendacious that it had to be logged immediately.

Sadly, as the final sentence indicates, the Romney campaign keeps lying because they can – there are no significant media challenges to his falsehoods and he can always run over to Fox News for protection and cover.

Sigh………….

Debate Notes

I didn’t hang out on twitter because I didn’t want other people’s reactions to skew my own. I also knew I couldn’t multi-task nearly well enough to read and listen closely at the same time!

So, I watching while texting with my very a-political boyfriend who follows nothing other than receiving classic chain emails and opinions from a very conservative friend and then whatever he hears from me from the left.

His first text?

“Romney is getting burned right now”

Followed by:

“It just seems like Obama makes more sense”

“POTUS is very calm and collected”

“Romney has a little sarcastic humor!”

I think he fell asleep after that since he’s traveling for work in the Midwest.

Anyway – here are my own notes written into a notebook:

Blue and red ties? Really? How predictable.

Obama uses his “new economic patriotism” line again. It had been mentioned that Romney had been practicing some “zingers” and early on that seemed to be true.

“Trickle down Government” was Romney’s response to New Economic Patriotism. Jim Lehrer picked up on that quickly and asked Obama to respond to it.

“Economic Tax” was thrown out there which you could tell was intended to land something but didn’t land as well as the first.

“You only picked losers” was another one on the topic of investing in new energy companies.

After that he seemed to move away from any zingers until much later on the topic of the role of government specifically in education when he dropped the “You are entitled to your own plane and house, but not your own facts” ha ha.

Outside of the zingers – Marcus was right about their demeanors. Mitt appeared with agitated or amused or most often as if he was lecturing people who Just Don’t Get It. His tone was one of impatience and sometimes exasperation. Obama was his usual cool self. He did scowl and smirk in response to some Romney statements and took notes.

Most though, Obama used Math. He took a note from the Bill Clinton DNC speech and dazzled with facts and arithmetic. You could see it frustrated Romney a few times because he couldn’t answer to those.

Obama gave more detail not only about his own policies he has already put into place, or about his own plans for a second term, but he also gave more detail about Romney’s plans! It truly seemed like he knew much more about them than Mitt did. And, if he didn’t he frequently pointed out that the reason he didn’t is because Romney *hasn’t* put out details on a lot of key topics.

Romney continued to dodge any request for details. He would lean on vague promises with no actual plan on how he would achieve them.

Obama remained hopeful and positive about the country.

Romney, as challenger had to tack more pessimistic about the direction.

That makes sense in the framework of any Presidential election so I don’t necessarily blame Romney for that.

I’m writing this before looking at any other reactions of seeing if any fact checks have come into place BUT –

Did it seem as if Romney was presenting an entirely different tax and healthcare plans than he has ever mentioned before? I swear he was making all new claims about his never properly detailed plans.

Romney also railroaded the moderator and often corrected him or derailed the format as planned.

I thought it was a little insulting that Romney told people over 60 they could stop listening when they started talking about Social Security and Medicare. As if people that age don’t care how policies will impact their kids or grand kids.

I would also like to know what planet he was on when he stated that private insurance companies have ALWAYS covered young adults over age 19 and people with pre-existing conditions?

My disappointment with Obama is perhaps that he was, again, too nice. So many times when I was screaming responses at the TV to nonsense Romney was stating, he just ignored it. So many times he had opportunities to bring up many of the truly extreme things Romney has said in the last few months and he never rose to the bait. I know people can react badly to candidates directly attacking each other but many times Romney attacked and Obama *never* responded and certainly never counter attacked.

If you are a policy hound or, wonk as they say, then Obama was much stronger since he actually laid out specific details and math and facts. If you like mud-slinging and combative battles, then you probably thought Romney did a better job.

Of course, he has a lot of ground to make up. He needed to be aggressive and domineering and he was. It will probably tighten up the race in polling, but polling doesn’t matter one hoot. Voting matters. And I truly doubt any actual voters who are now or intend to cast their votes in the next 30 days had their minds changed. What this might drive is fund raising since it has been rumored that Romney’s big donors have been hesitant to go all in any more. So he might get a poll boost and a money boost. But there are two more debates and one VP debate and I truly doubt that Obama is going to remain this careful and professorial.

Fun stuff! I love Presidential election cycles

A hand out, or a hand up?

When you follow politics as much as I do, it makes you think about WHY you end up with the opinions that you have.

A large part of it, for me, has been watching the GOP steer away from “compassionate conservatism” as described by George W. Bush and drive head on into the judgmental, superiority complex driven attitude of rich vs poor.

Instead of simply championing less government intervention and more personal responsibility,  they are voicing some ugly and cold hearted opinions about the poor and anyone who needs government aid.

While I had heard a few snide remarks about welfare recipients in the past, this has taken an even uglier turn.

I think it is not JUST that conservatives are anti-government assistance anymore – they are anti poor PEOPLE. The anger is no longer focused on the programs, but on the recipients themselves. People. Families. Children. Fellow citizens. They seem to resent that there IS a need that government, or ANYONE must fulfill. I’m not entirely sure they would be pleased to donate to charities that could potential fill some government gaps quite frankly.

For instance, most of the wealthy in my area who I know donate plenty of time and money. But not to homeless shelters. Not to facilities that help the needy right here at home. They LOVE to talk about bringing clothing and toys to kids in orphanages in Mexico. Or they donate to the Arts or Museums or maybe to a youth sports league that caters to special needs children. They *might* take their kids to serve meals on the holidays to the poor – but only then. Make a monthly donation? Go down there every week? Oh heck no.

Then, perhaps in a particularly bad example of a conservative friend – I got into a bit of a Facebook tussle with a high school classmate that resulted in her removing me as a friend. Which is kind of awkward because she lives 10 minutes away, our sons were born in side by side delivery rooms within  minutes of each other and we both go to every reunion and high school gathering there is. So it was very very difficult to see her literally go OFF on anyone who ever used government assistance with a disdain that was palpable even through the computer.

It didn’t matter to her that I told her I had used WIC coupons for the first year of my older son’s life, then rolled off once I gained enough income to cover those costs myself.

It didn’t matter to her that people I knew who had used unemployment benefits were members of my close circle of friends and family who only used it because they truly needed it.

It didn’t matter to her that things such as tax credits for childcare, homeowner’s insurance and such are actually government benefits.  (She sure loves those!)

Or that student loans for college are, or that small business loans are (she and her husband had used both of course).

Nope – all that mattered to her was that Newt Gingrich was SPOT ON and all those damn welfare and food stamp recipients were just a bunch of lazy people sucking on the teet of the government and hardworking tax payers and that “those people” had no motivation or self-worth or self-motivation to get them off that dole!

Hmmmm….sorta sounds like the now infamous 47% of the country statement by Mitt Romney doesn’t it?

Anyway, that 48 hour fight was ugly and somewhat painful and as I said, eye opening to reveal such an ugly side to this person who I most likely will have to see next year at our 30 year reunion (ugh!)

But I think it also encapsulates one issue very well.

Does it bother you MORE that some people will take advantage of government benefits funded by your taxes (among many other things your taxes fund which you may or may not support don’t forget!)?

Or does it bother you MORE to think that the government would just turn a blind eye to those in need in order to ensure that NO ONE ever skates by?

Would you rather risk that 1 in 5 people who you reach out to give a hand up will take it too far?

Would you rather walk past ALL 5 and never once reach out a hand?

I choose reaching back to give that hand up.

That’s why I support Democrats.

 

Freedom

In an interview with 60 minutes this weekend, Mitt Romney was asked what his primary focus would be for the country should be win the election. He stated that he would bring “Freedom” to the country. Freedom.

Oh really?

Ok, I am being snarky because I understand what he is doing there completely. It’s all in how to drill down and define “freedom” really.

For the Libertarian/Conservative leaning folks it means freedom from as much, if not all, government intervention in your day to day life.

With some key exceptions of course.

Government still gets to restrict marriage to heterosexuals only. Totally fine to keep an entire group of people as second class citizens without all the rights and benefits of marriage because, you know, they don’t approve. Or really, their church doesn’t approve.

Government still gets to cut funding to Planned Parenthood effectively removing it from some areas.

Government can also allow insurance companies to restrict the health care they cover for women specifically. It will be totally OK to make it tons harder in both those examples for women to pay for birth control, well woman care and to make decisions about their own bodies.

Basically, again, because their church doesn’t approve of women having the ability to make those choices you see.

So government…err..churches…er…government…wait, aren’t those supposed to be SEPARATE?! Yeah, anyway, they can set restrictions – intervene even, in the lives of women and LGBT citizens.

Suffice it so say that my definition of freedom is a tad different.

Those government mandates and regulations that the right seems to think is chaining them to some imaginary fence preventing them from living their lives as they would choose?

Well, those mandates help to pay for a few things that I view as ENHANCING people’s freedom.

Oh, by people, I mean the less fortunate. Gasp! Horror!

Access to healthcare and insurance coverage is a basic need for everyone, rich or poor. Contrary to something else Mitt Romeny said on Sunday night, access to emergency rooms does not exactly suffice as an alternative to insurance and being able to see a regular doctor. I know because I have watched my older son struggle with this.

Emergency rooms wont help if you have ADHD or depression or need cancer treatment or have MS or lupus or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and any other of the hundreds of chronic illnesses that can debilitate someone even IF they have regular healthcare.

In other words, without access to a county/state/federally funded clinic or health insurance, your FREEDOM to maintain your health and your ability to support yourself is greatly reduced.

Without the FREEDOM to marry who you want, you can end up leaving a lifetime partner with no social security benefits, no dependent healthcare benefits. None of the things guaranteed to heterosexual couples. Think of all the inherited government benefits that the widow of Neil Armstrong received upon his death. None of those went to the widow of Sally Ride.

Those are the freedoms that mean something to me.

Libya, Egypt politician reactions in a timeline

This timeline of events (with my thoughts added) is taken from this article on the Huffington Post:

Libya And Egypt Attacks: How U.S. Politicians Reacted To Unfolding Events Abroad

TUESDAY:

Shortly before noon, EDT: The U.S. Embassy in Cairo issues a statement condemning the video promoted by anti-Muslim Florida pastor Terry Jones. “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions,” it reads. “Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”

A mob gathers outside the embassy in Cairo throughout the day, and some storm the compound by nightfall. The embassy tweets that it stood by its statement as its compound is entered.

This came out, as is noted, when the embassies began to be attacked in reaction to the ridiculous video posted on You Tube that was designed to inflame Muslims.  No one in Libya had been injured or killed at this point. The statement – BY THE EMBASSY OFFICE IN CAIRO – was a CLEAR attempt by the diplomats there to defuse the anger at the video and to try and protect the people working at the embassies in the middle east region. These people were on the ground there and most likely feeling a completely different set of circumstances than anyone over here would know about. It was issued before any state department officials were injured or killed in Libya. It is still, IMHO, quite a stretch to claim that the statement was a show or “support” for attackers storming the embassies in either compound.

However, I can see how, as events unfolded subsequently, this ends up not being the best position to take. Clearly the embassy should have added that they ALSO condemn any violence that results as a reaction to the abhorrent video.

But let’s be clear, it was NOT a statement by “The Obama administration” or President Obama.

10:09 p.m.: The Mitt Romney campaign sends out a statement embargoed for release after midnight — in other words, after the 9/11 truce for the presidential campaign has ended — attacking the Obama administration’s response to incidents in Libya and Egypt. “I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi,” Romney says. “It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

10:10 p.m.: Politico reports that the Obama administration is disavowing the statement by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.

10:25 p.m.: The embargo on Romney’s statement is prematurely lifted.

10:44 p.m.: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemns attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

Naturally, Mitt Romney couldn’t WAIT to spin that embassy statement into something to use to attack Obama directly once information comes out that the situation in Libya became deadly.  Going right to the furthest possible stretch of the facts to accuse “the Obama administration” of “sympathizing with those who waged the attacks”.  It was completely disingenuous and truly disgraceful that his statement was not one of sympathy for those killed. No, the point of the remarks was to lie about Obama.

Also – notice that the 9/11 embargo was supposed to be held until midnight EST? Because, I guess…there are NO OTHER people in America in any OTHER time zones?? Guess what folks – I was reading these statements and then a tweet that followed it before I went to bed at 10pm PST. Yep, for those of us in the Central, Mountain, Pacific and beyond time zones, our 9/11 ended with partisan blowhard statements.

Peace, love & understanding, My Ass.

WEDNESDAY:

12:01 a.m.: Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Preibus tweets, “Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic.”

12:09 a.m.: Obama campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt responds, “We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Governor Romney would choose to launch a political attack.”

That Reince Preibus tweet should, in a reasonably sane world, get him fired from his job. Again – not one WORD of sympathy to those killed. Not one word condemning the attacks. Just a straight out LIE and cheap shot aimed directly at Obama.

Sometime after midnight: Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin pens a stinging Facebook post: “Apparently President Obama can’t see Egypt and Libya from his house.” She asks when President Obama will speak out. “If he doesn’t have a ‘big stick’ to carry, maybe it’s time for him to grow one.”

6:06 a.m.: The Associated Press tweets that Libyan officials say U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other embassy staffers were killed at the Benghazi consulate, which was under attack by a mob with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades.

7:21 a.m.: President Obama issues a statement condemning the deaths in Benghazi, including the death of Ambassador Stevens. “Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America’s commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.”

8:38 a.m.: House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) condemns the attack on Americans in Libya, without criticizing Obama.

9:14 a.m.: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) issues a statement much along the same lines, condemning the attacks.

9:16 a.m.: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) condemns the attacks.

9:52 a.m.: Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) condemn the attacks. “We cannot resign ourselves to the false belief that the Arab Spring is doomed to be defined not by the desire for democracy and freedom that has inspired millions of people to peaceful action, but by the dark fanaticism of terrorists,” they say.

10:32 a.m.: Priebus tweets again, “Our prayers are w/Ambassador Stevens’ family and the families of those killed in the attacks in Libya. We mourn their loss and grieve w/them”

Please note how none of the other GOP leaders sunk to the level of Romney or Preibus. That’s telling because by the time they issued their statements, there had been 8+ hours of online outrage aimed at them. In an election year for those officials to distance themselves from their party chair and their Presidential nominee is a sign that those two folks *might* have been a tad…oh…DUMB..about their reactions.

Kudos to Mr Preibus for figuring out 10 hours later that perhaps a message of sympathy would be a nice touch.

What is missing from this timeline is that, in between live statements by Sec of State Clinton and President Obama, Mitt Romney made his own live statement AND took questions.

And? He *doubled down* on his outrage at that initial embassy statement! He AGAIN attributed those statements to President Obama and his Administration and accused the President of “apologizing” for America. Again. A ridiculous accusing he continues to level against Obama despite there being NO ACTUAL FACTS to support that characterization. Certainly there was NOTHING within the last 24 hours of actions to base that claim upon. No, Mr Romney smirked and grinned and leveled his attacks as if nothing tragic had occurred.

Worse still – when asked what he would have done differently in regards to Egypt & Libya – he had NO ANSWER!

I know that most people have already made up their minds in this election. But I really do have to wonder – if you are planning to vote for Romney – were you happy with the way he has handled these last 24 hours? How did he and Reince Preibus not make you cringe with what they said?  (I’m ignoring that SP drivel because she is simply a joke who shouldn’t even have a voice in this)

Is your Obama derangement syndrome so ingrained that you cannot see just how callous and disgraceful they were?

3 Reasons I support the Democratic Party

Full disclosure – I am stealing this blog idea from my August Mom friend who posted it to her Facebook Wall. She stole it from one of her friends so I am just continuing the tradition just on a different platform

Here’s the Rule (me and my damn rules, right?!):

I have a lot of friends that are Republicans, and I love them! I have a lot of friends that are Democrats, and I love them! Without any negativity…if you are willing…list three reasons why you support your party! (NO MEANNESS ALLOWED)

Pretty similar to my overall blog rules, right? So, here’s my entry into the topic, all issues that came from my own personal life experiences and moved me away from one party and to the other over the years:

1) Equality – LGBT equality brought me to the Democrats in the 90s. Repeal of DADT (done, yay!) and full repeal of DOMA and establishing Marriage Equality across the country (not done, but working on it) – this is my one issue that I cannot debate very nicely because I absolutely cannot even begin to wrap my brain around anything other than supporting love and granting equal legal footing to everyone. THE END.

2) Women’s right to choose how to manage their bodies and granting or maintaining full access to all healthcare options (basically another equality issue if you think about it)

3) Commitment to the social safety net – no, that doesn’t mean socialism, but it does mean caring for the least among you in their hour – or lifetime if they are disabled – of need. I think access to healthcare is a RIGHT, not a privilege and as someone who has been very thankful to have government assistance when I needed it, I will stick with the party that makes sure it is always there. Charities and churches are fabulous partners in this endeavor, but they are not everywhere all the time. This is one of the critical roles where I view Government as the best overall solution.

Your Mileage and Experiences May Vary of course

So – what say you? What are 3 positively expressed reasons why you support the party that you do?