Althouse: "President Obama’s post-election offer to sit down with vanquished GOP rival Mitt Romney has spurred talk..."

November 8, 2012

"President Obama’s post-election offer to sit down with vanquished GOP rival Mitt Romney has spurred talk..."

"... of a possible White House role for Romney, a move that could help calm jitters on Wall Street and warm the partisan chill on Capitol Hill."

318 comments:

1 – 200 of 318 Newer› Newest»

Levi Starks said...: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha; 11/8/12, 1:26 PM
Levi Starks said...: A "vulture/pirate capitalist in the White House? I think not; 11/8/12, 1:28 PM
Bob said...: Sort of like Simpson-Bowles? How did that work out?; 11/8/12, 1:29 PM
Known Unknown said...: Sure. Why not?; 11/8/12, 1:30 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Riiight.
Obama, the unrepentant radical leftwing ideologue?
riiiight.

Romney is vanquished! The headline has it! We don't need that rich white dude. We need Obama's words. We need Obama's corruption and his economic ineptitude.
Celebrity party at Beyonce’s house, suckas.; 11/8/12, 1:33 PM
Chip S. said...: Secretary of Business?; 11/8/12, 1:35 PM
Brian Johnson said...: Secretary of State?; 11/8/12, 1:35 PM
Matt Sablan said...: I think Romney will do it if asked, because he wants to fix problems. It'll be sad if Romney somehow saves Obama's legacy after Obama and his team went out of their way to lie about Romney's.; 11/8/12, 1:35 PM
Portia said...: Obama says a lot of things. He's always talking. I, for one, do not believe him in this case.; 11/8/12, 1:36 PM
bagoh20 said...: Right. The problem is nobody has given Obama any advice yet. This should change everything. I can see the little light bulb above his head right now.; 11/8/12, 1:37 PM
garage mahal said...: As long as it doesn't have any actual responsibilities I'm fine with it.; 11/8/12, 1:37 PM
Portia said...: Let him suffer on his own, after all, he WON, remember. The dipshit.; 11/8/12, 1:37 PM
Fritz said...: Romney: "Mr. President I will not be used as cover for your failed leadership on these issues. If, as I suspect, you are unable to find a solution and our country is in peril, you may call upon me for help. It will be on my terms."; 11/8/12, 1:38 PM
bleh said...: No way. Romney's a possible felon who might have killed a man's wife when he worked at Bain; a heartless financier who only wants to help the richest Americans; a caveman who wants to deprive women of control over their ladyparts; etc.

How can such a scoundrel be allowed anywhere near a position of responsibility in the Obama administration?; 11/8/12, 1:39 PM
bagoh20 said...: A Secretary of Business would be like a Police Chief of the Anarchy.; 11/8/12, 1:40 PM
Robert Cook said...: "Obama, the unrepentant radical leftwing ideologue?"

Hahahahahaha!

Yep! Just like that hardline commie bastard Jerry Ford!; 11/8/12, 1:40 PM
Autolycus said...: Setting aside the fact that he met down with McCain after 2008 and then started attacking McCain and all Republicans almost immediately after his fake show of interest in compromise ... no, I shouldn't set that aside ...

Didn't a lot of Obama's incredibly-talented and well-respected economic team (e.g. Romer, Summers, Goolsbee, etc.) quit during the first term with lots of rumors that they were unhappy about how little their recommendations were actually listened to? I seem to recall a whole lot of grumbling about how Obama's political handlers--Valerie Jarrett, raise your hand--controlled all the conversations and didn't let the actual economists give their advice.; 11/8/12, 1:42 PM
edutcher said...: Too cute.

Where's shilol?

We need him to give us Ned Silver's take on this.

PS Legacy. Choom wants somebody else to take the fall when he leaves office when all that he did that failed in the first term fails in the second.

As the Romster is 65 with an ailing wife, he may agree to a meeting, but he'll very happily retire.; 11/8/12, 1:43 PM
Paul said...: Obama met with McCain after the '08 election. It's all for show and not even original.; 11/8/12, 1:43 PM
Patrick said...: As long as it doesn't have any actual responsibilities I'm fine with it.

Nothing and no one in the Administration has (or takes) any responsibility.; 11/8/12, 1:44 PM
Paul said...: Obama met with McCain after the '08 election. It's all for show and not even original.; 11/8/12, 1:44 PM
TWM said...: Translation? "Fuck, I have no fricken idea how to turn things around so I need to ask the guy who actually does."

Romney can advise Barry but he doesn't take advice well so I don't see this going anywhere.; 11/8/12, 1:45 PM
Chip S. said...: You know, this could work out really well.

Obama as President, the public face of the operation. Romney as CEO, actually running things.; 11/8/12, 1:47 PM
tiger said...: DNRTA but I don't believe it.

1) Obama seems to believe in the Godfather's phrase of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer

2) I have a difficult time believing that Romney would let himself be 'played' like this; IF it was to happen he would be a figurehead, powerless to do anything.; 11/8/12, 1:47 PM
garage mahal said...: Ambassador to the Cayman Islands?; 11/8/12, 1:47 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Romney takes up failing enterprises and tries to fix them. I think he ran for office to fix things; if he has to circumvent that by working for Obama, he'll give it a try. Even though Obama has been fairly vile to him, refusing to even denounce the ad about Romney's role in killing that guy's wife.; 11/8/12, 1:48 PM
TWM said...: Besides, Barry and Harry and Joe can compromise all they want and it isn't going to help muc. Obamacare is a done deal and it is literally going to KICK THE ASS of every American out there both in terms of cost and quality of care. Save for the rich who will be able to pay for their care out of pocket.

Nothing anyone can do about it.; 11/8/12, 1:49 PM
Toad Trend said...: Ask Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles how that turns out.; 11/8/12, 1:49 PM
Toad Trend said...: Valerie Jarrett has Barry's advice acceptor in a lock box.

This would be a sham move that leftists love to pull. Typical window dressing to hide true intent.; 11/8/12, 1:51 PM
Anonymous said...: A stooge like Hillary?

"The problem is nobody has given Obama any advice yet."

correction: The problem is Obama hasn't taken any advice from anybody yet.; 11/8/12, 1:51 PM
campy said...: The White House kitchen needs the grease traps cleaned?; 11/8/12, 1:51 PM
Chuck said...: Tell you what; they can have Chris Christie.

We may need someone to run for John Kerry's Massachusetts senate seat after they make him Secretary of State. Scott Brown would be fine. Romney might be better.; 11/8/12, 1:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Some say he should be talking to Boehner instead, but that's just crazy talk.; 11/8/12, 1:54 PM
prairie wind said...: He's not going to ask for advice. He's just not like that. He will continue to be who he has been up to now: a lying incompetent who blames it all on someone else.; 11/8/12, 1:55 PM
X said...: with all the jobs that are about to be outsourced due to Obamacare, Obama wants they guy he accused of outsourcing jobs to come in and take the blame? no one is that stupid.; 11/8/12, 1:56 PM
Chip S. said...: This is consistent w/ those wingnut stories about how the Obamas were looking forward to moving to some lavish home in Hawaii.

"Here are the keys, Mitt. And my private phone number. Call me if you need me. Aloha!"; 11/8/12, 1:56 PM
TWM said...: "Tell you what; they can have Chris Christie."

Well, it's not like he has anywhere else to go now . . .; 11/8/12, 2:02 PM
Amartel said...: Secretary of Business?
Open and honest dialogue about Best Interests of Nation?

Naw!

Photo op. (See, e.g., Christie, Chris - bipartisan posing.); 11/8/12, 2:03 PM
Shouting Thomas said...: I don't become emotionally committed to any politician or candidate. While I preferred Romney over Obama, I was ready to live with either, providing Congress remained in opposition to the presidency.

So, I don't have any personal animosity toward either of the presidential candidates.

My sense of Romney, derived from working directly with CEOs and venture capitalists, is that he's a good guy and a patriot. I suspect he will do what he thinks is best for the country, and park his disappointment at the door.

I also think Romney is probably level headed enough to thank God for what he's got, and not to dwell on what he doesn't have.; 11/8/12, 2:03 PM
Hagar said...: That is seriously delusional.

Anybody read Robert Caro's description of Lyndon Johnson's life as vice-president under the Kennedys?; 11/8/12, 2:03 PM
TWM said...: "My sense of Romney, derived from working directly with CEOs and venture capitalists, is that he's a good guy and a patriot. I suspect he will do what he thinks is best for the country, and park his disappointment at the door."

I agree. If asked, Romney would try to help. But these two men are so fundamentally different on what they want for America and the way they should get there it just won't work. Barry is not going to change. And even if he were unles he dumps advisors like Jarrett he won't be allowed to.; 11/8/12, 2:06 PM
Matt Sablan said...: I wonder if maybe Obama realizes he needs help with big problems.

Kind of odd the number of things that happened before the election we're just hearing about now.; 11/8/12, 2:07 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: I'm surprised how in tune Garage is with Obama. A manager given a task with no responsibility is a recipe for failure because it is being responsible which spurs people to get the job done. Don't leftists know anything about the real world?; 11/8/12, 2:07 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Obama is an economic disaster on steroids. Why help him? Sadly his economic Paul Krugmanesqe bad faith will ruin our economy. That's the point. The left want to ruin the economy. Make it ripe for centralized command and control. After it fails, they can blame the video and Bush.; 11/8/12, 2:08 PM
Renee said...: It isn't like Obama will ever run again, he has 'flexibility'. Run with it. If it can be done, I say do it. Our country is culturally divided, and most definitely will make Obama into a true 'healer'.; 11/8/12, 2:09 PM
Comanche Voter said...: When donkeys fly.; 11/8/12, 2:10 PM
Hagar said...: I think we are frozen in place until at least January 2015. (I hope all those little red arrows on the NYT map points to another 2010 in 2014!)

No substantive legislation from the House is going to pass the Senate - or, as we have seen, will not even be taken up - and Obama will attempt to govern by executtive fiat. Again, until 2015 at least he will likely get away with it, since no impeachment proceeding against him will succeed in the Senate, regardless of what it may be for.; 11/8/12, 2:11 PM
mccullough said...: The Business Czar!; 11/8/12, 2:13 PM
shiloh said...: Although Willard longed to be king, he'd agree to be Obama's gofer. Since Romney has no core, Obama can easily string him along on a leash.

From severely conservative to a moderate in a NY minute. Hey, Willard's gonna have a lot of free time.; 11/8/12, 2:14 PM
Rabel said...: Secretay of ladyparts?

Silly speculation by a columnist looking for page views.

On the other hand Matalin is married to Carville.

Mitt, you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas. And in this case you would get blamed for bringing the fleas.; 11/8/12, 2:15 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: I, for one, would be curious to finally hear what tax deductions Romney was going to eliminate. It would be interesting to see him head a committee on streamlining the tax code.; 11/8/12, 2:16 PM
garage mahal said...: If you embiggen Rabel's avatar, it looks like Steve Buscemi with a wig on.; 11/8/12, 2:17 PM
Michael said...: Maybe Romney will be asked to be the new Secretary of Business because we really need a cabinet level position in competition with the Secretary of Commerce. Romney is good at competition so perhaps he would succeed in forcing the Commerce Dept to either merge into the Business Department or move its jobs to India.; 11/8/12, 2:18 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Here are some helpful ideas for Obama from Erskine Bowles, who served as chief of staff to President Bill Clinton. I'm 100% confident Obama will reject them. Why?
Obama is a stubborn radical leftwing ideologue. Like his contemporaries Reid and Pelosi, Obama lives to tax, spend, waste, destory, and give your money to his democrat client class. Your money - gone. That's a good thing in Obama's world.; 11/8/12, 2:20 PM
Michael said...: A Reasonable Man: I believe the Romney idea was to limit deductions by income levels and to have for each tax bracket a maximum number of deductions that could be selected from the currently available deductions. He might have intended to remove the home mortgage deduction for high income tax payers but his "basket" system would not have required that.; 11/8/12, 2:21 PM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: If Obama was the wise choice, why do we need his opponent to calm jitters and bridge the partisan divide. Aren't these things a leader is expected to do?

Leadership and responsibility weren't O's strong suit in the first term. It's now time for him to step up. After all, he has more flexibility now.; 11/8/12, 2:24 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Obama has never even invited a moderate like Scott Brown to join in his pickup b-ball games. Obama is a hater and a far left lib. That is who he is and he only associates with other far left libs. He will not invite Romney to do anythng.

Wake the f up people.; 11/8/12, 2:25 PM
Shouting Thomas said...: Although Willard longed to be king, he'd agree to be Obama's gofer. Since Romney has no core, Obama can easily string him along on a leash.

As you can see... the asshole act of the leftist. Bitterness and hatred without regard, even, for whether they've won or lost.

The eternally pissed off stance is really a personal weakness in search of a scapegoat.; 11/8/12, 2:25 PM
Bob Ellison said...: Secretary of Makers. Secretary of 49%.; 11/8/12, 2:26 PM
David said...: Hoo, boy. They'll listen to Mitt all right.

What a crock. Keep holding that pose, Barack.; 11/8/12, 2:27 PM
Franklin said...: Romney's a racist.; 11/8/12, 2:28 PM
Anonymous said...: What did he do when Paul Ryan fell into his meet-trap?; 11/8/12, 2:28 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: When the president of the United States asks a citizen for help, he be well advised not to turn him down.

Specially a citizen that just finished telling as many Americans as his purse could reach that he wanted to be of service.

Its Romneys choice... but I hope he takes him up on it.; 11/8/12, 2:28 PM
Franklin said...: Let it freaking burn.; 11/8/12, 2:29 PM
Nichevo said...: garage mahal said...

Ambassador to the Cayman Islands?

11/8/12 1:47 PM

Well the ambassador to the Cayman Islands is unlikely to be raped and murdered by Islamic terrorists. So no, I don't think Obama would offer Romney that position.; 11/8/12, 2:29 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Michael said...
A Reasonable Man: I believe the Romney idea was to limit deductions by income levels and to have for each tax bracket a maximum number of deductions that could be selected from the currently available deductions. He might have intended to remove the home mortgage deduction for high income tax payers but his "basket" system would not have required that.

I actually did hear this, but I think it only came up very late in the cycle, after he was repeatedly being pressed for details on specific deductions to be eliminated.

I thought this was a brilliant idea. The congress and president would be advised to strongly consider this. None of them have enough backbone to deal with the ridiculous proliferation of deductions and the lobbyists who support them. This would give them an easy way out. It could be phased in over a period of ten years or so with the final step being a complete elimination of all deductions and a dramatic simplifying of the tax code.; 11/8/12, 2:33 PM
Rabel said...: garage wrote:

"If you embiggen Rabel's avatar, it looks like Steve Buscemi with a wig on."

That's one of Charlie's Angels. Charlie Manson that is.

"Sadie" was an intelligent woman who was led far astray by a charismatic, narcissistic egomaniac. For some reason, can't quite put my finger on it, it seemed a better fit than my "Hazel" avatar.; 11/8/12, 2:37 PM
Paul said...: Oh bull. Obama isn't gonna talk to Romney. The press are just playing with this.; 11/8/12, 2:38 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "I actually did hear this, but I think it only came up very late in the cycle"

If by "late in the cycle" you mean sometime in late 2011, you would be correct. If however, when you say "late in the cycle" you mean "late in the cycle," you would be incorrect.; 11/8/12, 2:39 PM
Rabel said...: Is the Libyan ambassador's job still open?; 11/8/12, 2:40 PM
Lydia said...: How about this scenario? Biden resigns, Obama appoints Romney vice president.

Hey, Reggie Jackson’s cool with it.; 11/8/12, 2:40 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: AJ Lynch said...
Obama has never even invited a moderate like Scott Brown to join in his pickup b-ball games.

Not unreasonably, Obama sees playing basketball as a recreation. The last thing I wanted to do, when I could still play basketball, was talk about work or deal with work related shit. Even the president should take some time off. I can never understand why people think work drones make better decisions or produce more than people who lead a more balanced life. In my experience the opposite is generally true. And this is coming from someone who spent years working every day of the week and never taking a vacation.; 11/8/12, 2:41 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Obama went golfing with Boehner. Part of these sorts of efforts are to try and get politicians to see each other as people and dull the partisanship.; 11/8/12, 2:43 PM
BarrySanders20 said...: "Sadie" was an intelligent woman who was led far astray by a charismatic, narcissistic egomaniac.

Garage and many other Obama voters get this.

On an unrelated note, Manson's followers thought late term abortions for any reason should be legal too.; 11/8/12, 2:43 PM
ricpic said...: A new party will coalesce around those who unequivocally oppose the tyrant. First order of business, say no to the next raise the debt ceiling shenanigans. Make it crystal clear that Obama and his fellow marxists OWN the fiscal cliff when we go over it. Any crossing the aisle gutlessness at this point by Boehner and McConnell dooms the party.; 11/8/12, 2:43 PM
Seeing Red said...: Geitner might be stepping down. If it's Commerce, Mitt should talk to Bill Daley - he couldn't do anything either and he tried.

If that's the position Barry suggests - Mitt should decline.

It won't matter, they're taxing things they don't want which is energy. Energy which warms & feeds us relatively cheaply. It doesn't make any sense.

It doesn't matter what else they do.; 11/8/12, 2:44 PM
Toad Trend said...: "That's one of Charlie's Angels. Charlie Manson that is."

Is it just me, or is there something oddly attractive about Rabel's avatar???; 11/8/12, 2:45 PM
jungatheart said...: Chait:

"The odd thing about the debt-ceiling debacle is that the deal Obama tried to cut with Republicans may have been absurdly generous, but the deal he actually got was pretty favorable. It required the establishment of a bipartisan commission that had to agree to $1.5 trillion worth of reductions—which, of course, it could not, for the same reason every other bipartisan deficit negotiation failed—or else automatic cuts would take place in 2013. Because Republicans refused to allow higher revenue to make up any part of those cuts, and insisted all the automatic deficit reduction consist of lower spending, Obama made his own demand: that he have a greater say in what kind of spending would suffer cuts. Social Security and Medicare benefits were exempted, though cuts to Medicare providers were not. Programs that benefit the poor were likewise spared, but defense absorbed a huge proportion of the automatic cuts.

The idea was to turn the Republican coalition against itself. As the clock ticked toward January, doctors, hospitals, and—most especially—defense contractors would be confronted with terrifyingly large reductions in their income stream. Voiding those cuts would require convincing Obama to sign a law undoing them, which he would not do unless the replacement plan met his definition of fairness, which meant including higher tax revenue from the rich. This has had precisely its intended effect. Executives and lobbyists have begun to beseech Republicans to accept a budget deal that includes higher revenue along with lower spending. Republican defense hawks like John McCain and Lindsey Graham have signed a letter calling for a “balanced bipartisan deficit reduction package,” which is Beltway code for a deal mixing taxes and spending.

What really lured Republicans into a trap was the timing of the arrangement. The beginning of 2013, when the automatic spending cuts take effect, coincides with the expiration of every penny of the Bush tax cuts. And so, by postponing the fiscal reckoning, Republicans inadvertently scheduled it for the very moment when Obama (should he win reelection) will hold his maximum leverage. Last summer, Obama was pleading with Boehner to give him $800 billion in additional revenue. Come January, he’ll have $5 trillion in higher revenue without doing anything. Since Obama’s own budget proposes to raise only $1.5 trillion in new revenue and trim entitlement spending, he could then offer Republicans a deal that cuts taxes (by, say, a couple trillion dollars), increases military spending, and reduces entitlement spending. In other words, he could offer a right-wing bill—and the end result would be a mix of policies to the left of his own budget, and to the left of the Simpson-Bowles proposal.

...Bipartisan agreement is not necessary to fix the debt. Nothing is necessary to fix the debt. It is as if the network of activists, wonks, business leaders, and Beltway elder statesmen who have devoted themselves to building cross-party support for a deficit deal have grown more attached to the means of bipartisanship than to the ends for which it was intended. The budget deficit is a legislatively solved problem. It is, indeed, an oversolved problem. In the absence of any agreement between the president and Congress, the deficit will shrink to less than one percent of the economy by 2018, and remain below that level through 2022. The budget deficit declines so sharply and so drastically, and in ways that neither party is entirely comfortable with, that the task for Washington is to pull back on deficit reduction."

http://nymag.com/news
/politics/elections
-2012/obama-romney-
economic-plans-2012
-10/index3.html; 11/8/12, 2:45 PM
Seeing Red said...: My wife is ill, I'll be happy to consult.; 11/8/12, 2:46 PM
BarryD said...: "Police Chief of the Anarchy."

A position for which I hereby volunteer (of course).; 11/8/12, 2:46 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Matthew Sablan said...
"I actually did hear this, but I think it only came up very late in the cycle"

If by "late in the cycle" you mean sometime in late 2011, you would be correct. If however, when you say "late in the cycle" you mean "late in the cycle," you would be incorrect.

Can you document this? Romney and Ryan ducked an awful lot of questions about specific eliminations for a long time. If this plan had be central to their policy from the get go they could have avoided all that "shucking and jiving", to quote Sarah Palins immortal phrase; 11/8/12, 2:46 PM
chickelit said...: Rabel's avatar does remind me a photo of young Althouse that she put up a while back. The one where reader remarked that she looked a little like one of the Manson girls.; 11/8/12, 2:47 PM
BarryD said...: "Tell you what; they can have Chris Christie."

They can make him the obesity czar, to free up Michelle to go on even more lavish vacations.; 11/8/12, 2:48 PM
Chip S. said...: Reminds me of Inga.

Atkins diet and all that.; 11/8/12, 2:48 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Matthew Sablan said...
Obama went golfing with Boehner. Part of these sorts of efforts are to try and get politicians to see each other as people and dull the partisanship.

This is not a bad thing. I just don't think he is obligated to wreck every game by having to drag along Boehner or someone similar.; 11/8/12, 2:49 PM
test said...: Please, this is political grandstanding so idiots like garage can claim Obama is bipartisan.; 11/8/12, 2:49 PM
Chip S. said...: My previous comment was about Rabel's avatar, not Christie's avoirdupois.; 11/8/12, 2:50 PM
shiloh said...: "Bitterness and hatred"

ST's childish projection.

If Clinton can be the Secretary of explaining stuff ...

Willard can be the Secretary of makin' stuff up!; 11/8/12, 2:51 PM
mark said...: Obama: "Hey Mitt. I hear you are good at the hard science-y thing call 'Math-e-mathics'. Is that true? Cause once letters get involved with numbers my brain starts to melt down!"; 11/8/12, 2:51 PM
Toad Trend said...: "Any crossing the aisle gutlessness at this point by Boehner and McConnell dooms the party."

This is a no-win situation.

The dems have already announced their mandate to raise taxes on whoever they deem as wealthy.

The GOP will be fileted by the press for 'gridlock'. They will be skewered by the far-right if they give in to the democrats.

This is going to be ugly.; 11/8/12, 2:51 PM
Matt Sablan said...: As early as Nov. 2011, Romney was working on explaining specifics of his tax plan and working to find a compromise plan that could pass muster.

The fact you are not aware of this is troubling, since you've undoubtedly misled many people by declaring Romney as not being open about his plans and unsure of them. Even worse, you've probably let any number of media repeat this lie to you time and again without critically thinking about it.

Face it: You're one of the many low-information voters that Democrats complained about in 2004 and 2010 and that Republicans complained about in 2006 and 2012.; 11/8/12, 2:52 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Marshal said...
Please, this is political grandstanding so idiots like garage can claim Obama is bipartisan.

If you also read some left leaning blogs, as opposed to relying on a monochromatic diet of news, you would know that most on the left think Obama has tried much too hard to be bipartisan in the past. I happen to think he tried too hard in some instances. I think Obama genuinely believes in bipartisan approaches, despite essentially endless evidence that this doesn't work in the current political climate.

On the left there is the strong feeling that Obama is very naive on this issue. It definintely doesn't work for him politically.; 11/8/12, 2:54 PM
Toad Trend said...: "Reminds me of Inga.

Atkins diet and all that."

Its not Inga's avatar that makes her ugly.; 11/8/12, 2:56 PM
chuck said...: Well, we'll see if this is anything serious. I have my doubts, but I always thought Romney better suited to a cabinet position than to president.; 11/8/12, 2:56 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "I think Obama genuinely believes in bipartisan approaches, despite essentially endless evidence that this doesn't work in the current political climate. "

-- Obama has made exactly zero honest attempts at bi-partisanship. From "I won" to tossing the Simpson-Bowles plan, to how he managed the ACA -- there is not one iota of evidence that he has done anything remotely bi-partisan that wasn't an obvious thing to do, like show up for a major disaster and say "Yeah, we'll help."; 11/8/12, 2:57 PM
Levi Starks said...: Is it just me, or is there something oddly attractive about Rabel's avatar???

in an adams family sort of way.... yes; 11/8/12, 2:57 PM
Levi Starks said...: "I think Obama genuinely believes in bipartisan approaches, despite essentially endless evidence that this doesn't work in the current political climate. "

Keeeeep on beleeeevin, hold on to what you got.; 11/8/12, 2:59 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...

Romney and Ryan ducked an awful lot of questions about specific eliminations for a long time.

The elections over, you don't have to keep up the idiotic pretense you care so much about policy you voted for a guy whose entire campaign was Hopenchange.; 11/8/12, 3:00 PM
Toad Trend said...: "If you also read some left leaning blogs, as opposed to relying on a monochromatic diet of news, you would know that most on the left think Obama has tried much too hard to be bipartisan in the past."

Fine. This is illustrative, as it shows the gulf between perceptions - I happen to agree with Matthew that Obama wouldn't know bipartisanship if it bitchslapped him upside his melon.; 11/8/12, 3:01 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...

If you also read some left leaning blogs, as opposed to relying on a monochromatic diet of news, you would know that most on the left think Obama has tried much too hard to be bipartisan in the past.

In fact I do realize you're all idiots.; 11/8/12, 3:02 PM
ampersand said...: Willard can be the Secretary of makin' stuff up!

Obama already has Bernake doing that.

BTW everyone's taxes are going up in January, everyone. The lowest tax bracket by 50%.; 11/8/12, 3:04 PM
LoafingOaf said...: It makes sense since Obama and Romney agreed on most shit in the debates.; 11/8/12, 3:04 PM
Known Unknown said...: I'm all for simplifying the tax code.

I remember going to my father's office when I was young, and he had a row of about 8 binders that were as thick as stumps, and then 2 other slightly smaller binders next to them. The first eight were the tax code. The next two were books that explained the firt eight.

Eliminate deductions and loopholes. Lower rates across the board. Lower corporate rates to bring companies back to the shores (like Ireland has).

Eliminate or curtail ag subsidies and corporate subsidies of any kind.; 11/8/12, 3:04 PM
Seeing Red said...: --Romney and Ryan ducked an awful lot of questions about specific eliminations for a long time.---

So did Barry.

Maybe if he sat on Harry in the past 3-1/2 years to get a budget?; 11/8/12, 3:04 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Funny, the adult in the room, Mitt Romney - who lost - is still the adult in the room.

He is vanquished! No wait - please come back. We need you, Mitt.
Come back so we can dump on you, blame you and scapegoat you.; 11/8/12, 3:05 PM
dbp said...: garage mahal said...
As long as it doesn't have any actual responsibilities I'm fine with it.

You realize that the presidency does have actual responsibilities?

Oh! you meant Romney? The guy who has been successful at everything he's touched.

Seriously, I think Romney is a big enough man that he would set feelings aside and accept a meaningfull post such as Sec. of Treasury. I am pretty sure what Obama had in mind for a sec of business is a dept. specifically for regulating business. No thanks!; 11/8/12, 3:05 PM
Toad Trend said...: Community organizers don't 'do' bipartisanship - they agitate, and rub raw emotions of those they dub victims.

He'll have the dem establishment and the press all in a lather over the 'stonewalling' of the GOP.; 11/8/12, 3:05 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: These are quotes from the article to which you linked so approvingly.

“Romney's more conventional tax plan has largely flown under the radar. That's exactly the way he wants it.”

“He promises to lower ordinary income tax rates—but to unspecified levels at some unidentified time in the future.”

“He doesn’t say how all this would work, but allowing firms full expensing, adding an investment credit, and letting them continue to take an interest deduction all on the same equipment would result in massive subsidies on capital purchases.”

“These corporate tax cuts would also dramatically increase the deficit.”

“He also promises to move to a territorial system, where only income earned in the U.S. would be subject to U.S. corporate income tax. But again he provides no details.”

Nowhere in the article is there a mention of limiting personal tax deductions across all income groups.; 11/8/12, 3:06 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "The guy who has been successful at everything he's touched."

-- Except getting elected.; 11/8/12, 3:06 PM
Seeing Red said...: I think Jon Corzine is a better prospect anyway. Where'd the billions go, Jon?

I don't know.

And he's still scot-free.; 11/8/12, 3:09 PM
Colonel Angus said...: As long as it doesn't have any actual responsibilities I'm fine with it.

That's not surprising since Obama hasn't assumed any and you seem fine with that.; 11/8/12, 3:09 PM
chickelit said...: AReasonableMan said...
If you also read some left leaning blogs, as opposed to relying on a monochromatic diet of news, you would know that most on the left think Obama has tried much too hard to be bipartisan in the past.

The Left has their entrenched positions and the Right has theirs. Those who even peek up out of the trenches or dare to meet in No Man's Land are mostly shot down.

And FYI Inga, bipartisanship does not mean "be reasonable and come over to my side because we won the latest battle."; 11/8/12, 3:10 PM
Seeing Red said...: Iran fired on an unarmed U.S. drone last week as it was hovering in international airspace, the Pentagon announced Thursday.

Yeah, "Mr. Flexible" will be a lot more fun, if I lived in Georgia, I'd be getting the hell out.

Poor Taiwan.; 11/8/12, 3:11 PM
Seeing Red said...: ...Two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed U.S. Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf last week, CNN has learned.

The incident raises fresh concerns within the Obama administration about Iranian military aggression in crucial Gulf oil shipping lanes....

Of course, if we could drill....maybe they wouldn't be as crucial.

But we can't have that.; 11/8/12, 3:13 PM
Toad Trend said...: Areas on a bleman

Your attempts to explain life inside your bubble fail, as do your attempts to besmirch Mr. Romney.

Besides, your guy 'Won'.

Now run along.; 11/8/12, 3:13 PM
jungatheart said...: From American Conservative, some ideas that Romney may have been considering. Can't remember where I read it, but someone wrote that this would work if the lost tax breaks would begin with those earning 100K, but Mitt insisted his plan would start at 250K.

"One of the flashpoints of the now-concluded presidential race was over how Mitt Romney would offset his proposal to cut taxes $3.6 trillion (over 10 years) below the current Bush rates. Publicly, the campaign served up only the vaguest assurances that “the math works”; that they would limit or eliminate tax deductions and the wealthy wouldn’t benefit as handsomely as they do today. In the second debate, President Obama derided this proposal as a “sketchy idea.” Yet this quite large pot of money has been hiding in plain view on Capitol Hill since the days when Dan Rostenkowski reigned over the Ways & Means Committee.

Bruce Bartlett’s book The Benefit and the Burden is a great primer on this area of fiscal policy. The big kahunas are the exclusion for employer-provided health insurance (costing $434 billion in income and payroll taxes annually), the mortgage-interest deduction (about $100 billion), and the deduction for charitable contributions ($53 billion). Other tax expenditures include the deduction for property taxes and, Bartlett notes, the tax-free status of Medicare (since seniors consume more than they pay into the system over their lifetime, you can look at those benefits as a kind of income)."

http://www.theamerican
conservative.com/
the-makings-of-a
-deal-on-the-fiscal
-cliff-romney-
ryan-without-rate-cuts/; 11/8/12, 3:15 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: I predict the world is going to go to hell over the next four years.
No worries. Party at Beyonce's!; 11/8/12, 3:16 PM
Alex said...: After FIC(Fucktard in Chief) revenge speech, no way.; 11/8/12, 3:16 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Ah. I'm sorry; yet again, I assume that cafeteria tax plans were known to be a common method of simplifying the tax code. It's something that has been bandied about a lot, so I simply assumed when people talk about you know, doing that, we all were pulling from a shared knowledge of what we're talking about.; 11/8/12, 3:17 PM
Colonel Angus said...: I think Obama genuinely believes in bipartisan approaches, despite essentially endless evidence that this doesn't work in the current political climate.

Next time don't start out as a dick by proclaiming to the opposition 'I won'. Seeking bi-partisan ship also means not telling the opposition that they belong in the back seat. Those liberal bloggers are idiots but I repeat myself.; 11/8/12, 3:17 PM
garage mahal said...: Maybe, maybe if Romney coughed up 10 yrs of tax returns, and personally apologized to Americans for his untruthful and reckless campaign, Obama should agree to a sit down. Even then...; 11/8/12, 3:19 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: deborah said...
From American Conservative, some ideas that Romney may have been considering.

He may have been considering them and I agree with most of them. The complexity of the tax code has become a form a institutionalized corruption. What Romney didn't do is make this case forcefully and often.; 11/8/12, 3:19 PM
jungatheart said...: "I assume that cafeteria tax plans were known to be a common method of simplifying the tax code."

Never hoid of 'em, but they sound sensible.; 11/8/12, 3:20 PM
Tank said...: I wouldn't pass up a free lunch at the White House. Does Romney have to go to the Bibi door? Can he take home some gifts?

Then just decline to take on the job.; 11/8/12, 3:22 PM
Seeing Red said...: --Nowhere in the article is there a mention of limiting personal tax deductions across all income groups.--

Some of us pointed it out to you more than once.

Of course, he did have a website with information.....

Was it too hard?; 11/8/12, 3:24 PM
jungatheart said...: ARM, I don't think they would have been greeted with agreement, and as I said in my first para, he'd have to back off the 250K threshhold for them to work...(I don't know from economics.); 11/8/12, 3:25 PM
bagoh20 said...: Looks like Althouse didn't get what she thought she would by electing Obama the first time. There has been no accepting or assignment of responsibility to Democrats for what they have done. Then she votes against him just before he is gonna be forced to take responsibility.

The left will never blame him even if we go into a depression, and it turns out he is the anti-Christ.; 11/8/12, 3:26 PM
shiloh said...: Looks like Bagoh20 didn't get what he wanted either ...

"bagoh20 said...

My Final Prediction:
Romney 310 / Obama 228

Note: Romney up 92K in OH early voting?"

blessings; 11/8/12, 3:30 PM
Known Unknown said...: Then just decline to take on the job.

Part of me says he should go and make it BFD.

"I'm glad you've brought me here to help you take care of some of the nation's most pressing problems you failed to address in your first term ... "; 11/8/12, 3:31 PM
Known Unknown said...: What Romney didn't do is make this case forcefully and often.

Look around. No one gives a shit about the tax code.

How to approach this? Bring the tax books to a debate. Wheel them in on a cart, and then stack them LOUDLY in between the 2 podiums as your opponent looks on.

Then again, Republicans are lousy at theater.; 11/8/12, 3:34 PM
garage mahal said...: My Final Prediction:
Romney 310 / Obama 228

Forgot to remind bagoh on this, he had quite a bit to say in the run up to the election how wrong I was going to be.

Hate to toot my own horn here, but my prediction? 49 of 50 states correct!; 11/8/12, 3:35 PM
jacksonjay said...: As I recall, the ad said that Romney was not the "solution" he was the "problem'!; 11/8/12, 3:36 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Matthew Sablan said...
Ah. I'm sorry; yet again, I assume that cafeteria tax plans were known to be a common method of simplifying the tax code. It's something that has been bandied about a lot, so I simply assumed when people talk about you know, doing that, we all were pulling from a shared knowledge of what we're talking about.

This is a very different argument from arguing that Romney was a strong and persistent proponent of such a plan, across the board and for both personal and business income, which is what it would take to effectively simplify the tax code.

This being said, I do think such a plan can achieve some support on both the left and the right. I would like to see this idea advanced further. It has to include corporate deductions to have any chance of appealing to the left and Romney clearly was not proposing this. Instead he came up with more tax breaks for business. To actually simplify the code it also has to extend across all personal income groups, which won’t be very appealing to the left.

G.E. pays no tax on billions in profit. This is corruption, pure and simple, yet no one seems willing to do anything about it.; 11/8/12, 3:37 PM
MadisonMan said...: Hate to toot my own horn here

People who say that usually don't hate it at all :)

Nice predictions, however. I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be getting slammed pretty ferociously hereabouts.; 11/8/12, 3:38 PM
Bob said...: Mitch just needs to say "I don't do beer summits"; 11/8/12, 3:38 PM
DADvocate said...: As long as it doesn't have any actual responsibilities I'm fine with it.

Romney can accept responsibility. Dems and liberals, not so much.

Obama likes meaningless, symbolic drinking of beers.; 11/8/12, 3:38 PM
MadisonMan said...: I agree that this is for show.

I think Romney would serve if he were asked, but it would not be a visible role -- not like a Cabinet position -- but rather an emissary type thing. Special Envoy.; 11/8/12, 3:40 PM
shiloh said...: "No one gives a shit about the tax code."

Voters also didn't care about Willard/Ryan harping on Obama sayin' "voting is the best revenge" either. They actually wasted a couple days and did a commercial re: this irrelevant minutiae. Too funny!

Presidential elections are all about the big picture!

Ryan/mittens were totally not ready for prime time, whereas Obama had a finely tuned political machine which had been up and runnin' for (6) years.; 11/8/12, 3:40 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: EMD said...
What Romney didn't do is make this case forcefully and often.

Look around. No one gives a shit about the tax code.

At least one thing we can agree on. It is a fucking disgrace.

Although the US is not a particulary corrupt country by standard measures, if you consider the tax code and contributions to political campaigns it is arguably one of the most corrupt countries on the planet.; 11/8/12, 3:40 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...
He may have been considering them and I agree with most of them. The complexity of the tax code has become a form a institutionalized corruption. What Romney didn't do is make this case forcefully and often.

Interesting that this same commenter insisted forcefully and often this didn't happen. Now there's proof it did but amazingly the goalposts have moved.

There's nothing more central to leftism than the ability to continue to believe your conclusion after the facts have proven your reasoning wrong.; 11/8/12, 3:42 PM
Known Unknown said...: G.E. pays no tax on billions in profit.

Not quite.; 11/8/12, 3:44 PM
carrie said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 11/8/12, 3:45 PM
carrie said...: Obama doesn't have a plan to fix the economy so I bet that he wants Romney to give his plan to him.; 11/8/12, 3:45 PM
shiloh said...: "you'd be getting slammed pretty ferociously hereabouts."

The yin and yang of political winners and losers. No biggie, except to diehard Althouse cons who absolutely feel they should never lose a presidential election regardless.

Many of these fools came of age in the era of Dutch and probably felt every election would be like Reagan's '84 landslide.; 11/8/12, 3:45 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Marshal said...
Interesting that this same commenter insisted forcefully and often this didn't happen. Now there's proof it did but amazingly the goalposts have moved.

No. I said that it came up as a real issue only late in the campaign, under duress. Try again.

Personally I have no idea what Romney truly believed. Maybe this was a big issue with him. That was certainly not clear from his campaign.; 11/8/12, 3:47 PM
Bob said...: Obama: "Hey Mitt, it was just politics, nothing personal. Hey, can you spare a few million? Tim seems to be a little short."; 11/8/12, 3:47 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: EMD said...
G.E. pays no tax on billions in profit.

You are right, I should have said G.E. pays no corporate income taxes. That makes me feel a whole lot better.; 11/8/12, 3:49 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...
No. I said that it came up as a real issue only late in the campaign, under duress. Try again.

That's what you said today. During the campaign you insisted 1,000 times he had no plan at all. Maybe you are that guy who forgets everything once it falls out of short term memory.; 11/8/12, 3:50 PM
Indigo Red said...: If true, it's a "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" kind of deal.; 11/8/12, 3:53 PM
SteveR said...: Romney: Czar of all things I'm actually better qualified for.; 11/8/12, 3:53 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: The more i think about this the funnier it is....Obama invites the eeeevil outsourcer, the killer of cancer victims, the flip-flopper whose plan was from the same old Repub playbook to come to the White House and show Obama how to do simple arithmetic and pare the budget.; 11/8/12, 3:56 PM
Bob said...: Obama: "Mitt, you show me your tax returns and I'll show you my college transcripts.

Debt plan, economic plan? Man who can deal with all those numbers!

Hey, how about a round a golf?"; 11/8/12, 3:57 PM
Anonymous said...: This one's yours, Barry, start activating and organizing and getting people where you want them to be on your own.; 11/8/12, 3:59 PM
Seeing Red said...: All the problems investors face—from a fiscal meltdown to the various economic woes around the world—add up to one daunting prospect: Another possible recession just over the horizon.

LOLOLOL; 11/8/12, 4:00 PM
wyo sis said...: "Don't give a shit about the tax code."
It's funny the things you don't give a shit about until suddenly you give a lot of shit about it but it's too late.
Did I say funny. Only in the sense that Inga is funny.
I've got to get over this Inga obsession.; 11/8/12, 4:02 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: The country's psyche & economy have been held back by a huge deficit of confidence.

Romney's election would have done a lot to negate that confidence deficit. But when the incumbent gets re-elected, the confidence deficit lingers on and on until we get some big signal that things will get better.; 11/8/12, 4:06 PM
Mr. Irene said...: Timing is everything: Steven Speilberg's Lincoln movie, based on Kearns's Team of Rivals, is set for limited release tomorrow, Nov 9(everywhere Nov 16).; 11/8/12, 4:07 PM
chickelit said...: wyo sis said...
I've got to get over this Inga obsession.

Please don't. Some call Inga devisive, but I think she's a uniter of reasonable conversatives.; 11/8/12, 4:08 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: I'm going to sound like a broken record over the next few years.
The Obama administration has one plan: Remove as much private economic wealth as possible from the private sector.
The economy will "unexpectedly" fail. This is what they want.; 11/8/12, 4:09 PM
a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...: Tomasky says over at The Daily Beast that Romney 'sucked up to an extremist party' to get the nomination. Such might be the actions of a former management consultant. He does have ideas about budget and taxes and it would be nice if the next Obama budget got a vote in the House; maybe he could help with getting that together while accepting some of Obama's preferences as he did the Republican parties social positions.; 11/8/12, 4:09 PM
Baron Zemo said...: Romney will never do this. He would be stupid if he did.

How did it work out for Hillary when she came in to help the One.

It is Obama Time.

Let him do what he intends to do.; 11/8/12, 4:09 PM
test said...: AJ Lynch said...
The country's psyche & economy have been held back by a huge deficit of confidence.

Romney's election would have done a lot to negate that confidence deficit. But when the incumbent gets re-elected, the confidence deficit lingers on and on until we get some big signal that things will get better.

They're waiting the see how he's going to tax them next. Does he think business owners and managers weren't listening when he said company X "doesn't need any more profit" to justify confiscating it? They know it's coming, we all know it's coming.; 11/8/12, 4:10 PM
Mr. Irene said...: Timing is everything: Steven Speilberg's Lincoln movie, based on Kearns's Team of Rivals, opens in big cities tomorrow, November 9, and everywhere November 16.

Now the movie can be based on events "ripped from the headlines!"; 11/8/12, 4:11 PM
mark said...: Obama: "Hey Mitt. When I was taking Physics for Poets we talked on and on about existentialism and how everything is just a wave until you look at it and then it .. uh ... uh ... uh ... turns into a solid ... by ... uh ... just LOOKING at it man!

So .. uh ... is that ... uh ... why we don't have enough money to pay my ... uh ... girls vacations?"; 11/8/12, 4:12 PM
test said...: a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...
Tomasky says over at The Daily Beast that Romney 'sucked up to an extremist party' to get the nomination.

How does Tomassky reconcile the election with his belief that we recently underwent a Republican backed coup d'etat? Tomasky may be the biggest idiot writing anywhere.

Except if you count blog commeters, then he's second to garage.; 11/8/12, 4:13 PM
Seeing Red said...: Poor Micky D's can't sell their food. Worst numbers since the Great Depression of 2003?; 11/8/12, 4:18 PM
garage mahal said...: Except if you count blog commeters, then he's second to garage.

What you really mean is that you hate the fact that I post here.; 11/8/12, 4:22 PM
Bob said...: Mitt: "Obama, you won. My money's offshore. Bye"; 11/8/12, 4:23 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: garage mahal said...
Except if you count blog commeters, then he's second to garage.

What you really mean is that you hate the fact that I post here.

Yes it is odd since he has nothing to say himself. The most singularly vacuous commentor on the blog.; 11/8/12, 4:26 PM
ricpic said...: "Inga the dolt, Inga the dolt,
I can't stop obsessing on her."

"How cloistered, madame, unstoried, untold;
World with dolts is thick strewn all astir."; 11/8/12, 4:27 PM
Bob said...: Inga, FYI

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49745604; 11/8/12, 4:28 PM
B said...: Romney should say,

'Sure, how about I come by the White House next Thursday at 9? Have some reporters stand by. I'll bring the wife and she and Michelle can get a few photo-ops in too."

Then blow him off.

After all, what does Mitt have to lose at this point. He's wealthy. I doubt he'll run for anything ever again. He doesn't need any good will from the democrats. And even a forgiving man like Mitt with huge compassion and fulsome charity for his fellow man must have been deeply wounded by what was said and implied by the Obama campaign. So ride into the sunset making an implicit statement about how Chicago politics is it's own reward.; 11/8/12, 4:31 PM
sakredkow said...: Excellent idea. I hope they do it.; 11/8/12, 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Garage, I seriously think that if you and I and the rest of the liberals here quit commenting, these conservatives would be forlorn, bored to tears and would eventually turn on one another. We add spice to the comments section.

So we serve a noble purpose here. You better hope we never leave for good.; 11/8/12, 4:32 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: "it would be nice if the next Obama budget got a vote in the House..."

what?

Obama's Budgets don't get votes from anyone. Not even democrats.; 11/8/12, 4:33 PM
Bob said...: Mitt should go up with McConnell and Boehner and say "We're not helping. You're the smartest one in the room. Figure it out!" Then just leave.

Go right over the fiscal cliff with no debt ceiling increase. All of it! He got the mandate. It increases taxes; just like he wants. US treasury goes to cash accounting. Painful adjustment to spending. A lot less free goodies for all.; 11/8/12, 4:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Ricpic loves him some Michele Bachmann, he thinks she would make a fine President.; 11/8/12, 4:36 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...
Yes it is odd since he has nothing to say himself. The most singularly vacuous commentor on the blog.

Coming from someone who doesn't understand co-existence doesn't prove causality that doesn't mean much: even the basics are over your head.; 11/8/12, 4:37 PM
Matt Sablan said...: More reasons Obama might be asking Romney for help. Gee. That'd been good for the country to know before election day, don't'cha think?; 11/8/12, 4:39 PM
Bob said...: Inga, your silence will have no impact just as your postings have none. Many of us are already adjusting to the post-election realities. Business plans being adjusted, employees let go, capital investments shelved, and assets shifted into tangibles and hard to tax. Revel in your moment. BTW, how's well is your pension funded? Inflation is a heartless mother on fixed income.; 11/8/12, 4:40 PM
I Callahan said...: I have an idea. Let every Republican house member who's district voted for Obama, vote with the Democrats on every bill. Give the people what they want good and hard, and let the chips fall where they may.

Let's solve this problem of who's right and who's wrong.; 11/8/12, 4:40 PM
test said...: Inga said...

So we serve a noble purpose here.

Don't do it for us, we can find our humor elsewhere.; 11/8/12, 4:43 PM
Bob said...: Inga: "So we serve a noble purpose here."

So will turkeys in a couple of weeks.; 11/8/12, 4:45 PM
Rose said...: Make him VP, Obama, and maybe we'll believe change is on the way.; 11/8/12, 4:49 PM
jacksonjay said...: I think Obama has already promised Secretary of Business to Richard Trumka!; 11/8/12, 4:49 PM
BrianE said...: Madison Man said:

"I agree that this is for show.

I think Romney would serve if he were asked, but it would not be a visible role -- not like a Cabinet position -- but rather an emissary type thing. Special Envoy."

I understand there's an opening for ambassador to Libya.; 11/8/12, 4:50 PM
Baron Zemo said...: Garage is actually a noble porpoise.

I love it when he balances a beach ball by spouting through his blow hole.; 11/8/12, 4:51 PM
chickelit said...: Rose said...
Make him VP, Obama, and maybe we'll believe change is on the way.

That far too sensible and 18th century.; 11/8/12, 4:51 PM
Phil 314 said...: What, Warren Buffett stopped taking BO's calls?; 11/8/12, 4:53 PM
Michael K said...: Areasonableman, We have this thing called the Constitution and it says all tax legislation has to start in the House. I know Obama ignores it and will legislate by fiat he next four years but Romney would observe the law. He was talking about concepts but could not promise certain provisions as they would have to be negotiated. I know you voted for the guy who rules by fiat so maybe you didn't realize this.

Personally, I think mortgage deduction should be capped at around $250 k but Romney's plan was better. He would cap the deduction amount and let the tax payer choose which to use.

Romney would be crazy to accept any position since he is not a crook from the "Combine" like LaHood.

You might read Woodward's book to understand your guy better.; 11/8/12, 4:54 PM
chickelit said...: Baron Zemo said...
Garage is actually a noble porpoise.

Sometimes he is a mere swine. A real sea pig.; 11/8/12, 4:57 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: "SPEAKING OF PUBLIC WORRIES ABOUT CORRUPTION IN WASHINGTON: The Washington Examiner’s Mark Flatten has found at least 2.1 million in spending on employee conferences by the Inspector-General at the Agriculture Department. Here’s the twist: The Ag IG neglected to tell Congress about the conferences when asked and the events weren’t included in an online spending database the sprawling department is required to maintain. The IG’s job is to expose waste, fraud and corruption in USDA spending. So this is what the watchers do when they think nobody in Washington is watching?"

I just love modern democrats. They waste our money while we struggle. Awesome.; 11/8/12, 5:01 PM
Drago said...: Another recession on the way?

How can that be? We were told over and over again that obama had rescued the economy!

If fact, we had 3 "Recovery Summers" in a row!

We were told just last week that the economy was recovering!

Clearly this is Bush's fault again.; 11/8/12, 5:02 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Marshal said...
Don't do it for us, we can find our humor elsewhere.

You can only spend so much time looking in the mirror.; 11/8/12, 5:02 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Michael K said...
Areasonableman, We have this thing called the Constitution and it says all tax legislation has to start in the House.

He had the most influential house member on tax issues on his ticket. This is not really a good excuse.; 11/8/12, 5:05 PM
Drago said...: Inga: "Ricpic loves him some Michele Bachmann, he thinks she would make a fine President."

Who cares about Michelle Bachmann?

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the mass layoffs coming at hundreds of companies?

Fortunately for obama, these notices were just sent out.

Convenient for him.

Not so convenient for the workers.

But who cares about them right?

After all, the private sector is doing just fine....

Just fine.; 11/8/12, 5:06 PM
test said...: AReasonableMan said...
Marshal said...
Don't do it for us, we can find our humor elsewhere.

You can only spend so much time looking in the mirror.

Only the nutty left believes people on the right believe the same things. The best discussions are when the nuts aren't driving the conversation onto nonsense topics. I think we can all agree it's fun to laugh at people who claim this month's employment rate means "Reaganomics " has failed, but does it really advance anyone's understanding?; 11/8/12, 5:09 PM
test said...: garage mahal said...
Except if you count blog commeters, then he's second to garage.

What you really mean is that you hate the fact that I post here.

What I really mean is that since you never offer anything intelligent it seems your being an asshole is the goal and not merely a byproduct of your personality.; 11/8/12, 5:13 PM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Marshal said...
AReasonableMan said...
Marshal said...
Only the nutty left believes people on the right believe the same things. The best discussions are when the nuts aren't driving the conversation onto nonsense topics. I think we can all agree it's fun to laugh at people who claim this month's employment rate means "Reaganomics " has failed, but does it really advance anyone's understanding?

Still struggling to form an actual opinion on something, anything? Why not start small and work up from there.

How was the weather in your part of the country?; 11/8/12, 5:13 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Retard Nation keeps coming up with increasingly retarded shit.

Romney would have to slam down the first gay bottom president and change his red diaper and then shred his 2,000 + page healthcare bill.

That would be a tremendous pleasure to watch but ain't gonna happen.

Retard is trying, "here take my shit load of tax sandwich and put your cover on it. I'll be a perfect antagonistic retard every step along the way and then I'll take credit for it.

Romney, having just seen the cutest little South Park episode, hard at first because he cringes at sweary words and is automatically repulsed, but they are dogging Mormons with the dum dum dum dum dum refrain at each point of their mythology, but sticking with tortuous ridicule to the end is rewarded with God's own words to his earthly creatures when dealing with distortions, "suck my balls, retard."; 11/8/12, 5:15 PM