Follow us on Twitter

Our Archives

November 2012
« Oct   Dec »


On January 20′TH of 2009, President Barack Obama was sworn into office as the forty-fourth President of the United States.  At that time, The Onion, an online satirical news outlet opined with the following headline: “Black Man Given Nation’s Worst Job.”  How right they were! Prior to this President being sworn into office, the economy shed nearly 3.5 million jobs in the last six months of the Bush administration alone, and continued losing nearly 3.4 million jobs during the first six months of this President’s term; something he could not be blamed for since his policies had not even been fully implemented.  In addition, the housing market was in crisis, the automotive industry was in need of financial assistance with no private equity firms able to assist, our Country was engaged in a War in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden was still this Country’s most wanted criminal for his planning and involvement of the 9/11 attacks ,  the Al-Quaeda network was fully operational, and just eight weeks into this President’s term, former Governor Mitt Romney appeared on Fox News telling the nation how the “President’s policies were failing America. ”  Yet, the former Governor never once stated during this interview, precisely what it was that HE would have done differently, or how HE would have handled what has been described by the President and economists alike as the greatest economical disaster since The Great Depression.  Heidi Shierholz, an economist from the liberal Economic Policy Institute states: “Regardless of political leanings, it is not ambiguous that Obama inherited a labor market in free fall.”

Despite this, our Country was treated to nothing but a steady diet of lies, myths, rumors and false allegations of a personal nature against the President by the likes of Rupert Murdoch’s now infamous GOP ally, Fox News, and other conservatives radio “talking heads” in this Country.  Forget whether the allegations were true, (they weren’t), and forget that the typical response from an American electorate towards a newly elected President inheriting this sort of mess, should have mirrored that which we all witnessed on that fateful day when our Country was attacked by terrorists on September 11, 2001.  Surely you recall the moment when we all sat in front of our television sets only to observe the United States House of Representatives standing in solidarity on the steps in front of the Capital, singing God Bless America?  So, what changed? Why is it that the GOP did not rally around this President, supporting his initiatives in the spirit of creating a “more perfect Union” versus remaining silent as the personal attacks mounted against the President?  While we may all have our own theories attempting to explain the GOP’S behavior, the reality is this: The GOP simply sat on the sidelines consistently criticizing the President, versus working together with him in an effort to make conditions in our country more tolerable.  Mitt Romney, who stated in his acceptance speech during this year’s Republican National Convention that “he wanted this President to succeed because he wanted America to succeed,” was no better.  In fact, he began raising funds for his bid for President, according to several sources, the very day the President was being sworn in.  Does this really sound like a man wanting the President to succeed? Hardly!

And what about the more outspoken individuals, such as Rush Limbaugh, the Kingpin of the conservative cause, telling the country, “I hope he fails,” when commenting about the newly elected first Black President? Or, what about Michael Savage, G. Gordon Liddy, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, and the entire host of other conservative radio talk show hosts? What did these folks contribute towards solving the problems of our day other than perpetuating the same conservative myths, such as; “The President’s Birth Certificate is a forgery,” or, “The President is taking our Country down the road towards socialism,” or, “The President is indoctrinating our children in camps,” or, “The President wasn’t born in the United States, therefore his presidency is null and void,” or, “The President is a Muslim, anti-capitalist, who is out to destroy our nation,” and the list goes on ad nauseum.  Did the GOP speak out about these lies and myths? No! They sat on their rear ends and instead of calling for calm in the midst of the storm they allowed these word prostitutes to continue on wrecking havoc on our electorate, consistently providing deflection for their true agenda; making this President a one-term President.

Lest you are missing where I am headed with this, let me make it clear: The GOP did absolutely nothing but obstruct this President from the outset, did absolutely nothing to quiet the voices of those spreading lies and rumors about the personal character of the President, while consistently criticizing each and every single policy the man attempted to implement. Adding insult to injury: Now the GOP not only believes, but expects this electorate to reward this behavior, by providing their nominee, Mitt Romney, with the White House, despite their ignoring the will of the people as 52% of this electorate cast their vote for Barack Obama during the 2008 election. Any other President handed this situation, would have garnered the full support of both parties, if only in an effort to bring relief to a frightened electorate experiencing financial calamity.  However, due to their lust for power and control, coupled with the outright obstructionism their party engaged in during these past four years, seems to me at least, that the candidate this Country chooses should all come down to a matter of principle!  As a psychologist, I have learned that one does not reward poor or inappropriate behavior, lest one expects to see this behavior repeated! That is, casting a vote for Mitt Romney for President today, is doing nothing more than reinforcing the GOP’S obstructionist behavior, their sense of entitlement and control, while in the process ignoring the very will of “We the People,” which the GOP claims to be so concerned with.  How can the GOP make such a claim when they have placed their own self-interest as a party over our Country; blocking every single effort to create the hope and change this President promised our country?

Despite this, the President still managed to take an economy which was bleeding jobs for the first six months of his term, while providing this country with  34 consecutive months of private-sector, non-farming job growth.  Certainly, as this President makes clear: The unemployment rate in this country is not acceptable, however to deny the very reality that things have improved is to either ignore the factual evidence provided by the United States Bureau of Labor statistics, or to buy into the further myths and lies promoted on Fox News, by the likes of Jack Welch, implying the administration is manipulating the numbers. Of course, Rupert Murdoch’s empire is not always known for its journalistic integrity, but then again, this is the stuff that sells and conservatives eat it up as though it were candy! Forget the fact that Fox News anchors have absolutely no problem citing citing the exact same Bureau when the numbers support their argument that “the President’s policies have failed America.”  Or, how about where the Stock Market was on the day this President was sworn in?  According to my memory, the market hovered around 7000 points, yet today it consistently hovers on a daily basis at nearly 13,000 points.

Ask any conservative what they attribute this improvement to, and they are quick to deflect off the topic by arguing that the economy is no better than the day this President took office.  How about this: If the economy is no better than the day this President took office, and the Stock Market reflects 13,000 points, while corporate profits sit at an all time historical high, then why do these conservatives continue to argue for a supply-side or trickle down economical model? Furthermore, if the economy is truly not on the mend, how do conservatives explain the fact that consumer confidence continues to improve, or that the housing market seems to be stabilizing? Sadly, they have no explanations other than to deflect back to the same old portrayals of how “this President simply does not understand the basics of American economic policy,” or they quickly pivot to the accumulating debt problem the country is facing.

Yet, what these same conservatives neglect to recall, is how the Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH), and the President reached a tentative agreement by their shaking each other’s  hand during the debt-ceiling debacle, much to the chagrin of progressives due to the President placing everything on the table, including Medicare and Social Security, as a way to reduce the debt in our country, in exchange for the Bush tax cuts to expire for only those people earning over $250,000 per year.  And yet, we all know how that deal ended, don’t we? Once again, instead of doing what was in the best interest for the Country, the GOP began accusing the President of “engaging in class warfare,” and “engaging in wealth redistribution.”  But let’s be honest here folks: All governments engage in the redistribution of wealth.  The only question that begs an answer is how do we want to redistribute the wealth we have?  Do we want our Country, particularly the GOP, to be held hostage to a man named Grover Norquist, who persuaded nearly all GOP representatives to sign his pledge to never raise taxes? Perhaps even more paradoxical is how this party has nearly begun the process of beatification and subsequent canonization of former President Ronald Reagan, while neglecting to remember how he raised the debt-ceiling eleven times during his presidency.  The current President attempted to do so ONE TIME, and all the GOP could do was to engage in moaning and groaning, with many in the GOP trying to convince the electorate that the “debt-ceiling was a myth,” arguing we could allow the deadline to come and go with no ill consequences.  But ill consequences there were as Moody’s downgraded our credit rating as a result of this debacle and look what the GOP did then: They blamed the President! And what about this President’s other accomplishments such as issuing the order to proceed with the mission to take care of the previous Administration’s problem; Osama Bin Laden?  According to conservatives, the President does not even deserve praise for this one act alone, despite the Joint Chief’s confirmation that it “was a gutsy move, and despite everyone else in the room being against it, the President issued the order” (Paraphrased).  What about the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010?  Despite the Bill not being perfect in every way, it has been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court, and it has been a goal of nearly every single President to reform health care since Harry Truman.  This President made it happen! Once again: It may not be perfect, but many experts in the health care industry argue it is a move in the “right direction!” However, the truth of the matter is that it seems irrelevant as to what this President has accomplished in his first term; according to conservatives.  Perhaps the false information clouds their thinking, but the reality is this: The current President enjoys a  higher legislative success rate than Lyndon B. Johnson, who experienced a 93.3% record compared to the current President having a 96.3% legislative success rate.  Simply put: The facts don’t lie! This President has accomplished a great deal!  Maybe his opposition cannot see this because they do not see HIS accomplishments as THEIRS!

Let’s face it folks: No politician is perfect! Moreover, there is not one single politician who implements policy just the way we would like! The reason for this is due to politicians being human, and we all know human beings are not perfect.  But for the GOP to engage in “character assassination” in the midst of our economic storm, while the President was doing everything within his power to create a “more perfect Union,” should send a strong signal to our “prejudice detectors.”  Case in point:  Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), held an impromptu meeting with the Senate minority, several days BEFORE the President was even sworn in.  His reason? The incoming President had a popularity rating of 79%, with several other polls reflecting an over 80% popularity rating.  McConnell’s response? He and his GOP Senate minority developed a new “procedural” voting process requiring sixty votes versus the standard fifty-one in order to pass legislation.  McConnell’s strategy was simple: “Lest we be perceived by the electorate as agreeing with this President on anything, or bipartisan, let us require sixty votes for ANY legislation the President supports” (Paraphrased).  Of course, at the same time, the GOP was also engaged in doing whatever it took to block the new Senator from Minnesota, Al Franken from being seated lest the President had his sixtieth vote. Question: How did McConnell know specifically WHAT this President would support economically, when the GOP admitted on record consistently throughout the election cycle that he “ran a generic campaign due to his hope and change message?” Answer: They did not know, nor would they care as was made abundantly clear by not only McConnell’s admission of the new procedural voting process, as reported in the New York Times and confirmed by Senator Lyndsay Graham (R-SC).

People hired by the likes of Karl Rove, as reported in a “leaked email” to the Daily Kos reflects the deepest hatred and sentiments this party has toward the President by Karl Rove allegedly encouraging his “internet operatives,” to go to “progressive or liberal leaning sites,” articulating their grave disappointment with the President, despite their supposedly voting for him in the election, only to be let down by his broken promises.” In addition, in that correspondence sent by Rove to his paid “operatives,” he encourages each of them to falsely state how they voted for the President, then to make any accusation (the more bizarre; the better), while conveying how disappointed they now were with the President.

Perhaps, even worse, Robert Draper, shares in his book, Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives, that while the President and First Lady were dancing their first dance at the President’s Inauguration, a band of GOP leaders, including Mitt Romney’s Vice-Presidential pick, Paul Ryan (R-WI), pollster Frank Luntz, right-wing journalist Fred Barnes, and Newt Gingrich, all met at a steakhouse, less than one mile from the Inaugural Ball, to also develop a strategy to take back the White House.  Please note: Not one single actor in this unbelievable non-fictional drama has disputed Draper’s account.   Newt Gingrich, former GOP Presidential candidate stated at the conclusion of that meeting these words: “You will remember this day. You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown.”  Pause for just a moment here and reflect on this last statement because it is precisely this issue which I believe makes the strongest argument as to why one should not cast a ballot for their GOP nominee.  If this party can get away with ignoring the will of the people, through obstructionist tactics, such as they have engaged in, “We the People,” are placing our very democracy in grave danger.

Hopefully, you are asking yourself right about now, what all of this has to do with Mitt Romney? In order to garner the GOP nomination, Mitt Romney pandered to THIS very crowd by not only refusing to dispel the myths these radical conservatives held, but by perpetuating these very myths himself during his campaign.  Whether he was accusing the President of “engaging in a one year apology tour,” or criticizing the President’s foreign policies only to end up agreeing with nearly every single foreign policy the President implemented during the third debate, or, whether he was criticizing the President for bailing out General Motors and Chrysler, only to turn right back around indicating the “President followed my advice,” while ultimately attempting to take credit for the auto bailout, which he strongly opposed in his Op-Ed piece published in the New York Times and during various interviews, Romney demonstrated throughout the President’s term and during his campaign that he was no different than the radical conservatives in his party.  Perhaps the clearest example is how Romney at his last rally before attending the Republican National Convention uttered the following to his supporters: “As many of you know, I am from here!  Many of you know me.  You don’t have to worry about me being able to give you a copy of my birth certificate.  You know I have one” (Paraphrased). He made this choice because he realized that in order to secure the GOP nomination, this group could not be ignored.

This reflects precisely the manner in which Romney reaches decisions, through a business model, analyzing every action through a cost-benefit analysis. But please note: Engaging in this process for decision-making not only reveals something about the character of the individual while providing a glimpse of the candidate’s judgment.  That is, individuals relying on the cost-benefit analysis model for their decisions have one interest; self-preservation.  Extrapolate what you will from this, however, to me it demonstrates that Romney is willing to say whatever it takes in order for HIM to WIN, when the focus of an individual occupying the presidency must be on the people whom he or she serves; “We the People!” Put another way: Romney had every opportunity to show this electorate that he was different, a leader, one who could steer this GOP, his party back towards some sense of moderation, but instead, he chose the path of least resistance with the greatest payoff (or bottom line in business speak).  He literally co-opted the existing hatred, disdain, and utter lack of respect this President is due, using THIS as his calling card throughout his campaign! His entire campaign slogan could very easily have been; “I am not Obama.”

But simply telling the electorate who you are not, especially when you are intelligent enough to understand the difficulties this President encountered upon being sworn in, while realizing how many myths and lies have been spread as a result of not only Fox News, but nearly every single conservative radio talk show host leaking down to the electorate, with the only goal of obtaining the residency of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is not a sufficient argument as to why “We the People,” ought to cast our ballot for you! Simply put, Romney has failed to define himself while utilizing his cost-benefit analysis model of decision making, embracing whatever myth or lie du jour of the day was being used on any particular day against the current President, with the sole goal of benefiting himself.  In business, there is an old saying that managers do things right, whereas leaders do the right things right, no matter what the cost.  Clearly, Romney falls into the category of the  former while President Obama falls into the category of the latter.  Sure it is safe to simply parrot what you know the base of your party believes however, while there were clear risks involved for Romney to depart from the myths and lies, he very well could have restored the image of the GOP!

Yet, despite Nate Silver’s predictive  model affording Romney a mere 9% probability of winning the electoral college, he continues to remain close to the President according to polling data. How is this possible? This, especially taking into consideration that Romney has embraced nearly every position known to man, has offered absolutely no specifics as to what he would do differently than the President other than create 12,000 jobs in four years, (which Moody predicts will already occur due to policies the current President has implemented), has agreed with the President on nearly every aspect of foreign policy despite his previous criticisms, and his now infamous 47% video where he accuses nearly one-half of this country of being “dependent on government,” the question as to how he remains so close in the polls persists.

Here is but one plausible among many explanations: During the 2008 election cycle, Fox News, along with several conservative commentators placed highly disparaging commentary involving character assassination of then candidate Barack Obama.  These lies, rumors, myths, and misinformation were a blatant attempt for the GOP to win the 2008 election.  Perhaps the most noble man in all of this was Senator John McCain who responded to a woman at one of his rallies accusing the President of being “Arab,” responded with “No Ma’am! No he isn’t! He is a good family man who simply disagrees with me on several issues.” However the damage had already been done, and instead of these metaphorical flames of character assassination being extinguished, they persisted due to a phenomenon known to social psychologists as “confirmation bias.” That is, people who fall victim to this phenomenon, continue to seek out only that information which “confirms” their previously held beliefs, while ignoring any other relevant information which has the potential to change their minds.

This explains why it seems so baffling to progressives that despite fact-checking organizations debunking these lies, rumors or myths, conservatives continue to perpetuate them.  Simply put: There can be no reasoning with conservatives any longer.  They have “chosen” to believe whatever it is Romney is selling (which is nothing other than “I am not Obama”), along with the conservative radio talk show hosts and Fox News versus the truth.  Conservatives simply do not want to hear it anymore.  For them, as they go to the polls today,  their vote will be cast due to prejudice, perhaps not racial prejudice but prejudice nonetheless.  Take a closer look at that word lest you believe I am being hyperbolic here.  Prejudice simply means to pre-judge.  How else does one explain how Romney who has revealed very little about himself to this electorate remains so close in the polling data to this President? Try asking a conservative precisely what Romney stands for, and most likely, you will hear the same old stories which were circulated when candidate Obama originally ran back in 2008, prior to winning the election! Don’t believe me?  Take a look at the eight minute video I shall provide each of you with at the end of my article today! Then, do me a favor and ask yourself the following question: Why am I voting for Mitt Romney for President of the United States? If your answer is remotely close to any of the reasons provided by these voters at the Romney rally in Ohio, or you find yourself defaulting over to the typical, “The President does not share my values,” then you very well could be a victim of the phenomenon I just shared with you!

Me? I am voting for the re-election of our President for two very basic reasons! First, I KNOW who the man is! .  Second, I shall vote for this President to be re-elected for a second term premised on principle alone! I utterly refuse to hand the keys over to a party who did nothing to silence the consistent lies being purported against our leader, while doing nothing to assist him in making our country better.  How about you?  Former Governor Romney has offered me only one reason to vote for him: “He is not the President!” THAT is about the only thing I find myself agreeing with the former governor on! He surely is NOT!

Till then,

Doc Bear


  • Jeff

    OMG, I wonder how many people read that long winded wandering mess. You sounds like someone who knows the hope and change dud experiment is over today.


    • Mark Bear

      Hi Jeff,

      I in no way believe the Hope and Change Experiment is over for two reasons! First, I think it unfair for anyone to consider it an experiment because the final data is not in. That is, should this President be re-elected, and find a himself working with a GOP Congress, which will find themselves having to work with the President, in my opinion, I think we shall all find a different result than what we all experienced in the past four years. Finally, I actually feel quite good about the prospects of our President being re-elected short of any extraneous variables such as further suppression or an utter failure in the President’s ground game! The latter variable the President can control; the former his attorneys can! Thanks for the constructive criticism. Be well!


  • Adam Schabow

    That’s funny Jeff…I had no problem reading this well articulated and well written article. Jeff, maybe you should think of reading as not a chore, but as a form of entertainment and/or education.


  • Rich

    Jeff, I’m trying to find your well reasoned and insightful post about why you’re voting for Romney. Care to share a link?

    Two topics important to me that, unfortunately, have been given little attention by both candidates are veterans issues and our judicial system.

    It is well documented that President Bush slashed funding for the very soldiers and sailors that he sent into harms way, and that the R/R plan would have done more of the same. Our current President has done a much better job in addressing veterans issues, though there is room for much more improvement.

    But far and away the most important consideration for me is the duty of the President to appoint nominees to the Judicial Branch. Ceding this power to any Republican at this juncture in our history is a very hazardous prospect. Especially when it comes to the Supreme Court. Our current President has done exceptional work to keep our judiciary as objective as possible in the face of withering opposition from the right.

    These are two more reasons why it is imperative that President Obama be reelected.


  • Tim


    First off. You can not know who “the man” truly is. Michell Obama has the best knowledge of who “the man” really is, and the last I know, you were not her. Wrong sex. We both know that your wife would not have any of that. Lol.

    Now about the lies issue. We know that every party spreads rumors about lies concerning the other party. The Democrats have done the same thing, whether talking about this presidential nominee or any other nominee. It is part of the process to become president.

    Also, and YOUR statement, “How else does one explain how Romney who has revealed very little about himself to this electorate remains so close in the polling data to this President? ” We have discussed this issue in the past. Talk about someone hiding themself from the public eye? Will not go into detail again about the current President. We “ALL” know that he has been very secretive about his past. This argument that you have does not and will not fly, in my eyes.

    The problem with the Presidency, is that the next President has to deal with what the last President has left for them. It started with George Washington, and will not end with whoever the next President is. Hopefully, someday it will end, but not in the near future.

    Final thoughts, Mark, you are bad mouthing this Presidential hopeful just like everyone else has bad mouthed the current President. It is something that the political parties are “great” at. As we have self-determined, we agree to disagree. We need to start a revolution that does not bad mouth the other party and let what happens happens, and focus on the good things that each President has contributed instead of the back stabbing malicious rantings of people other than us, because we can and will be above the slanderous people of each political party.


  • Mark Bear

    Good morning Tim,

    You write: “First off. You can not know who “the man” truly is. Michell Obama has the best knowledge of who “the man” really is, and the last I know, you were not her. Wrong sex.” I am going to take this as though this comment is a “tongue in cheek,” versus having a valid argument. However, in the event that you truly believe that I have to “know” the President in an intimate manner to understand what he actually believes as a leader is a rather weak argument. Do you have to intimately “know” Romney in order to know what he believes? I sincerely doubt it! However, lest you have missed the first four years of this President’s term, due to your consistent focus on the “conspiracy theories,” being stated about the President, please allow me to sum up what I KNOW, and fully believe he stands for politically. First, he believes in a country where “everybody, no matter who they are, what they look like, has the same opportunity as every other citizen in this country.” Second, he believes in “everybody” doing their fair share, and yes, including those who earn over $250,000 paying just a little more in order to assist in balancing a budget, versus balancing the same budget on the backs of the middle class. Doesn’t sound socialistic to me in any way. And before you go reminding me that it has been three years since a budget has been passed, please refer back to the article above. There “could” have been a budget, and what was described by many to be historical in nature, was literally blocked by Eric Cantor (R-VA)storming out of the meeting being held after the President and the Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH) had a tentative agreement with a handshake to boot. Third, this President believes nobody in this country should go without health care. While the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010 is not perfect; it is heralded by many as a start, a move in the right direction. Fourth, this President believes in getting our troops out of Afghanistan by 2014 just as he fulfilled his promise to end the war in Iraq.

    Second, you write: “Now about the lies issue. We know that every party spreads rumors about lies concerning the other party. The Democrats have done the same thing, whether talking about this presidential nominee or any other nominee. It is part of the process to become president.” Fair! Perhaps parties DO, in fact spread lies about the other political party, however, what this President has endured can best be described as character assassination. At least, with other candidates there usually exists a “shred of truth,” to the allegations, and then once it is discovered that those allegations are not true, they cease being thrown at the candidate. Not so, with the then candidate Barack Obama which continued to be promoted by the very people I mention in the article.

    Third, you write: “Also, and YOUR statement, “How else does one explain how Romney who has revealed very little about himself to this electorate remains so close in the polling data to this President? ” We have discussed this issue in the past. Talk about someone hiding themself from the public eye? Will not go into detail again about the current President. We “ALL” know that he has been very secretive about his past. This argument that you have does not and will not fly, in my eyes.” Yes! We have discussed this previously, and your argument fails miserably! The myth that this President has not been vetted appropriately is simply false. We knew more about this candidate in 2008, then any other candidate. Just because folks in the conservative movement could not find evidence for their claims, does not mean those claims are true. In a similar vein, since you bring up our previous conversations: I have provided fact-checking organizations that have debunked every single one of your claims such as “he is not a US born citizen,” or, “Michelle Obama is vile due to her making racist comments by responding to an interviewer on 60 minutes, when asked in the context of race, whether she feared for her husband’s life as Colin Powell’s wife did.” Just because she indicated that as a “Black Man Barack could be shot at a gas station,” does not a racist make. Simply put: You are grasping at straws here.

    Fourth, you write: “The problem with the Presidency, is that the next President has to deal with what the last President has left for them. It started with George Washington, and will not end with whoever the next President is.” So Tim, what are you saying here? Are you indicating that it is not a fair assessment when I indicate the GOP instead of WORKING WITH THE PRESIDENT, decided to make him PRIOR TO BEING SWORN IN, a “one-term President?” Because the last I read in my history books, this is NOT standard behavior engaged in. In fact, I have read a wealth of history in my time, including a huge focus on the FDR administration, and despite his having a majority of Democrats in the House, the GOP NEVER articulated this as their goal. That is, BOTH parties realized the people in this country knew it was imperative to work together in order to bring relief to a country which just went through a GREAT DEPRESSION. Lest you think I am making this issue greater than it is: When this President entered office he inherited an economy that was considered “trashed” by several leading economists, due to a lack of oversight. So, I really do not know what point you are attempting to make here, but once again, my concern lies not so much, what the President inherited (as you can see I provide very little space to this in my article) but the response of the opposition! Simply put, they did NOT want to work with the President as evidenced by Draper’s book, and the piece I cite and which was admitted to by Lyndsay Graham (R-SC).

    Tim, I am going to address your “Final thoughts,” in my next response. You really do want to read it.



    • Tim


      Maybe I should have read this posting first and should ahve admitted I was wrong. Lest, I will not. You are a dedicated Democrat and are knowledgable in your political party, but you do not see the forest for the trees.

      I will not take part in any more discussions with someone who does not think outside the lines. As for this presidential election, President Obama did win. I offered to give my life for this great country, for the many, not for one person. If you want some more dialogue from me, then it needs to not be of political nature.


      Tim Romine


  • Mark Bear

    Good morning Tim,

    I now want to address your last statement in your response, despite the fact that the electorate has spoken and made clear that they will not be fed a line of bull, will not be forced to have a budget balanced on the back of the middle-class without everyone paying their fair share, by electing this President to a second term. And, while I admittedly feel awkward providing the following to you as my response, since the campaign is over, and Governor Romney DID provide one of his best speeches since he began campaigning for office, I still do owe you a response to your comments.

    You write: “Final thoughts, Mark, you are bad mouthing this Presidential hopeful just like everyone else has bad mouthed the current President.” Really? Surely, you cannot be serious here. But hey, you said it, so allow me to re-direct you back to the article I wrote last night. Let us both review what I have stated on the record here in this article because I am not concerned with what I have stated in other venues due to me providing similar commentary. So, what DID I actually accuse former Governor Romney of doing here?

    First, I state that in no more than eight weeks after the President was elected into office, he was on Fox News arguing how “this President’s policies have failed America.” This is a fact; not fiction. Second, I argued how the former Governor, despite his stating in his acceptance speech that “I wanted this President to succeed, because I want America to succeed,” was literally counter to his actions. Why? Because several reliable political analysts have already been on record indicating that Romney began raising funds for his bid for the White House for 2012, on the VERY DAY THE PRESIDENT WAS BEING SWORN IN. This is also factual material. Finally, I argued factually, that Romney “pandered” to the very crowd who engaged in character assassination against the current President. Please note: I do not ever recall the Governor NOT making things personal throughout his entire campaign. This is evidenced by his consistently beginning a statement at rallies or speeches with, “THIS PRESIDENT…blah, blah, blah, blah!” That is, he made things personal and yes, I will readily admit the President did as well. However, what would one expect when being accused personally about issues versus being critical of policy? Surely, I did not want my President standing idly by. But perhaps you miss the real point here: The things I placed in my article are not bad mouthing the candidate, they are providing specific factual evidence about what he has done. Compare this with what the conservative movement had done with then candidate Obama, while continuing to utilize these very lies during his term. Let’s compare:

    (1) He is a Muslim: Coded language for “he is not one of us.”
    (2) He does not have a valid Birth Certificate: Coded language for “He is not one of us.”
    (3) He is a socialist: Coded language for he is not patriotic and does not share American values.
    (4) He is indoctrinating our kids in camps trying to get them to believe in socialism. FALSE
    (5) He is going to take all of the guns from Americans in this Country: Coded language for he is taking over the country with anti American values and will not allow Americans to defend themselves.
    (6) He is racist against Whites: FALSE! Coded language once again for he is NOT one of us.
    (7) He was born in Kenya; not the US: FALSE AGAIN! Coded language for he is not one of us.
    (8) He pals around with the wrong people! Coded language for he is associated with very bad people who could hurt this country.
    (9) He is attempting to implement sharia law in this country: FALSE and once again, coded language for he is different from us.

    Tim, this is just a sample. And furthermore, every single one of these issues brought up by conservatives has been debunked by the fact checkers. Question: Did Fox News and other conservative radio talk show hosts cease repeating these lies? Answer? No! Question: Did one single GOP leader speak out to the American people telling them to stop this behavior other than Senator McCain? Answer: NO! In fact, they rode the wave, dude, getting fueled off of the people being mis-informed and banking on that hatred and disdain to get them to the White House as planned at that Steak House that night. Did it work? Nope! The American people saw directly through this subversion and spoke clearly last night: The GOP must learn to stop fueling the fires. I watched Fox last night, and lo and behold there was a contributor saying the exact same thing about the GOP. I watched another news source and guess what I heard? Someone stated: “If you are a GOP Senator who “could” have been the head of a committee, right about now, you are going to Mitch McConnell and telling him, ‘you have got to stop this behavior because it just cost us dearly.'”

    Anyhow Tim, I digress with the above made points. The reality is this: The GOP sat idly by, while the most radically insane accusations, which were false, continued to spread WHILE THE PRESIDENT WAS DEALING WITH THE WORST ECONOMIC DISASTER IN THE UNITED STATES!!! Couple this with the fact that he had two wars going on, Osama Bin Laden on the run, and Al-Quaeda still fully functional! Add to this that the Wars we were involved with were placed on a credit card by the former President. Never paid for Tim! This, is perhaps the very point I think you are not getting here: Instead of working WITH the President, and telling those nut jobs to knock it off, they refused to do so. Simply put: THEY PLACED THEIR PARTY OVER COUNTRY! (Please note: I am not yelling at you; just highlighting the most important aspects of my points).

    It seems to me Tim, that now the GOP is faced with yet, another opportunity. Will they work with the man, or continue on with their obstructionism? My guess is this: They will have no choice but to work with the man now, lest they want to lose more seats in Congress in 2014. I also heard on Fox News that “the President” needs to now reach across the aisle to heal all of the wounds from this election.” Interesting that they would say that in light of the documentation I have regarding what they have done in the past four years as a news agency! As I have stated previously, in other venues, all media persuades and influences, but Fox goes overboard and they actually won a court case arguing that “they do not need to report the truth.” While the judge ruled in their favor, my best guess is sooner or later, they are going to cross the line and the next judge may not be so nice. As for the GOP, they had better reach across the aisle because they surely have neglected to do so thus far. It is not the President’s responsibility to compromise as the people have clearly spoken that we agree with the President’s plan; not the GOP’S!

    Finally Tim, I left out all of the lies Romney DID say about this President during the campaign but two do strike me as examples and I do want to provide you the evidence. We have heard how the President supposedly said, “If you have a business; you did not build that.” The Romney campaign saw nothing but an opportunity to use these words out of context neglecting to understand that there were going to be people, journalists, bloggers such as myself who would check the entire statement out. It is simply a statement taken out of context and Romney said the very same thing in his rebuttal to this comment. Further, they apparently did not understand that folks such as myself and journalists have a grasp on the English language. Why? Because when you listen to that video the President is referring to bridges and roads; not the businesses they claim he made the very statement against. Second example is as follows: Romney’s campaign ran ads consistently regarding how the President was doing away with the work requirement for Welfare, yet, this was patently false. Even Joe Scarborough, a conservative connection of mine, on LinkedIn, told me personally, “I do not know why he has to continue with that particular lie.” Joe also said this on the air, and rightfully so because once again, the campaign chose to portray this president as someone who was not sharing our American values, someone lazy, someone who led others to be lazy, etc.

    Tim, I have absolutely NO DOUBT, that Romney is a nice man, a good family man, and perhaps a good businessman; despite my not agreeing with the type of business he is in. I also think he was too intelligent to allow his campaign to dictate to him how to run it. HE is the candidate, and if I were running for such an important office, I would have told my strategists to knock it off and that we were going to do things right. What am I saying here? Either Romney is intelligent but allowed himself to be handled by his campaign in such a manner that he shows poor judgement. Or, the only other alternative is that he actually embraced this strategy, and if THAT IS TRULY THE CASE TIM, I am sorry if you are offended, that makes him an foolish while lacking character and integrity.

    It is my prayer that this country will now move forward and those people responsible for spreading lies, myths and rumors will cease, supporting their GOP reps to work with the President in an attempt to create a “more perfect Union.” I hope that is your prayer as well Tim! Have a great day and thanks for coming to Blogging Blue!



    • Tim

      Mark, Even you have stated that we need to reach across the aisle and start to help the American people. But remember what you stated first, thah Obama needs to reach across the aisle. How can an opposing party end the wounding process when even the President will not reach across the aisle to end the strife that this country is in? This is what you stated in your rebuttal.

      Also, Presidential nominee Romney did not have to borrow $15 million dollars to help fund his campaign. Of course, President Obama went to the one bank that he knew would back his agenda because U.S. Bank is well known for supporting illegal aliens. Just seems kind of funny to me that he had to borrow money. What bank would refuse to assist someone in political power when they have shown so much support for the illegal aliens in this country while the illegal aliens use a particular bank and the bank does not care about how it affects the American people?

      I am not offended by what you wrote. I am not offended that President Obama was re-elected as President. I am saddened that there are Americans out there that have been brain-washed into believing that this man is what America needs. It saddens me to believe that Americans have been brain-washed into believing that Romeny is what America needs. Neither of these two men were what America needed. But we had to pick the least of the two evils. America made its choice, and I pray that this current President will turn this country around and assist us down the proper road we need to be on, instead of making the Americans wish that they had voted differently. This current administration has made promises that have not been fulfilled. The main issue right now, as per the President, is to lower the deficit. Let us see if this “PROMISE” is fulfilled, instead of being left vacant like some of the “promises” that were made by this presidency.

      Gotta love these comments that we both publish.

      Congrats on your President being re-elected. I pray that these political party’s will work together for the American good. It does not start with the GOP being the one to initiate contact. It starts with all party’s initiating the contact for bi-partisian contact.

      Have a great day.


      • Rich

        Tim, he is not your President or my President. He is our President. You need to reconcile with that.

        You claim promises were made and not kept. But you ignore promises that were made and WERE kept. And there were plenty.


  • Mark Bear

    Good morning Adam,

    Many thanks for your kind and generous words. I must say though, I did struggle with publishing the length of the article but now in retrospect, am glad I did. Hopefully, someone read it and then watched the video below. Glad to have the opportunity to respond to you! I look forward to further dialogue. Be well!



  • Merlin DuVall

    The election is over with both popular and electoral majority votes going to Obama, backing the president is most important, agreeing with him on everything is not required or suggested.


  • Mark Bear

    Good morning Tim,

    First, you characterize those who voted for or voted for this President as being brainwashed.

    Second, you make clear how the President borrowed 15 million dollars from US Bank, and then go on to engage in character assassination accusing him of borrowing from that particular bank because it supports illegal aliens. Do you have specific evidence indicating this is precisely why he borrowed the money from that bank? No? Hmm!

    Third, you also state the following: “Also, Presidential nominee Romney did not have to borrow $15 million dollars to help fund his campaign.” TIM: I AM GOING TO MAKE A PUBLIC CONFESSION HERE AND TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE 100 PERCENT CORRECT ON THIS POINT! In fact, I have a link supporting your point showing that Presidential nominee Romney made a $20 million dollar loan in August!

    Fourth, you write: “Mark, Even you have stated that we need to reach across the aisle and start to help the American people. But remember what you stated first, thah Obama needs to reach across the aisle. How can an opposing party end the wounding process when even the President will not reach across the aisle to end the strife that this country is in?” YES! I DID say that the GOP MUST reach across the aisle now. The President has been reaching across the aisle the entire time he has been in office and the GOP STILL OBSTRUCTED HIM!

    Tim, former President Bush upon being re-elected in 2004 stated the following: “I earned capital in this campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it,” Bush told reporters. “It is my style.” Here is some context to this issue: Former President Bush earned 271 electoral votes in 2000, and 286 in 2004. The current President’s victory is larger than the following former Presidents: JFK in 1960, Richard M. Nixon’s in 1968, Jimmy Carter’s in 1976, and George W. Bush’s in 2000.

    Yet, when one watches the current President’s acceptance speech he does not make that sort of statement one time, does he? The fact of the matter is the current President’s mandate is larger than those president’s I just cited. The Country REJECTED the GOP message and ACCEPTED THE DEMOCRATIC MESSAGE. This President has a larger mandate than those I cited, and George Bush did not, but yet states he intends to spend his political capital. Tell us Tim: Did you have any issues with Bush making that statement?

    Read more:

    Fifth, you state: “This current administration has made promises that have not been fulfilled.” As Rich astutely points out: How about the over 230 promises the President HAS kept. He has a legislative victory which exceeds Lyndon B. Johnson who held the record at 93.3% compared to this President who has a 96.3% legislative victory.

    Sixth, you write: “Gotta love these comments that we both publish.” I have absolutely NO issue with the comments I write Tim! All of them are factual. I also have no problems with the comments you make with the exception of you throwing a personal insult my way such as “I cannot see the forest for the trees.”

    Finally, I could not help but notice your wording regarding congratulating me for MY President winning. Tell me Tim: Is he not YOUR President as well? How about the entire Country’s as was pointed out by Rich?

    Once again, many thanks for visiting our Blog here at Blogging Blue. Be well!



  • Kim Edwards

    Let me first say job well done, Mark. You successfully framed a poignant endorsement with hard facts. Second, your remarks regarding rewarding bad behavior with a grand prize emulates an old behaviorist psychological theory by B.F. Skinner, known as operant conditioning. While the theory suggests that rewards serve a greater reinforcement than punishment, it clearly differentiates between positive and negative reinforcements. In this case, Romney losing the election served as a positive reinforcement, because it proved that the American people would not reward negative, divisive behaviors and tactics with a favorable outcome. The fact that President Obama won a second term was in large part due to his transparency and clean campaign, NOT his incumbency and the difficulty defeating an incumbent, as many have suggested.

    Having said that, I strongly disagree with one of your assessments regarding Willard Romney. You noted, and I’m paraphrasing, that the American people did not know who he was, because he offered nothing other than, “I’m not Obama.” This is simply untrue. He showed the American people EXACTLY he is, and the majority did not like what they saw. In Romney, they witnessed a man who professed love of country, and God as he lied, engaged in birther divisive politics, and flatly stated he did not care about 47% of the population. They witnessed a man that would bear false witness against his neighbor, disagree with himself, and allow hate speech, gender discrimination, and trickery to overrun his candidacy. In this regard, he was honest in saying he is not Obama, because Obama would not allow such tactics to taint his image. In Obama, we have a man who, void of a Palin act of gratitude, defended her daughters teenage pregnancy, which resulted in a halt by media in their relentless attacks. Romney would NOT do the same, which was evident through his inability to shut down Limbaughs sexist, racist remarks, and Trumps constant birther, foreign exchange, Muslim rants. The American people watched these very things unfold, and they weighed Romney accordingly. If a man cannot stand up to his own party in defense of what is right, he is not worthy of office, because he would not be strong enough to fend off outside attacks that would be hurled at America and Americans. Examples such as these wreak of weakness.

    The point here is this: we know exactly who Willard Romney is, he showed us, and those actions and qualities are what we voted against.


    • Merlin DuVall

      Kim, I found you post as well as Marks both informative, the total picture that Romney presented of himself; in bits and pieces was distasteful and inappropriate for the position that he was in. FOX News has presented the case for why Romney lost (not realistically) but in the end it will be resigned to an elevated disdain between the evangelicals and Romney’s religious beliefs.


  • Mark Bear


    According to polling data, 74% of evangelicals proceeded to vote for Romney! While we have had this discussion on another site, I do think you bring an added dimension to this dialogue. My issue with the evangelicals was simple: They have for years articulated how Mormonism was a cult, only to turn right back around and basically “justify” this issue, by going in droves to the polls casting their ballot for him. In fact, approximately three weeks before the election, pastors all over this country, 1100 to be precise from evangelical churches spoke PUBLICLY while endorsing Romney, (a huge no-no in church circles), and even admitted their clear violation of the law according to the IRS! What did they do after they preached these so-called sermons, which were merely endorsements? They all sent copies of their messages to the IRS, goading them so to speak, to take them to court so they could move the matter up to the United States Supreme Court. These pastor’s aspirations were made clear when I heard one of the pastor’s involved in this fiasco arguing that they actually “wanted the IRS to sue them so they could get the matter in front of the Supreme Court, in order to pave the way for them to do the same in future elections.”

    Once again: For me personally, I take no issue with a man’s faith or religion, as the Constitution clearly spells out that no religious test should be put forth to a candidate running for office. Forget the fact that these very same people made such a huge issue over the affiliation the President HAD with Reverend Wright, and despite his publicly denouncing him during his first campaign you still hear people from the conservative side of the aisle bringing this issue up! Second, as you are well aware, the pastor from First Baptist in Dallas, arguably one of the most “conservative” churches in America, within the Southern Baptist Convention mentioned on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and other media outlets that “Romney was not considered a Christian because he (the pastor) considered “Mormonism to be a cult.” THAT, was the good ole preachers position during the Primary season, but lo, he ended up being converted nearly overnight when Romney garnered the nomination arguing that “Romney is MORE moral than the current President and MORE in line with the Scriptures than the man sitting in the Oval Office.” Furthermore, the Rev. Billy Graham, who always remained out of partisanship as a preacher, at the ripe old age of 93, decided to enter the political fray this year. Lest you neglect to recall, the Rev. Billy Graham had provided counsel and prayer for several previous Presidents from both sides of the aisle, and never once during all of that time, made a political statement endorsing or speaking against ANY politician or candidate. It was this sort of behavior which garnered the respect of many people, in and out of the church, for the man.

    What is perhaps most interesting about the Rev. Graham is on his website prior to the former Governor visiting him in his home two weeks before election day, the Reverend Graham had Mormonism listed as a cult along with Islam (comparing and likening the two of them). He had always taken this position only to reverse his position once he met the former Governor. After Romney’s departure, lo, I imagine the same angel which visited the pastor from First Baptist of Dallas must have traveled over to Charlotte, telling the Rev. Graham that now Mormonism could be removed from his “cult listing” on his website.

    Once again: I take no public issue with Romney’s professed belief, but DO take issue with the blatant hypocrisy my very own denomination engaged in, while publicly endorsing the candidate. So, here is my point: Do you think these people actually went out and did not vote for the Governor because of his affiliation with the Mormon faith after hearing the public endorsements of one of the most powerful men in evangelicalism? I just don’t know about this one. I think the exit polling provides very strong evidence that the evangelicals “justified” their vote for Romney, but my question is WHY??

    Thanks for the exchange!



    • Merlin

      Mark, what does that say about the actual religion its self? Are not they diminished by the action? Possibly they are going by the letter of the law, not to hold his religious beliefs against in the general election?

      What would be there position if a Muslim ran for that office?


Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>