Ann Romney and her horses

You know what? LEAVE ANN ALONE. She will not be running the country. What she does with her time is not relevant to the election. How about — I know this is a weird idea — telling us about Mitt’s record as Governor of Massachusetts?

I’m talking about this sort of thing from the NYTimes, which is all over the place right now.

…a glimpse into dressage, the chosen sport of Mitt Romney’s wife, and into the rarefied world of horses that cost up to seven figures….

We get it. She’s rich. The Mitt is rich. They’re rich.

That is also irrelevant to being President, just as it would be if the candidate was poor.

FDR was rich. That didn’t make him a bad President.

Reporters are needed to cut through the candidates’ speeches and tell us what they have actually done as leaders. That’s the part that’s hard for a mere amateur to find out. That’s relevant to being President.

So, O great Paper of Record, how about getting on task? And that goes for everyone else too. Including me, I guess.

92 Comments on “Ann Romney and her horses”

  1. Agreed. Good luck getting the Gray Lady et al. to reform on their election coverage. It’s like Elizabeth Edwards said. Strobe light journalism.

  2. Pilgrim says:

    Some people keep digging for dirt to throw at the Romneys. For example, something about a car elevator. I have sometimes thought, well, if I were very rich, building a house, with a beloved wife afflicted with a disease like multiple sclerosis, that tends to gradually worsen, I might think a car elevator would be something to consider. And I understand one of her main therapies is her horses. I never heard about “dressage” before, but … they’re rich so good for them.

    • bostonboomer says:

      Frankly, no one would have probably talked that much about the Romneys’ wealth if they hadn’t constantly referred to it with their tactless remarks. If you’re OK with the current level of economic inequality in the U.S., then you must be OK with the effects: the failing economy, rising poverty, failing schools, deteriorating infrastructure, and on and on.

      I’m glad Ann Romney has found a way to treat her multiple sclerosis, but why doesn’t she give back to other people who suffer from the same disease and don’t have the opportunity to buy and ride million-dollar horses? Based on their taxes, their main charity is the mormon church.

      With her money and charm Ann Romney could really make a difference for other people who suffer from the disease, but she chooses not to do that. I believe in the old saw that great wealth and power brings great responsibility to the society that made it possible.

      • ecocatwoman says:

        I’m with you, bb. Ann could set up a foundation & give grants to horse rescues across the country with the stipulation that they have a program for people who suffer from MS. She would be helping people & horses, not indulging her whim to own several VERY expensive horses. That would demonstrate that she’s familiar with the concept of compassion.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Good idea.

      • NW Luna says:

        The most common type of MS is relapsing and remitting. I really doubt that horse-riding does anything for the MS that another equivalent type of enjoyable exercise wouldn’t do. A foundation — or a bid donation to one of the existing worthwhile MS charities — would be very useful. I have a few patients with neuro-muscular conditions, including MS, who do horseback riding for the exercise, being outdoors, and being around animals. Some of them do get help from groups like the MS Society & MS Association.

  3. bostonboomer says:

    I can’t get past the paywall to read the NYT article, so I don’t know if it is a personal attack. But I don’t think Ann is irrelevant, because she is campaigning very actively and independently. Furthermore, Romney claims to get all his information about what issues are important to women from her.

    I wrote about Ann’s horse hobby awhile back. I don’t think I bashed her, but why shouldn’t there be feature articles about the spouse of the candidate? Again, I can’t read the NYT article so don’t know what it says.

    Obama himself has said that families of candidates are off limits, so I doubt if it’s coming from him.

    I’d be interested in what Ann thinks about her and her husband’s closeness to Donald Trump considering he is going around loudly claiming that Obama is not a U.S. citizen. Trump hosted Ann’s birthday party and is currently closely involved with the campaign in planning a fund raising event, including raffling off a night with Trump.

    BTW, I’ve written extensively about Romney’s record in Massachusetts. Anyone who has read my posts should be aware of his performance here.

    • I’m with you there BB, see my comment below.

    • ecocatwoman says:

      I wasn’t aware that Trump hosted her party. I read that someone else hosted the party & when he was in his 20s, he & some friends killed a stray dog & barbecued him. Here’s a link: It isn’t the one that I had originally read, however.

      • ecocatwoman says:

        This may have been the link I originally saw:

      • bostonboomer says:

        I’ll have to check my post. I believe that Trump threw a party for her and the cake had decorations of her riding a dressage horse. Maybe she had more than one birthday party.

        He is definitely planning an event with Trump now. I’ll get back to you on the party.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Yes, Trump threw a birthday party for Ann. It’s described in my post along with a photo of the cake.

        You can check the original link from the post.

      • ecocatwoman says:

        Sorry, I did read your post & after looking back at it, I remember the picture of the cake & that it was made by the Cake Boss guy. Apparently she had more than 1 birthday party. I’d never make it as a wealthy person. If someone wanted to throw a big bash party for me, I’d ask them to donate the money to local food banks or soup kitchens to feed people that can’t afford groceries.

    • quixote says:

      BB, I’m sure you know I’m not referring to your work on the Romneys, but for others reading who may not be aware of it: BB has done a lot of heavy lifting on the Mittbot topic!

      • bostonboomer says:

        I know you weren’t referring to me. I’m just trying to convince you that Mitt Romney is dangerous. Luckily, neither you nor I will have to agonize about our votes, since Romney has no chance in either of our states. He’s not even going to run ads here. LOL

      • quixote says:

        “not even going to run ads here”

        Yes, indeed. I’m thankful for small mercies!

      • northwestrain says:

        Romney is also by passing my state — which is solidly Blue.

        So I don’t have to choose the worst of two evils. I can go third party.

        Since the wives are VERY important — Mrs 0 has lead the money grabbing do nothing lead for all former first wives.

        The wives can make a difference — the for instance above — use the horses in some sort of charity.

        I do know several wives of CEOs etc who have a full time job with their charity work — which makes a big difference. One woman does a lot of animal rescue work — she also has help to set up and fund hospices where there have been none. She is very skilled at pulling people together and organizing. There are many other women like her who do make a difference.

        If Ann Romney were one of these women (full time charity work etc.) then I do believe we would have heard about all her good works. But we haven’t heard anything — except that she has expensive taste in everything and has made no effort what so ever to even try to understand how the 99% manage on far less than she has.

        Big deal — Ann Romney is able to spend thousands of $$$ for push button horses and $$$ more to learn how to ride the horses who are probably smarter than she is. She is all about herself — another typical narcissist. She raise 5 boys — big deal — i lots of friends and relatives who raised a bunch of kids and also worked outside of the home full time.

        Praise her because she has lots of money to spoil herself?? Why? What else has she done for the good of the planet?

  4. I totally agree with your point Quixote about the reporters doing what they are supposed to do.

    Last night I saw Moneyball and there was a scene where the sports writers were interviewing the players. Damn, I wish the journalist covering the politics arena would be as tough as that.

    I disagree about the importance of bringing to light the wealth involved in this election.

    I know the Romney’s are rich, but I do feel that is fair game. Just like Obama’s and their lack of connection to the real people. That is the big difference between FDR and Romney. Eleanor interacted with the poor and poverty stricken women and children before the depression era, so there was already a sense of empathy, genuine with the Roosevelts. There is none of that with Romney or any of the other 1% that run the country.

    I know that we turn to Hillary as comparison, but it is true. She may be in the “money” but damn, she is one rich politician who knows what it is like for the common man and woman.

    • bostonboomer says:

      Hillary is nowhere near as rich as the Romneys. There’s no comparison. I think their wealth–and how they accumulated it–is highly relevant to the presidential campaign.

      If they can’t stand the heat, they should stay out of the kitchen. Let’s see now, so according to Mitt, it’s inappropriate to discuss: 1) his time in MA because he doesn’t want to deal with his health care plan and his lousy record on taxes and unemployment; 2) his time at Bain, because if we do, we’re bashing capitalism; 3) his wealth, because that should only be talked about in “quiet rooms”; 4) anything his wife does even though she is actively campaigning and is his only adviser on women’s issues.

      I guess we should all just give up and crown him king.

      • Oh yeah, Hillary is not in the same league as Romney moneywise…the thing I was trying to point out was that with the Roosevelts and Clintons there is a feeling of genuine concern with the real people. What I get from Romney is that only the filthy rich like him deserve representation.

        Let’s see now, so according to Mitt, it’s inappropriate to discuss: 1) his time in MA because he doesn’t want to deal with his health care plan and his lousy record on taxes and unemployment; 2) his time at Bain, because if we do, we’re bashing capitalism; 3) his wealth, because that should only be talked about in “quiet rooms”; 4) anything his wife does even though she is actively campaigning and is his only adviser on women’s issues.

        Yup, I call bullshit on all of that…this stuff is important…and is fair game.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Yes, I agree. Roosevelt actually took on his own class and they hated him for it. They still hate him actually.

    • quixote says:

      That’s exactly my point. It’s not the wealth that matters, but whether the person behind it cares about other people, especially people NOT like them. Eleanor Roosevelt had that, Hill (and Bill for that matter) have it. The apparent lack of it in the Mittbot is highly relevant. The simple fact of his wealth, not so much I’d say. In other words, “Ooh, look, car elevator” = irrelevant. But Mitt palling up to Nascar folks by saying, “Hey, some of my best friends own Nascar teams,” that’s relevant.

  5. List of X says:

    Until Mitt keeps silent on his tax records, on his work as Massachusetts governor, on the actual list of jobs Bain has created, and on how exactly he plans on creating jobs and reducing the deficit with his proposed massive tax cuts, we’ll just have to judge him on what he says and what media can find out: the “I’ll take a lot of credit for that”, dog on the roof, “bet you $10,000”, school bullying, and Ann Romney as the voice of American women.

  6. bostonboomer says:

    OK, I read the article. Thanks for sending it, Wonk. All of the stuff that’s in it has been published multiple times, beginning back when Romney first started running for President. I don’t even think the article is critical of either of the Romneys.

    I know you seem him as less harmful than Obama, Quixote. But I don’t get why. Romney was a terrible governor. We’re still suffering for the things he did to all of our cities and towns and to the tax system.

    • quixote says:

      Less harmful? I don’t know if I’d say that. I see him as less likely to be effective because, as Vastleft put it so well, now half the country goes along with crap while the other half demands even worse. I’m microscopically hopeful that the first half might stop going along so much with a Mittbot figurehead on the corporate hydra. But who knows.

      I see them both as pots of poison. One of them is labelled as such. The other one hides his hands. It looks to me like Obama has done more damage to the nation than Mitt managed to do to Massachusetts, but that could well be only because MA is harder to push around and can’t start wars even if the governor wants to.

      It’s a horrible mess.

      • bostonboomer says:

        You have to realize that if Mitt wins, he will have a Republican House AND Senate. That means the Ryan Budget would pass and the President would not veto it. That would be a hell of a lot worse than what we’ll get with Obama. And that’s not even mentioning that horrible judges Romney would nominate.

      • quixote says:

        Is a Senate turnover a sure thing by now?

      • bostonboomer says:

        The only way Romney could win is if he gets a really big turnout and that would likely mean downticket races would be swept in.

    • quixote says:

      (Incidentally, about the NYT paywall: I don’t know which browser you use, but go to the option to turn off all Javascript, then go to the site. Voilá. No more aggro. For instance, in Firefox, it’s Tools > Preferences >Content, and untick “Enable Javascript.” After reading the article, turn it back on. Or install the Noscript extension, which gives you site by site control over script enabling.)

      • bostonboomer says:

        Thanks for the tip. Usually I can get in from google, but they must be toughening up. They only let you have 10 articles free now, so lots of times I go find their stories in other newspapers. I hate the NYT anyway. After all they gave us the Iraq War.

      • quixote says:

        They did have a bit of help, re the Iraq war, but, yeah. I read Krugman, so I’ll see highlighted articles in the side boxes. Very annoying.

      • northwestrain says:

        Speaking of NYT — some interesting gossip about the higher levels of management. The coming and going and other such stuff.

      • NW Luna says:

        Thx for that tip, quixote!

    • ralphb says:

      If Romney wins, a Senate turnover is all but a done deal! No place to hide in that case and it won’t matter if people “go along with it”. They don’t care about those people.

      • I think it’s doubtful Romney wins…

      • bostonboomer says:

        He could win. It really all depends on Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and a few other swing states. If Romney were to win Michigan, Ohio, and Florida, he might win. I’d have to look at the electoral maps.

      • granted the polling is closer than it should be given what a ridiculous GOP field Obama has had to run against for several months now, but I don’t know… I think Michelle Obama will come out rhetorical guns ablazin’ and be the Closer like she was in ’08. I really don’t think Obama 2.0 is showing all its cards at this point, but I may be wrong. I don’t think it’s gonna be close. But, it could be with this economy…

        I really hope MA makes sure Liz Warren gets elected, BB. That’s my only hope out of this mess right now… having someone in the Senate like her to ally up with Gillibrand.

      • RalphB says:

        Confidence at this point is not a very good idea. The economy is not that good and the GOP is going to have more money than God to spend on the election and they’re gonna spend it all if necessary. People in swing states are going to be absolutely underwater with TV ads of every description.

      • Pilgrim says:

        Michelle Obama was the “closer” in ’08? I’m trying to remember…..

      • ecocatwoman says:

        There was an NPR story yesterday about Super Pacs. The person interviewed said that at that moment there were 450 Super Pacs and R $ vs D $ was 10 to 1. He also said that even though Obama had more $ in his coffers now than does Romney, it doesn’t matter because of the Super Pacs.

      • Pilgrim, hi! Good to see you…

        Michelle was and remains the better campaigner/speaker/orator than Barack IMHO… I think her appearances made the difference in ’08. If you go back and look at the footage from that time, she was the one that got the crowds to react beyond that silly sappy “I love you back” call and response routine that BO did.

      • ecocatwoman says:

        Here’s an AP report from NPR on electoral votes:

      • ecocatwoman says:

        Here’s the link to yesterday’s story on Super PACs and their donors:

      • I’d rather see Romney lose, but I’m not that passionate about it…so it’s not a question of confidence for me. It’s more a reluctance to go running to the Democrats because of the skeery Republican.

      • RalphB says:

        You’re not that passionate about it? So you don’t really care about the policy differences between the two parties? Damned if I understand that.

      • I do care about policy differences. I just don’t see a sharp contrast between either parties or their presumptive nominees. Nader was wrong. It’s not pepsi v. coke. It’s malaria v. smallpox.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Speaking of leaving someone alone. Elizabeth Warren is being DESTROYED by the witch hunt over her Cherokee ancestry. I’m very worried. It’s just like birtherism.

      • northwestrain says:

        Mrs 0 did nothing at all to help Mr 0 — she is a racist.

        Right now — one would think Mts 0 is the one running and not dipsh&t 0bowma — by all the internet dem ads I’m seeing. air brushed pixs of Mrs. 0. Who is NOT a feminist. Sheht does NOT speak for women and she has no comprehension of how most American women live.

        She gained for all the hard fought work of women of MY generation and yet she has told us to go to hell. She is a phony and a fraud.

        Thankfully I do NOT have to make a choice — because I won’t vote for either legacy party candidate. Both are evil and both wives are evil as well. No charity work or good works for either of these two privileged and pampered bitches.

      • RalphB says:

        That may be the most sanctimonious piece of bullshit I’ve read in some time. So much actual hatred for people you don’t even know is sick.

      • quixote says:

        Wonk: “malaria vs. smallpox”

        Ain’t that the truth in a lol sob groan weep sort of way.

        Like Wonk, I don’t see a lot of difference in their actions. Sure, the content of the speeches is different, and Obama is easier to listen to. His Supremes are better than Shrubby’s Supremes. There’s that, too. But other than that? Making sure homeowners are hung out to dry after banks got bailed out (DDayen at FDL has been on that story with his usual brilliance); droning his way into a few more undeclared wars; letting net neutrality get chewed up by telcos; throwing women under every bus he can find. The list just never ends. He just does what the Repubs say they want to do. That’s how it looks to my disgusted eyes. That’s why I can’t work up too much fear of Romney. We’re living with Bush III.

        But, as I said in another thread, maybe I’m just getting too curmudgeonly for the real world.

      • northwestrain says:

        Sorry ralph — but Mrs. 0 happens to be a racist — I know good liberals can’t get their head around this face. I’ve seen how these racist behave — I’ve had teachers just like Mrs. 0 and they hated all white skinned children. Their loss.

        Mrs. 0 began the racism in the 2008 primary by lashing out at Bill Clinton and she called HIM and Hillary racist. I watched her body language and the way she screwed up her face when he call the Clintons names. Like I said I had teachers who screwed up their faces in exactly the same way when white children where in their class rooms or with a group of other kids.

        I’ve lived in many places where I was in the minority and watched the hate directed toward the “other”.

        Also — I took the time to read Mrs. 0’s college senior thesis — it was a racist document.

        She can put on a good act — but she has done nothing either at her hospital job or as first lady to actually focus on helping minorities and disadvantaged. Her job in the hospital was to redirect poor patients to somewhere else rather than her hospital. Really sad — also she made huge salary — and her job was just an add on for her benefit.

        Amazing how so many people think that just because someone is African American that they just can’t be racist. Read her senior thesis — she sent survey only to former black students. Most ignored her. She ends her senior thesis by telling us that she will only work for her people. OK find — but she ends up working toward her own enrichment. What she could have done for “her people” she did nothing. In fact she made sure they were sent somewhere else. Reality was that she was rich and she became a classist.

        She also proclaimed during the 2008 primary that she was NOT a dirty feminist (I added the dirty to go along with the face she makes when she even says the word feminist.) Yet she went to two colleges which a few short years before she attended were MALE only colleges. She got there because of the work of real feminists — and she can’t even recognize and thank those who put themselves on the line so that women could have some of the same educational advantages as men.

        Then as first lady — she choose a meaningless “cause” — Food — and fighting FAT. using her daughter as an example. Poor thing will forever be linked to a dumb ass mom who uses her kids to gain attention. WRONG and stupid of the mom.

        So as far as I’m concerned — Mrs. 0 is both racist and she is a misogynist as well. Just like all her rich friends.

        If I see this than you can be sure that others can as well — especially Latinos can see through Mrs. 0’s act.

        Think is I really wanted to like Mrs. 0 — but I happen to be blunt honest and I can only ignore her poor behavior and attitude for so long. There is no tooth fairy, and no Satan or hell. And Mrs. 0 has made it very clear that she doesn’t like women like me. Someone who looks white.

      • Michelle Obama isn’t a racist… the primaries were awful, but she’s not a racist any more than Bill was for saying fairy tale.

      • NW Luna says:

        Dems in Congress (and elsewhere) fight much much harder against an R president than when a D prez does the same thing. Mucking around with Social Security, and Medicare come to mind. And spying on all citizens in the name of “national security.”

        My horror of Romney and my desire to not reward Obama for his R policies, misogyny, and weak spine are fortunately accompanied by being in a Blue state — so I can vote 3rd party or write-in.

  7. RalphB says:

    Spain is spiralling into the vortex of debt-deflation. This has nothing to do with Greece. It is not the result of fiscal extravagance over the past decade, or other such Wagnerian myths.

    Europe’s Maquina Infernal has crippled Spain

    The country’s collapse is the mathematically certain – and widely predicted – result of ferocious monetary and fiscal contraction on an economy struggling to deal with a housing bust.

    Monetary tightening by the European Central Bank caused Spanish real M1 deposits to fall at an 8pc rate in mid-to-late 2011, guaranteeing the crash into double-dip recession that we now see.

    Indeed, the ECB even let the broader M3 money supply contract for the whole eurozone late last year, badly breaching its own 4.5pc growth target. This was not purist hard-money discipline. Let us not dress it up with the bunting of ideology, or false authority. It was incompetence, on a par with the errors of 1931.

    I don’t think we want to risk something like this for the US with Rmoney and the GOP version of austerity.

    • bostonboomer says:

      No, we don’t.

      • RalphB says:

        In the face of the pure destruction that could be wrought on this country, and it’s lesser people, by something as sick as the Ryan budget my personal feeling don’t matter about the candidates. It’s the policies they are for and against that really count. As far as those policies are concerned, at the level this election is about even small differences are just fucking huge in effect.

  8. Fannie says:

    Ann Lois had a civil ceremony in 1969, and we know the Morman temple is closed on Saturaday’s, but they opened it up for the good paying members to be allowed inside.
    Yup, don’t know how the horses do their healing, must be something about the pure breed, but anything that relieves stress is healing in my book. Maybe she ought to try getting some tatoos.
    You know a few horses, and dogs, put a few names on her skin for all of us to see, Seamus, Barron and one of her driving a cadillac, with her face blowing in the wind….. I know a guy that told me years ago “just be thankful”…………….I am.

  9. Fredster says:

    Well speaking of sports themes (dressage) Mittens wants to liken politics to being a sport for old guys.

    I mean, you know, I can’t compete in competitive sports very well, but I can compete in politics, and there’s the—what was the old ABC ‘Wide World of Sports’ slogan? ‘The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.’”

    “The only difference is victory is still a thrill, but I don’t feel agony in loss,” he added.

    So he won’t mind if he loses?

    • bostonboomer says:

      Why should he mind? He’s got all that money in the Caymans and Switzerland to soothe his troubled soul.

      • Fredster says:

        LOL! I love the courage of his convictions. “Meh…I’ll just do something else after this.” LOL!

      • northwestrain says:

        Amazing how easy it is for the 1% to hide their money. Yet if the peons attempted to hide or carry money out of the US — well they couldn’t.

        It seems that they various state and fed cops are running some sort of con game — they have a drug sniffing dog check the money and the dog reacts as trained — paws the floor or some signal. Then the cops confiscate the cash as being drug money. Except that nearly all money in the US is contaminated — even cash straight from the banks. Apparently the counting machines used at banks can contaminate bills because cocaine is found on most paper money.

        CNN has an article listed on Google with the number 90% of paper money has traces of drugs. Which is a big yuck — where has that money been?? Humm does that mean that the 1% use the same “hide the money” tricks as the drug dealers? Inquiring minds want to know.

  10. Pat Johnson says:

    I’m confused how anyone could honestly believe that Obama is worse than Romney.

    I know Obama has been a lousy first date, but Romney is rather “creepy” if you ask me. And he carries the banner of the Radical Insane Posse of the Right Wing on his shoulders.

    It only comes down to a choice between the two no matter how much a third party vote may make one feel warm and fuzzy about striking a blow as a challenge but the reality is between President Waffles and Miserable Mitt. A third party vote just ensures Mittens swearing in with his hand on the Mormon bible with the elders of that church peering over his shoulder.

    Along with his new bff Donald “Show me the birth certificate” Trump and his appreciation of Dick Cheney’s wisdom, this empty suit is even less welll fitting than the current empty suit already in residence.

    Romney won’t win MA but with enough third party protests votes and enough disillusioned stay at homes in November it is a distinct possibility that this could happen.

    The last batch of GOP congressional winners are toxic enough but a full house would be a total disaster since they all come marching in with a manifesto that is filled to the brim with austerity and religion that will choke this nation full years to come.

    • quixote says:

      Well, I just added my thinking again in response to the same point a bit upthread, so it’s there if you want to read it. 😀

      The value of a third party vote is that you avoid having a vote for either malaria or smallpox (see Wonk, earlier) on your conscience. I think Obama is having an appalling effect on the country. To me, he’s not an okay alternative until somebody reasonable comes along. He’s being Bush III, but the big difference is that the Left is nowhere. Remember how hard Josh Marshall fought when Bush tried to give SocSec to Wall St.? But now … crickets. That’s just one small example.

      The thing is it’s not a simple matter of making a tough choice as opposed to self-indulgently “voting your conscience.” I see a vote for Obama as strategically stupid (if you reward politicians for dumping on you, they will continue to dump on you) as well as a whole laundry list of other problems. I know you don’t see it that way, but I guess I’d like to ask the pro-party-line folks here to respect our differences just as we try to respect yours. Those of us appalled by Obama may have a point, just as you have a point about how awful Romney is.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Well, if that’s the choice, I’d rather have malaria than smallpox. Of course I’m old enough to have had the smallpox vaccine.

      • NW Luna says:

        I wrote a bit upstream too; 6:08. If Obama gets re-elected will we get even more R-ish DINO candidates in 2016? But I’m in a Blue state so can vote my conscience without instant run-off voting.

        Unless there’s a awful lot of us planning to do the same thing.

    • northwestrain says:

      Third party is still voting and I own my vote God Damn it

      Stop being an 0bot.

      Make sure Elizabeth Warren wins in your state.

      The drones will fly and keep up the killing. Our privacy will be eroded even more than it is now — no matter which jerk wins.

      Only a few thing MIGHT be better with 0bowma — but we really have no idea. The next 4 years of 0bowma might just be worse. Wall Street and the Banks will continue to empty the National treasury under either guy.

      0bowma will bow down to the men in dresses wearing red hats. or the bishops. And women will be the loser.

      The health whatever insurance giveaway to insurance companies could very well be gutted by the Supremes. Which answers why the lawyer working for the WH did such a bad job defending 0bama Care.

      0bama is an unknown — except we know that the keystone pipeline is a done deal with either jerk.

      Both choices are bad and the future looks very bleak no matter which jerk wins. The win for either of these jerks means we all lose.

      So I will vote — but not for either of these creeps. My vote is really meaningless in this state (WA) is a solid blue state.

      Pat if it makes you feel good to add your vote for liar and a con man — go ahead. Although he will win without your submissive bowing down to this con man. It is your right to cast your vote however you want to. In some states we can even write in someone.

      We have a hell of a long way to go until November. Let’s hope both dickheads tell us what they have planned for the next 4 years. 0bowma went into this without a vision — and he has muddle along. The political reporters have also realized that Mittens also isn’t a vision kind of guy and Mittens really hasn’t told us what he wants to do for the next 4 years.

      Whoever wins — we are all fu&ked.

      • No one here is an Obot.

        Also: We don’t have to see eye to eye on 2012.

      • quixote says:

        northwestrain, RalphB went over the top giving you psych diagnoses instead of discussing the points you raised. Using “Obots” is a bit over the top, too.

        This is to everybody, not specifically northwestrain. Preserve the decencies of debate.

      • quixote says:

        (Sorry, I see I’m repeating Wonk, yet again!)

      • bostonboomer says:

        Agreed. Northwestrain, voting third party is a valid choice. I may do it myself. As I’ve said many times, I may not decide who I’ll vote for until November 6.

        But calling long-time commenters “Obots” is not acceptable. And it’s very difficult for me to accept you calling Michele Obama a racist. Please don’t do that again.

        I think most of us agree that Obama wasn’t ready to be president. In my opinion, he had done OK with foreign policy, mostly because of Hillary, but his record on civil liberties is horrible. He should have focused on the economy and jobs instead of the health care boondoggle. But he is the president now. Nothing is going to be gained by obsessing about how he got the job. I think he has shown some signs of growing in office. I’d rather give him a chance at a second term than go to hell in a handbasket with Romney. That’s my own opinion and I respect the opinions of people who disagree with me.

        We can disagree without being rude attacking each other personally.

  11. Okay, we’re all adults here…
    Skydancing was founded on civility and we don’t run a tight ship. We rarely moderate.

    We’ve been through a lot together.

    No name-calling. Discuss issues. Not other commenters.

    No more warnings.

    • bostonboomer says:

      Thanks, Mona. I agree. We’ve managed to keep Sky Dancing blog a friendly place for quite a long time now. I think accusations of racism are beyond the pale. We each have a right to our own opinions. A difference of opinions does not equal being uncaring. It’s just a different point of view.

      Personally, I enjoy difference of opinion, and I think the discussion on this thread has been generally great. It’s fine to be passionate about issues, but personal attacks are not OK.

  12. Seriously says:

    Oh, Q. I find the whole thing so dispiriting. We might as well cancel all elections and just have a Miss Farmington-off where we explore which unworthy female is best suited to the only role to which females can aspire. Teach your daughter to sip tea silently, frequent the best fashion houses and coax the most bountiful array of vegetables from the earth in the most non-threatening fashion possible. Sigh. Bad enough to be married to these bozos without having to manage an ever changinf array of outmoded expectations.

    • quixote says:

      All I can say is hang in there. That’s what I’m trying to do! (In between bouts of Political Affective Disorder.)

      • northwestrain says:

        Like I said — it is a hell of a long way to November.

        Right now Romney is the new flavor — so no surprise that he is polling well. No one knows him.

        Political Science 101 — the candidate will each get a bump after the convention. (Florida could have a hurricane for the Republican Convention– If I believed in God I might start praying).

        STOP WRINGING HANDS — the only vote that counts is the electoral college.

        Obowma and Mrs. Need to be reminded that they work for we the people. She has a staff — we pay the bill for her staff — thus she works for we the people.

        Women’s votes should not given to anyone unless he/she is worthy.

  13. dakinikat says:

    Wow … I can see my trip to the mountains left me a little out of the loop!!!

    • to quote Oprecious–welcome back to the silly season 😉

      • dakinikat says:

        Well, for what it’s worth, I agree with you on having strong opinions but leaving the name calling for the playground and the psycho blogs

      • dakinikat says:

        I did like being out of the loop some. I was in a pure realm. I could tell because there was room service, a to die-for view, and dark chocolates on my pillow at night.

      • NW Luna says:

        Glad you were well-treated, Dak!

        Sometimes we’re too good at dividing and conquering amongst ourselves and forget we have far more in common than the relatively little divergences.