Pres. Obama does Jay-Z & Beyonce’s fundraiser, appears on ‘The Late Show’

Our general rule for covering politically-charged stories is “We’ll cover it if it has a celebrity/gossip/tabloid element.” I think appearing on The Late Show with David Letterman is celebrity/gossip-y enough. So here you go… Pres. Obama appeared on The Late Show last night for an interview that went longer than 30 minutes. It was particularly interesting timing – once again, in a gossip context – because yesterday, Mother Jones released the full video of Mitt Romney’s comments/Q&A at a Florida fundraiser, and Romney even name-checked Letterman. Romney said – to his contributors – that he would never do Saturday Night Live because it had “the potential of looking slapstick and not presidential,” but that he has done Letterman AND Leno and “Now Letterman hates me because I’ve been on Leno more than him; they’re very jealous of each other, as you know.” You can watch the full video of Romney’s fundraiser comments here.

As for Obama’s interview with Letterman… I still haven’t watched the whole thing (it’s so long!). But I thank CBS for making the full video available:

Here’s what Obama had to say about Romney’s “47 percent” comment (which, btw, Romney has doubled-down on although he admitted he stated his case inelegantly):

“Well, I don’t know what he was referring to, but I can tell you this. When I won in 2008, 47 percent of the American people voted for John McCain, they didn’t vote for me. And what I said on election night was, even though you didn’t vote for me, I hear your voices and I’m going to work as hard as I can to be your president. And one of the things I’ve learned as president is you represent the entire country. And when I meet Republicans as I’m traveling around the country, they are hard-working, family people, who care deeply about this country and my expectation is that if you want to be president you got to work for everybody not just for some.”

“You don’t meet anybody who doesn’t believe in the American Dream and the fact that nobody’s entitled to success… There are not a lot of people out there who think they’re victims. There are not a lot of people who think they’re entitled to something. What I think the majority of people, Democrats and Republicans, believe is that we’ve got some obligations to each other and there’s nothing wrong with us giving each other a helping hand.”

Obama even half-defends Romney during part of the interview, saying that “People understand, I think, that you’re going to make mistakes on the campaign trail.” But Obama counters, “What I think people want to make sure of though is that you’re not writing off a big chunk of the country.”

I believe was this was Pres. Obama’s last time in New York before Election Day – in addition to doing The Late Show, he also appeared at a fundraiser hosted by Jay-Z and Beyonce, which was held at Jay’s 40/40 club. Us Weekly says that Obama praised Beyonce in particular during the fundraiser, saying: “To J and B, thank you so much for your friendship. Beyonce could not be a better role model for my girls. [As for Jay], we both have daughters and our wives are more popular than we are. So, you know, we’ve got a little bond there. It’s hard but it’s okay.”

Last thing – if you’d like to read an excellent interview/profile of Obama, Vanity Fair’s Michael Lewis did a wonderful piece in the October issue, and VF has put it online here.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

187 Responses to “Pres. Obama does Jay-Z & Beyonce’s fundraiser, appears on ‘The Late Show’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. valleymiss says:

    I have no beef with this article until Obama praises Beyonce for being a great role model for his daughters. I HATE it when anyone encourages kids to look to celebrities or sports figures for their role models. Look to parents and teachers and so on. It’s not Bey’s job to be a role models for someone’s kids (unless she’s regularly a part of their lives. And while I’m sure Sasha and Malia have met Bey, I doubt she is a big part of their day to day life.)

    • Cherry says:

      Totally agree. ‘Beyonce could not be a better role model for my girls’?? That’s ridiculous- and a little offensive, I must say. Sure, he was at Jay/Bey’s fundraiser and he’s required to kiss their asses, but still. I really hope that’s not the highest hope he has for his daughters.

    • menlisa says:

      + 10000.
      I like Obama but that left a bad taste in my mouth..

    • Johanna says:

      Valley: I get what you’re saying but as soon as you generalize an entire group instead of seeing them as individuals you miss out.
      I’m a 24 year old female who looks up to Tim Duncan, a basketball player, who is the epitome of class, he’s respectful, non fame whorish, he kept his promise to his dying mother regarding his education, he’s a philanthropist… I could go on but I won’t.
      When I was preparing for my PT test to join the Army I would repeat to myself while jogging, ”Good.. Better. Best. Never let it rest until your good is better & your better is your best.” A little Tim Duncan saying.
      You should be able to look up to anyone as long as it influences you to become a better person. That’s all I have to say.

      • Ahot says:

        Standing ovations to you on this! Lord knows i can´t STAND Bey, but in terms of being driven, she is a role model to everyone (Argh!…). Love Hillary, but she was not from the down down middle class. B did very well even if i don´t always agree with her methods, so i see his point.
        Now YOU inspire me with this line. I am so copying it! Thank you.

      • Johanna says:

        I’m not a beyonce fan at all because her music doesn’t appeal to me & I think I’m too old to be a fan of her persona. I never considered Hilary a role model just because I’ve toned down on the political discussion due to the nature of my work but I admire her as a driven woman, she’s intelligent, hard working, & I would never want to go head to head with her in a debate. That being said, she doesn’t inspire action within me. Some people influence us in different ways so that’s why I think there is nothing wrong with looking up to an athlete or a celebrity, again, as long as they inspire you to become better. So Ahot, you have the power to inspire yourself. You can do it!

      • The Original Victoria says:

        I agree, but Tim Duncan has put in all the effort. Bey hasn’t. It does not take hard work to steal people’s shit and copy it as your own, or shake your ass while trying to convince everyone you created modern dance. Beyonce could not even articulate her commitment to World Humanitarian day on CNN without looking ridculous next to a UN rep who was cleary educated and REALLY dedicatd to the cause. She hasn’t really worked for anything. Or at least not nore than anyone to be noted for it. That’s why she’s called into question.

        Beyonce appears to be a hard worker because that’s what she tells everyone. And I’m not saying she doesn’t put effort in anything because she has but she is not out there reinventing the wheel or being extra the way she claims. She is just a chick with a slightly more than average voice and a dad who was a master PR wizard. Having girls look up to that type of phoniness is just irksome and one of the reasons why I side-eye the Obamas frequently. I’m team none of these heauxs.

        It matters to me the motivation behind what a person does as well as the goal. Beyonce’s “hard work” isn’t admirable because what she produces is not admirable in any way IMO.

        Of course I’m not saying that’s how everyone should think, but that’s just my spin on it.

    • lucy2 says:

      Totally agree – and those girls don’t need Beyonce, they have their own mother to look up to.

      • Cazzie says:

        Totally! Their Mom is a role model!

        Beyonce is very pretty and has a nice voice, but she was raised since birth to be a pop singer, and that is all she is. A pop singer. There were successful singers before her, and there will be successful pop singers after her.

        Michelle Obama on the other hand is actually, y’know, trying to change the world and stuff.

        (Whatever, though – Obama was just buttering up his donors anyways. Michelle knows that he really thinks she’s the great role model.)

      • Janet says:

        ^^This in spades.

    • Nikita says:

      oh come on, get over it, its not THAT important….. dont take every word so serious. Beyonce is a hard working woman who blieved in her dreams, there is nothing wrong with her. shes not perfect yes, but who is. you? me? i dont think so. i dont see anything bad in obamas words.

  2. ramona says:

    I really love Obama. I think he’s great. Definitely the kind of guy I want representing me. I wish I was in the States so I could vote in person instead of by absentee ballot.

  3. Skins says:

    Hey Pres, did you know that Jay-Z was a drug dealer and a thief and god knows what else before he became a rapper?

  4. mcleodlt says:

    This man is a terrible President. He is an apologist who would have most of us on our knees, relying on the government. He was never seriously vetted by the media so his inexperience in just about everything that is needed to represent this country was never discussed. He isn’t particulary intelligent – just sounding smart isn’t enough. I’m no fan of Romney, either. Second verse same as the first. We needed serious change in this country. Not more vacation time for Michelle.

    • brin says:

      Well said.

    • mln76 says:

      He was never vetted by the media?????? Totally not true the man has had to defend himself against allegations that he falsified his birth certificate at birth because of his diabolical plan in the crib to be president. Disagree with his policies all you want but please stop with the idiocy that he hasn’t been vetted.

      • mcleodlt says:

        Never been vetted – it’s not idiotic, it’s the truth. I don’t care about his birth certificate. I would have liked to know more about his experience in government. How was he going to accomplish all the big promises he was making. Whose ideas was he going to use. What about the people he learned from, who were they? What was his experience in getting things done. These things weren’t talked about in detail. He would barely admit to knowing the people who were tied to him. Anyone with a whiff of controversy, he threw under the bus. Really, go back and read. He wasn’t vetted.

      • Lacie says:

        You are spot on mln. He was vetted and they found everything they could, which wasn’t much. Even the conservative outlets did their best to find some dirt, and the best they came up with was that “he’s a Muslim” BS.

        Try again, Faux News lover.

        The reason you think he’s a terrible president, mcleodt, is because the majority repubs vowed to do nothing during his presidency and threw all their effort toward making him fail. So, they do nothing and he does nothing; he was forced into being a fairly neutral president. A terrible president would do bad things, like lil Bushie; at least this guy tries, it’s not his fault he’s blocked by the right, and the chicken shit dems do even less than the republican hissy fit stand off.

        The only way we can get serious candidates who want to do something is by taking the money out of politics. Senators used to get paid $6/day. Bring it back.

      • garvels says:

        Obama was never vetted like Romney. I didn’t realize that Obama’s mentor was Frank Marshall Davis,a card carrying communist. Obama references Frank 22 times in his autobiography. Obama’s father,mother and grandparents were Marxists. I do,like many, have a real problem with the Marxist philosophy.Marxism believes the power rests with the collective and not the individual. There is no middle class in a marxist society. There is just the very rich who are the people in government and their allies and then the lower class whose rights are given to them by the government. Obama is constantly preaching redistribution and fairness. I have seen several of his speeches where he vilifies successful people. What really turned me against Obama was an article in the Wall street jouranl where Obama had created an enemies list for people to target on a website composed of affluent Romney donors. How very Nixonian!

      • Issa says:

        Not vetted=Birthers & McCarthyites. Its code language for far leaning republicans believing the trash they hear on Faux and right wing blogs. Birthers, teabaggers, and those believing a Communist or Marxist is around every corner.

    • roxy750 says:

      Well said x’s 2! We need a leader, a trusted responsible one and not a celebrity. If that’s the case I’m voting for JOLIE!

    • Esmom says:

      “He is an apologist who would have most of us on our knees, relying on the government. He was never seriously vetted by the media so his inexperience in just about everything that is needed to represent this country was never discussed. ”

      And the Fox News talking points come out. If you look at the facts, he has not “apologized.” Rather, he has chosen diplomacy and sensitivity instead of blind arrogance in his handling of foreign policy. This “Obama as apologist” BS is conservative spin at its worst.

      As for him not being vetted…pure garbage. Do you even realize what nonsense you are mindlessly spewing?

      • garvels says:

        Read his 2009 Cairo speech. ..he did apologize.You along with Soledad OBrian should invest in a Thesaurus. Just because he did not say the actual word,”apologize”,does not mean he did not apologize.The tenor of the speech was that of an apology.

      • Tiffany says:

        Garvels, read up. Obama did not apologize. Politifact, Washington Post, Factcheck, etc. all reach the same conclusion.

      • Esmom says:

        You are missing the point completely…but if you insist on finding evidence of apologies by an American president, here’s one for you:

        “I told him I was sorry for the humiliation suffered by the Iraqi prisoners and the humiliation suffered by their families.”

        Uttered by George W. Bush to Jordan’s King Abdullah in 2004.

    • kay says:

      I am not American, so my opinion may not matter.

      You stated that he has not been vetted. By this I assume you are implying that other past Presidents have been?

      and my answer to that is “how’d that work for your Country?”

      some food for thought.

    • Tiffany says:

      “He is an apologist who would have most of us on our knees, relying on the government.”

      If you have to lie to that extent, then maybe you don’t really have a point to stand on. Even though Mitt likes to say that Obama has “apologized”, fact checkers have repeatedly shown that is not true. Secondly, the President and the Democratic party want programs available to people if they are dire straights to help them survive. That is NOT the same thing as wanting them to be dependant on the government. There are many good things that a government can do(emergency services, infrastructure, defense, etc.), and just because a person recognizes that does not mean that they are advocating that everyone get on government assitance.

      Can we have a factual discussion about real problems, or are you going to stick to talking points that are complete fiction?

    • Em12 says:

      Obama absolutely was NOT vetted, and the media’s being even more shameful this second time around though a couple are at least admitting they didn’t vet him properly, which is mildly refreshing. I’m horrified by how skewed in Obama’s favor the media is, and everyone else, party affiliation aside, should be terrified as well. Whether you support or dislike Obama is besides the point. The media is supposed to ask the tough questions and look into our candidates not choose them for us and then force them on the American public. If any other person had made the gaffes Obama has (most recently saying Egypt is NOT out ally, which his own state department had to fix just hours later) they would’ve been crucified. Also, the dems had control of the White House, House of Reps, and Senate for 2 years… the idea that the Reps blocked anything during that time is a joke!! Everyone should be educating themselves by exposing themselves to various kinds of media. Don’t just believe what the mainstream media tells you!! You’ll probably be surprised by what you learn, and you’ll be able to have much more interesting and accurate conversations.

      • Tiffany says:

        “Also, the dems had control of the White House, House of Reps, and Senate for 2 years… the idea that the Reps blocked anything during that time is a joke!!”

        Let’s not re-write history here. Sen. Kennedy had a brain tumor, and he was out for most of his final year. The dems did not have a filabuster proof majority…as evidenced by the RECORD BREAKING amount of filabusters used in the Senate. Also, Liebermann is an independant. He caucused with the Dems but he supported McCain in the election.

      • Lemon Poundcake says:

        Except that the Republicans do control the house, and have blocked everything they could (remember the debt ceiling, anyone?).
        Just ask Eric Cantor and the other Tea Party yahoos.

    • e.non says:

      provide a citation and link to any example of obama apologizing on his trips overseas.

      the actual quote was egypt was neither an ally nor an enemy. a reasonable statement considering the new government and completely uprooted political situation there. besides, it would be nice if the u.s. would end its support of corrupt, abusive dictators. but i digress…

      that democratic control of congress? heh. ever heard of blue dog democrats — who side with republicans more than the party they belong to. (blanche lincoln, ben nelson). not to mention the republicans abuse of senate rules.

    • Issa says:

      Guess you prefer the presidents that like to blow shait up? You may get your wish because Romney mentioned Iran, China, and Russia as our mortal enemies. Hinting for war. He said it after the embassy attacks. According to him our ememies aren’t in the middle east, not Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, radical Islamic extremists, Hezbollah, but the Ruskies.
      You make see Obama as a man that apologizes but I see Mittens as a man that believes we’re living in the ’80s and refuses to see our true enemies. Who the hell thinks Russia is out biggest threat? Is that the man you really want to be commander in chief? Reality verses Rocky.

    • Nikita says:

      terrible President??? HAHAHAHAHAAH you must be talking about bush right?
      i will never understand why some americans think that a president can solve all the problems a country has? hes the president yes, but he doesnt decide alone. and he cant solve all problems who have been made in the past by bush. the economy is bad in the whole world and this is not obamas fault. hes not jesus.

  5. mln76 says:

    Ugh I’m so disgusted with Mitt Romney’s comments. I can’t find the words for how gross it is that a man with such disdain for the electorate would be arrogant enough to run for President but only of the rich ones. I actually feel bad for Republicans because I know that although I disagree fundamentally with many of them they for the most part wouldn’t stand behind that sort of cynicism. What a putrid man.

    • Em12 says:

      Wow, if you think Romney’s putrid you should do more research into Obama. You’ll be in for quite a few surprised. As for Romney’s comemnts about the 47%, he was saying it’s not worth trying to “go after their vote” not that he won’t care for them if elected. Why is this more putrid than Obama’s statement that Americans, “Cling to their religion and guns?” Romney’s statement is actually accurate… most people receiving government assistance aren’t going to support Romney because they’ll want to continue to receive assistance. Obama’s statement is erroneous and disgusting, but it provides a scary glimpse into what he things of Americans. Very very sad.

  6. Meg says:

    I’m not an American and when I watch election campaign I don’t like the way Obama acts. He is more celebrity than serious politician and I don’t respect celebs.

    • vic says:

      Love this comment. You nailed it exactly. Most of us want a cool celebrity instead of someone with executive experience that can turn our country around. Instead of meeting with foreign leaders while our embassies are being attacked, Mr. Cool President is hanging out with rappers.

      • Mira says:

        What is wrong if BO is a little more relaxed? It makes him more approachable. I don’t know your nationality, but the country I come from would love to have someone like BO as our national leader. We are tired of seeing one uptight, stiff lipped, “traditionally behaved,” “supposedly serious” politician after an other. I like BO. Him being a little “chilled out” does not make him less of a serious President/politician.

        Really, how do you expect BO to undo ALL the domestic and foreign policy decisions taken by the Bush government in just one term? There’s a lot of damage to be undone – recession, Afghanistan, Iraq etc. I’m not an American, but it’s my opinion that the sky-high expectations Americans had/have of Obama that is failing them. The man has inherited legacies from the Bush term. One term is not enough to turn it around.

    • Mac says:

      If you don’t like the way Obama acts now then just wait to see what his 2nd term will be like.

      BO seldom passes on the opportunity to prance and preen, but he is a serious politician with a serious agenda for the future of the USA and elsewhere.

      The fact that he chose Letterman over Netanyahu speaks volumes about his priorities.

    • Lacie says:

      And how would you reach out to young people, who are the least likely to vote?

      Let’s be honest, he’s got a solid base and so does Romney. Romney’s going after Hispanics pretty damn hard, appearing on Telemundo, and Obama’s going for young people who have been thus far apathetic.

      Both approaches seem appropriate to me.

  7. dorothy says:

    Good to see that running the country isn’t interfering with his rubbing elbows with celebrities and doing talk shows. That’s really the important thing.

    • andy says:

      President Obama is running a presidential campaign for re-election. He has to campaign to win another term. Is he suppose to sit in the White House, while Mitt Romney hits the campaign trail?

    • Anaya says:

      Mitt Romney has celebrity supporters and he was recently on Live with Kelly and Michael. He’s done night time talk shows too as mentioned in this post. It’s become the norm for presidents or presidential candidates to do celeb focused talk show programs such as Letterman and Leno. If it’s okay for one it should be seen as okay for others.

    • Tiffany says:

      Oh please. The President can conduct business from anywhere. I was just watching a special on Reagan, and when he would go on rides on his horse, they had secret service that was following him with phones and other devices that enabled him to communicate with anyone he might need. No doubt Obama is able to get his work done and spend 30 minutes on Letterman.

    • F5 says:

      I’m really proud that he was a guest on “DJ Pimp With the Limp’s” show on Sept. 11.

  8. TheOriginalKitten says:

    What Romney said was stupid but honestly, he was speaking to a group of private donors. Are we seriously going to pretend that presidents don’t have opinions about the voting populous?

    Everybody is screaming that Romney’s campaign is dead in the water after this latest debaucle. Maybe, I don’t know-I’m not a swing voter. Anyway, I think people are blowing it WAY out of proportion and I don’t think his comments are a predictor of him being a bad president (there are plenty of other reasons why I won’t be voting for him).

    That being said, the Dem party is rightly jumping all over this. Remember when the Republicans took the “clinging to your guns” comment that Obama made and rehashed it every chance they got? So yeah, I don’t blame the Dems one bit for reveling in Romney’s missteps.

    • Kate says:

      Good post OriginalKitten, except I’d take issue with one point: Obama’s bitter gun clinger comments came during the primary season, so it was really Hillary’s camp that shoved it down his throat, not the Republicans. Who knows what effect it had, but he lost the PA primary to Hillary soon afterwards. By the time the general came around, that comment was old news.

      They are both similar comments, but it is the kind of stuff you say when you are speaking to $50K a plate donors. It’s all part of the game. Romney’s bad fortune is it came out in September, not April, like Obama’s.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        I guess weed isn’t helping my memory huh? ;)

        You are right-I forgot how savagely Hilary fought during her campaign.

        And that’s exactly it-politics is a game. If anybody thinks that politicians have the best interest of the people in mind, they are sadly mistaken. They vote in favor of their party, in order to make the opposing party look bad, regardless of whether what they’re voting AGAINST actually benefits the people.

    • Tiffany says:

      I think there are two reasons this is a big deal. First, he is talking about 47% of the country! That is huge. He isn’t just saying he isn’t going to get their vote, he is saying that they consider themselves victims and expect the government to provide all of their food, housing, medical care. That is a pretty damning statement about a pretty big portion of the country.

      Second, as Chuck Todd has said, gaffes are really only harmful when they reinforce an already existing narrative. In this case, Romney’s policies (especially tax plan) already have given voters the idea that he doesn’t care about the middle class, that he is working just for the wealthy. These comments play into that narrative.

  9. Des says:

    All those here to complain about how Obama spends his time need to read the VF Michael Lewis article linked above.

    The man is a time managing ninja.

  10. Anaya says:

    This is Jon Stewart’s take on the Romney remarks about the 47%. Hilarious as usual.

    • TG says:

      Jon Stewart is awesome and I like President Obama. I agree with many on here about the role model thing. I mean if you are in the public eye hopefully you take it upon yourself to be a role model for younger people and those around you but that doesn’t always happen and I realize even those who have good character and are conscious of the influence they have over young people make mistakes. So I don’t think Beyonce is evil or anything but I specifically remember watching an interview of people who put one of her videos together and the guy (I don’t know his name) said that she wanted to make it more “ghetto”. So she like many of the hip hop stars play in to the stereotypes like wearing your pants down to your knees knowing that they will influence a lot of impressionable people when in reality they are doing it as a marketing ploy not because that is them and they would choose to look that way. I really don’t like that.

      • Ahot says:

        Blame the game, don´t blame the players. I can´t believe i just defended B-yawn-cee! This is all Obama´s fault! Ugh.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        If only we cared as much about what presidents DO as we seem to care about what they SAY.

  11. Bite me aka aniston says:

    Can’t wait for November 6

  12. lucy2 says:

    I think that was a good response to the Romney video. He could have gone for the jugular, IMO, but I think a more measured response is a good one.

    If I were undecided, Romney’s comments would have an impact on my decision. I know every politician panders to their fundraisers, but those comments were beyond that, IMO, and were pretty insulting to that “47%” he was talking about – the majority of which are working people with lower incomes, but also includes senior citizens, the disabled, students, etc. To write all of those people off as irresponsible moochers is pretty gross, IMO.
    Especially coming from a guy who has benefited greatly by the current tax code, and who won’t release more than 2 years of his returns.

    • videli says:

      Agree, and I think Romney basically said that he is prepared to be the president of only 53% of the population, that only 53% is the nation for him.

      • Em12 says:

        That’s not what he said. What he was saying is that he knows he’s not going to get a vote from those in the 47%, which is true. More people are on government assistance now than ever before, fewer are working than ever before, and we have $16 trillion in debt!! What has Obama been good for? Absolutely nothing! He said it was unpatriotic for Bush to incur around 3.5 trillion in debt over 8 years, but somehow it’s not totally acceptable for Obama to incur ever MORE than that in only 3.5 years… how does THAT make sense?!

      • videli says:

        Em12: Please, let’s cut the rambling about Obama, we can talk about him separately. Smarter people than me have already brought up important points: this candid phrasing falls into a narrative of the rich CEO who’s going to work for his rich shareholders, not of a president capable of uniting the nation. Second: it shows that Romney does not have a clear idea of who the 47% are, or doesn’t care to find out (Hint: a lot of them are his voters, yeah, clinging to the guns and all). To me that meeting sounds almost like a ritualistic session where the employee assures his employers of their shared contempt for the working poor.

    • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

      Don’t forget those shiftless war vets.

  13. maggiegrace says:

    @mcleodit – the President isn’t particularly intelligent? He went to Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he was president of the Harvard Law Review. He then taught constitutional law at University of Chicago. Anyone who has those credentials is without a doubt, PARTICULARLY intelligent. Michelle does good work and is completely unobjectionable. “On vacation”? Are you kidding me? Or is she just a bit uppity for your liking?

    • flan says:

      A bit too smart probably.

      Some people really hate smart women.

    • mcleodlt says:

      No, not particularly intelligent. Some of the stupidest things done have been done by people who went to Harvard. It’s not the degree, it’s the action and his aren’t particularly intelligent. 16 vacations in 4 years, that doesn’t seem a lot to you? Most of us don’t go on vacation but once or twice a year. That’s you and me paying for those vacations, as well. I normally pay for my own….

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Comments like yours are yet another reason why I’m done with politics. People focus on the most INANE, arbitrary things in their quest to prove who’s political party is superior and completely lose focus of the real issues.
        WGAF how many vacations a president takes? I’m more worried about him taking ownership of my uterus.

        And I’m not singling out Republicans here, Democrats do it too. We need to focus on REAL problems guys and stop with the silly bickering. Ugh.

        If you’re not happy with what the president has done so far, FINE. Cite specific examples and how you would change things instead of blaming what you consider to be a poor job on him taking too many vacations.

    • Lacie says:

      Agreed. Intelligence is objective, not subjective. It isn’t something an online poster can assess, and it’s not something you can tell from watching clip shows of a person.

      To get into Harvard and Columbia, there are very real and accurate measures of intelligence that must be met, unless you are a legacy or your parent makes a generous enough donation, of course. This, we all know, was not possible for him.

      • mcleodlt says:

        Most currently and most specifically, I would have made a healthcare reform that was easy to read. I would not have allowed any one to hide things in the bill – have you read it? I would have included tort reform. Lawyers make the most money when a person sues. Lawyers, not the person who suffered. I would have allowed people to purchase insurance across state lines so that cost of being covered might have gone lower if companies actually had to work for your business. I would have asked pharmaceutical companies why we Americans are subsidizing drugs for other nations. Your cost as an American for a drug is always going to be more than CANADA! They are not some suffering third world nation. Are you even paying attention to what you are paying for?

      • Lacie says:

        Yes, I have read it (ok, what’s available of it), I work in clinical research and it affects my industry profoundly. My guess is that you have not read it, but that you subscribe to someone else’s interpretation of it, ie the “stealing money from medicare” lines.

        Anyway, I applaud most of your ideas and it is clear that you have thought about this independently.

        Although, take it from someone in the research industry, the only reason meds cost more here is because the research is grotesquely mis-budgeted and Americans can and will pay for their drugs, but other countries won’t pay outlandish prices. Why? Because it is covered by their extremely broad insurance coverage that is not available here.

        Tell a fat person it’s $100 for Lipitor per month or a new diet, and the Canadian (immigrant) will change their lifestyle while the American will pay for the Lipitor. It’s what we’re already used to.

    • Em12 says:

      With all due respect, if he’s so brilliant why’d he spend millions securing his college docs so no one could find anything out about that time in his life? You’d think he’d want to flaunt that paperwork everywhere especially since he promised soooo much transparency. Also, why does he stumble and stammer whenever he doesn’t have a teleprompter? The myth that he’s a great speaker is a joke. He’s a pretty good reader, but the second he’s with a teleprompter you could have a drinking game with all of the “ummms” that come out of his mouth.

      • Tiffany says:

        College documents are released as a matter of law. Obama isn’t special in this regard. Do you check out any of these talking points before you spout them off?

        “Obama’s college records are not “sealed” by a court order, as this graphic would have you believe. It would be illegal under federal law (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) for Occidental, Columbia or Harvard Law School to give any former student’s records to reporters or members of the public without that person’s specific, written permission. Obama hasn’t released them, but neither have other presidential candidates released their college records.”

      • mcleodlt says:

        I’ve actually read a great deal of it. I’m not taking any body’s word for it and if they ended medicare today, I wouldn’t be sorry. I am old enough to be worried about medicare. I’m not old enough for medicare, but I’m getting close. I also don’t care about social security. Stop it right now and don’t give me the money that I’ve paid into it and I’ll call it even. The truth is neither one of these programs is solvent. We are pretending that there is money there and it isn’t there. We believe the lies we are told on a daily basis and we never stop to think that they are just trying to keep us complacent so they can keep their power. Neither party is telling us the truth. The crazy part is if we actually took the time to research all the ‘truths’ they told us, we would know they were lying. We’re apathetic; it requires too much effort.
        I am on the side of freedom. I don’t need the government to take care of me. I’m not rich, but I’ll be damned if I let anyone ‘take care of me.’ Sarah Palin is an idiot who was right. They are going to decide whether or not you deserve the life saving drugs. They are going to decide if you’re thin enough or healthy enough or pc enough. They are stealing our liberties and we let them. Stay out of my luggage when I travel; don’t take an xray of me just because I have big boobs. How is that keeping us safe? How much are we going to give up? Jesus, we’re just letting it happen.

  14. epiphany says:

    Romney didn’t make a mistake – his remark was right on the money, and I’m glad he’s not backing down. Of course many folks on government assistance would prefer to be employed – Romney said as much. There is also a large number of these people who believe the role of the government is to take care of them – they DO feel entitled. The question is, do you want to live in a country where the government does supply all your basic needs – you have food, shelter, healthcare – to an extent – but you make no decisions for yourself, and can never be more than you are right now. Or. do you want an America where anything is possible – not guaranteed mind you, you may fall flat on your face -but where you have the opportunity to be , oh, let’s see, a middle class black girl from Houston who became a superstar, or a former drug dealer/pimp who now cavorts with the Commander in Chief? Obama’s vision of America makes those ambitions null and void. And yes, I want a President who thinks going on talk shows and giving interviews to “the pimp with a limp” is beneath his dignity.

    • Green_Eyes says:

      Not even going to point out some facts about that statement as this is blog site I don’t come to for politics or to bash anyone.

      That being said, By your own standards you just listed, it’s not very “Presidential” to reveal on a National Television daytime talk show how little as possible one wears to bed w/ an innuendo tone. To be fair by your standards neither are very Presidential.. Just curious?:)

    • flan says:

      You sound brainwashed by proganda if you really believe that people in a country with food, shelter and healthcare can’t decide things for themselves. And yeah, in those countries it’s also possible to better yourself.

      Since -news flash- those countries are not and have never been like cold war Russia.

      You probably never thought of that, but a lot of the money people pay flows back to them and their kids in the form of education, health care etc (horrible things, I know).

    • videli says:

      I don’t get it, and I’m not being disingenuous. What country in particular you have in mind when you picture it like, the govt takes care of your basic needs, but you can’t make decisions for yourself, and you can’t become more than you are? France? Britain? The Scandinavian ones? Is there one specific example of a country that you suggest Obama is herding us to? Seriously? You really think those Europeans live in police states, and that they are devoid of political will and savvy? And, more, aren’t there ambitious/enterprising/better/greedier people there, too? I must conclude, though I really don’t want to make it an insult, that you are either dishonest or poorly informed.

  15. Fudge you, I'm going to Guam! says:

    As a non American…I don’t like that president Obama hangs out with misogynist rappers and singers who I think degrades themselves by p*ssy popping, wearing the skimpiest of clothes with some of the most disgusting lyrics, and no, making songs about independent women and single ladies doesn’t make it right.
    Switching from power female songs and then to misogynist trash doesn’t work for me, I see through that act.
    I am very disappointed in Obama and Michelle, you’d think they’d know better than to uplift “thug life”.

    And Romney just looks like a sociopath to me, he doesn’t act very empathetic. I am referring to the YT video where he addressed a gay vietnamn war veteran. It was heartbreaking watching that and Romney was so cold.

    I’m wondering why more Americans aren’t registered independent? Why not vote for a third party candidate? I’m surprised more Americans aren’t demanding better after Clinton, Bush and the same old promises but no delivery, why even put up with it?
    They work for YOU which means YOU need to demand a better president, riot if you must! The power is in the hands of the people.

    • TG says:

      romney is the ultimate misogynist. He would like to legislate women’s bodies.

    • Lacie says:

      Are you being literal? I’m going to answer your questions. You seem to genuinely not know how it works here (not that I agree with the way it works here! …and not that it necessarily “works” either LOL)

      I’m wondering why more Americans aren’t registered independent?
      You cannot register to be an independent, you can only register with an existing party, and there isn’t an “independent party” because that is the opposite of what an independent is. The reason so many don’t register unaffiliated is so that they can vote in the primaries for the person they would prefer who is in the party they lean toward, and most people genuinely lean left or right. Some people change their affiliation with each election cycle.

      Why not vote for a third party candidate?
      Because when you vote third party, it is the just about the same as voting for the person OPPOSITE the one you’re leaning toward. For instance, if Ron Paul were to run, and a lot of people voted for him, it would never ever be enough for him to win but it would take votes AWAY from Romney since they agree on many things and thus provide Obama with a greater lead.

      I’m surprised more Americans aren’t demanding better after Clinton, Bush and the same old promises but no delivery, why even put up with it?
      What do you suggest we do? On both sides, we have opposition groups now, Tea Party and the Oppose Wall Street crowd–these people are very angry and stage protests but their questions go unanswered. The reason is because of money. Those with money control our political landscape because they control the candidates, and if we don’t have money of our own we are powerless to have any real say. Candidates pander to who gave them the most money, and nobody else.

      • mln76 says:

        At least in NY state there is an Independent Party I used to be registered as one but decided I wanted to vote in the primary so…. I would rather a Parliamentary system which favors third fourth and fifth parties over the two party system that would enable a third party to have influence instead of handing the election to an unfit candidate ala GW… But since Eisenhower would be considered socialist by today’s standards I shouldn’t say I prefer the English system too loud.

      • mln76 says:

        At least in NY state there is an Independent Party I used to be registered as one but decided I wanted to vote in the primary so…. I would rather a Parliamentary system which favors third fourth and fifth parties over the two party system that would enable a third party to have influence instead of handing the election to an unfit candidate ala GW… But since Eisenhower would be considered socialist by today’s standards I shouldn’t say I prefer the English system too loud.

      • banga says:

        @Lacie. You can register as an independent in any state in the US. If you are registered independent you can’t vote in republican or democratic _primaries_, but you can vote in general elections for ANY candidate of ANY party affiliation.

  16. ladybert62 says:

    Does he ever spend any time doing presidential things? I think not – it is campaigning 24/7.

  17. mln76 says:

    Do you honestly believe 47% of America is on welfare? As other commenters have stated above many of the 47% (besides seniors and those in the military)are people who work everyday pay taxes out of their payroll but end up owing little to nothing in payroll in otherwords the ‘working poor’. Ironically the 47% come disproportionately from ‘red states’ like Texas, Alabama, Idaho etc that have followed Republican polices for years. Blue states tend to be wealthier and we pay higher taxes which makes for a better standard of living for everybody go figure…

    • lucy2 says:

      Here’s another article that’s a good breakdown of who that 47%.

      It’s says right off the bat, about half of those people ARE employed, but thanks to a variety of things in tax code like income level, child credits, deductions, college credits, etc, they end up not owing FIT.
      The rest looks to be the elderly living on Social Security (which they probably paid into for decades) and people making less than $20K/year.
      I’d love to see any politician try to live on that for even just a month, and then yell that those people aren’t paying their fair share.

    • epiphany says:

      Just to clarify, Romney didn’t say 47% of Americans were on welfare, he said 47% don’t pay income taxes – which means the rest us us are paying for them.

      • mln76 says:

        Well your above comment seemed to imply that these people were looking for a handout and felt entitled and didn’t work. Which isn’t the case. The 47% are the working poor living in Red States and very possibly voting for Mitt Romney but he doesn’t care about them.

      • lucy2 says:

        He said 47% don’t pay income taxes – AND that those 47% will vote for Obama no matter what, that they feel they are victims and entitled to government handouts, that it’s not his job to worry about them, and that he’ll never convince them to take responsibility for their lives.
        The 47% pay no federal income tax is a fact. If he had left it there, no problem, but it’s everything else he attributed to those people that’s the real issue here.

      • flan says:

        I really don’t get Romney.

        It’s like he and his party are trying to alienate huge chunks of voters (women, gay people and now 47% of Americans).

        Yeah, we know he’s all about the richest 1-2% men, but before the GOP had always been smart enough to not so obvious about it.

  18. Ahot says:

    I sincerly hope for you my friends that Romney won´t win. His views of politics, economics & so forth are not of a qualified man. If the majority choose him just out of spite, i fear for the future of your country (& for the world because we are all bond together,just like the economical crisis showed). Just remember some other are just waiting for the US to loose their supremacy to take over, & these are not human rights friendly countries. You guys can not afford another Bush in the making, or someone who just ignores social needs of his country, thus leads to final ruin. Oh well, only time will tell, but i don´t see a bright future if some crazy-ass fanatics gain strengh in the world. I feel a new world war coming…

    • garvels says:


      What are you talking about? I could only dream about being as unsuccessful as Romney has been in his personal,public and business life. Romney is a proven leader,unlike Obama who is a failed leader and a proven orator. A leader would never blame someone else for their failures.

      Romney was the governor of MA,one of the most liberal states in the country. Romney had to work with a legislature that was 87% democratic.

      When Romney took office,MA was 3 billion in debt,when Romney left office,he left it with a billion dollar rainy day fund.

      Romney listened to the electorate and worked with the legislature to pass healthcare. Romney also passed legislation that rewarded high school graduates with a free 4 year state college scholarship for those who graduated in the top 25% of their class.

      When Romney left office,unemployment trended downwards to 4.5%. The bottom line is that Romney knows how to bring legislatures together to pass effective legislation that represents the will of the people.Romney sounds like such an awful person-NOT!

      What has really troubled me throughout this election cycle is the open collaboration of main stream media and the Obama campaign. The Obama campaign issues talking points and the MSM parrots these talking points nonstop.The MSM has just made themselves irrelevant.

      • Ahot says:

        So, you want me to believe that the state of your country is WORSE then when Bush left, & this is because of Obama? That he received support from all parties to move the country forward, that some never tried to block any effort he ever made, even when it was some of their own ideas he deemed good enough to be applied?
        Romney is suspicious in my eyes because of the tone of his campain, & the way he comes off on the international scene. Trust that i don´t solely refer to american medias to form my opinion on this matter. & if we were to criticise the media for their support, we should expend the criticism to news outlets like Fox News who are certainly not with the current president since the very first day, shouldn´t we?
        I can only tell you this: governing one state is not the guarantee that one is capable to take over the rest of them, because they all present different challenges.
        & with Romney´s behaviour in this campaign, i just don´t think he is qualified to do that.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:


      • garvels says:


        Bush destroyed the republican brand,period. Bush recklessly spent money that we did not have. Bush grew the deficit by 4.5 trillion in 8 years and Obama has grown the deficit by 5.5 trillion in 3.5 years. Obama inherited a poor economy but his policies have made the economy and recovery stagnant. Obama has no clue as to what drives job creation in the private sector. The government picking winners and losers is not the way to go. Obama does not know how to create a favorable business environment,simply because he has never had a job in the private sector. Obama only knows government and Obama truly believes that government should take control of all businesses via over regulation and high taxation.

  19. Courtney says:

    at least President dumb ass didn’t make these two idiots blush like he did Joanne Woodward at the Harvey Winestein fundraiser on August 6th. what these two are so jaded by success that having the president call them inspiring doesn’t make them a bit uncomfortable. Ms Woodward has always been a modest southern girl at heart that when she’s called out for the positive legacy she’s left in the world she naturally turns makintosh apple red and particularly when her beloved late husband Paul Newman is mentioned because she feels he never got enough recognition while he was alive

  20. karley says:

    Jayzs usual lyrics involves the N word, B word and F word repeatedly. Real role model material. It’s too bad military women, scientists, astronauts, doctors, writers etc didn’t make the list. I guess “single ladies” and “big pimpin” adds more to society and his daughters future. Obama better lay off real housewives from now on then.

    • Hotpockets says:

      So true Karley. I can’t stand Jay-Z, so why would I hold his political opinion to any high standard? Obama crosses the line with wanting to be our president and a celebrity.

  21. Hotpockets says:

    “You don’t meet anybody who doesn’t believe in the American Dream”

    I don’t, there’s someone. I’ll sum that up with one of my favorite quotes and comedians of all time. “They call it the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe in it.” -George Carlin

    Oh the American dream, do you want to vote for puppet number one? or puppet number two?

    • epiphany says:

      Thanks – that pretty much sums up my philosophy. I’m not a huge Romney fan by any stretch, but I do know the guy we have now is NOT the answer, and his oh-so-left leaning idealogy does not jive with the framework of our Consitution.
      And, yes, I still believe in the American dream.

      • Hotpockets says:

        Yes I agree immensely. I am not a Obama supporter or gasp, a Romney Supporter either because I don’t agree with either one. They are both extremists and that is wrong on both sides of the spectrum. I don’t agree with a president who declares that the constitution is up to his interpretation because it is NOT (Obama). I also don’t like how they are trying to turn this election into a single issue election, women’s rights, when there is a lot more going on. I think if people actually researched who founded planned parenthood, a woman with Nazi ties who studied eugenics and believed minorities & the underclass should be sterilized, there would be a lot less support for it. Her name was Margeret Sanger, by the way. That’s a whole other story, though.

      • normades says:

        The past is exactly that, the past. PP is the only health service that alot of women get. Don’t take that away from them.

      • giddy says:

        Ummmm… PP is how liberals eradicate underclass population.

      • normades says:

        Whatever Giddy, that is just twisted.

        I used to go to PP when I was in college because it was the only doctor I could afford to see. And yes, I got birth control there, but also pap smears and a monogram when I found a lump. I never got an abortion and had kids much later when I WAS READY to have them.

        I was using a service that was within my means to be RESPONSIBLE – Not looking for a handout.

    • Janet says:

      @giddy: You have got to be kidding! Would you rather women be forced to have a slew of children they can’t take care of? Are you feeling nostalgic for the good old days when the infant mortality rate was over the moon and women died in childbirth left and right? PP has helped millions of women limit the number of children they have to the number they can responsibly care for. Anyone who would take that away from them is certifiably bonkers.

  22. evadstructn says:

    How any rational-thinking person could even consider electing a Mormon as US President is beyond me. If the kind of mind that can believe Mormonism is in control of the US government, I have grave fears for our global future.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Yeah we shouldn’t have Mormonism, Catholicism, Christianity, Islam or any other religion “controlling” the government, which is why we need true separation of church and state or even better, an ATHEIST president.

      Oh that wasn’t what you were getting at?
      My bad…

      • Lacie says:

        I would LOVE an atheist or agnostic president.

        Unfortunately, atheists are hated more than anyone else in this country because they tend to restrict their beliefs to things like facts and science.

        However, Mormons really are 2nd on the “craziest delusional religion” list, right after CO$.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @ Lacie-we’d have a C0$ president before we’d ever have an atheist president ;)

      • Tiffany says:

        “I would LOVE an atheist or agnostic president.”

        That would be wonderful! So much less pandering!

      • evadstructn says:

        Original kitten, that’s exactly what I was getting at.

        I think it’s terrifying that a man who is capable of believing the craziness of Mormonism could potentially have power and influence globally. Magic underpants aside, the Mormon doctrine is particularly bonkers and it’s horrifying that he could have any more power than he already does.

        i hope rational people in America give that some thought before they go back to arguing about the economy.

        I think in Australia, for all our political problems, having an unmarried childless woman who has more or less “come out” as an Atheist as our Prime Minister is a really good, progressive thing.

      • mln89 says:

        i totally agree. it would be great for once to have the leader of this country TRULY leave their religious beliefs out of matters of state. the fact that shrub jr. dedicated so many public funds to christian faith-based initiatives was not only a slap in the face to those who aren’t christian, but those who don’t practice any religion at all.

  23. TG says:

    I also think Beyonce is the one celeb that the President has a crush on and she is his fantasy. I mean we all have one, or most of us do and it is kind of cute but a little weird too.

  24. TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

    I’ve worked in the legal field for 20 some years and lawyers are among the least well read and well educated members of our professional classes; Ivy leagues schools have declined and are not what they once were (the literature on higher ed. and its troubles is vast);
    In the spirit on non-partisanship, all of our politicos should show some substance and stay far away from today’s silly celebutard world, nothing good comes from these dalliances.
    Good point Karley I wonder if our First Lady has read Camel’s lyrics out loud to her daughters. Just asking?

  25. Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

    Here’s the thing that I believe is getting so many hackles up: Since the footage was shot with a hidden camera at a fundraiser attended by enormously wealthy people, there’s something in his tone that goes beyond the pandering that is employed by all political hopefuls to their audience of the day. There was something about it that came off as, ‘alright, now I can relax with my people and chat about how it *really* is’, which is fine–it’s his right to do so–but when one is off the record that is the time when you see how a candidate *really* is. You won’t hear me saying that he should be silenced or something else equally draconian, but it is a reminder to choose your words carefully, even you don’t believe you’re ‘on’ at a given moment.

    Why? Because his statements must seem alienating to the demographic who is traditionally hugely loyal to Republicans. There is a concentration of ‘moochers’ in areas more sympathetic to his causes and party than to President Obama’s. Retracting those statements isn’t an option since they’re on tape, so that sounds a bit more like he got caught, not that he defended his principles because he certainly wouldn’t say that stuff in an interview or debate, at least not in such an accusatory manner.

    We’ll see where this goes.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Really thoughtful and well-stated post. I get it. I still think people are blowing it out or proportion but I get it.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        To be truthful, I’d agree with you. And as I’ve probably stated about a million times before I’m a Canadian observer just trying to keep pace. The population of our entire nation is roughly equal to that of California, so our voting day is held a bit over a month after an election is called. I can’t imagine what kind of effort it takes for our American friends to become responsibly informed citizens. It’s fascinating (but kind of harrowing and then just enervating) to watch, but I’m not too proud to say that I like our relative smallness. Of course, it’s a bit dizzying for us Canadians to see all of this happening because even though it’s not about us, we’re so deeply involved in what happens after election day. We need to be aware of what’s going on in America but it but I don’t have to spend huge amounts of time thinking about how the electoral college works.

        And these campaigns–they just get bigger and bigger and go on for multiple eternities. I’m pretty sure the Dream Police whispered something to me last night about New Hampshire, the year 2028, Soylent Puce, same-Dalek marriages and some rumblings about the Latter-Day Jains. I’m out of my depth.

        I think everyone has got some degree of election fatigue and everyone is really emotional about this election. Heck, I sure get emotional about it and I can’t do a thing about it.

        But as far as the 47% thing goes, I think it was largely timing that bit him. So close to the election, he can’t exactly tamp down any ‘I knew it’ accusations because he’s made a case for his opponents if they’re so inclined to believe that he was hiding some sympathies that aren’t really sympathetic to a lot of the concerns of his countrymen. So how ‘right’ is he on paper and how ‘right’ is he in convictions? I gave my soothsayer the night off, so I can’t answer that. Interesting times.

  26. Tanya says:

    I want a leader, not a guy who seems cool and likeable on entertainment shows. His performance as president is tragically horrible..yet the media barely reports on his lack of leadership. If he does get re-elected, his truly true colors will show since he doesn’t have to worry about appeasing the voters any longer…and it’s going to be scary stuff…the economy will finally explode… remember, depency breeds complacency…the mindset of so many has morphed into entitlement and handouts and we just cannot afford all of this any longer and something is going to have to give. It is so sad that so many people don’t research and study what he has actually done..and what he actually stands for. judge a man by his actions..not his words or how ‘cool’ he may seem. I want a strong leader, NOT a friend!

    • Esmom says:

      Again with the Fox News talking points. You want to know what he’s managed to accomplish — despite the GOP doing everything they can to block him every step of the way? Check this out for starters:

      • mln89 says:

        thank you esmom- it’s beyond absurd when people repeat the junk they hear on fox noise. it’s the “news” channel of choice for idiots who can’t stand facts and like having their willful ignorance, greed, and racial biases reaffirmed on what they like to pretend is a legitimate “news” channel.

    • mln76 says:

      Can we please take a moment and remember that Obama inherited an economy that tragically imploded under the supervision of a Republican President who is so infamous for his cronyism and incompetence that he wasn’t invited to his party’s convention.
      Can we take a moment and recall THAT second term before we try to hand our nation over to a person who unlike GW can’t be bothered to even feign concern for the working class?

      • Tiffany says:

        I completely agree. Romeny’s policies are NO DIFFERENT from Bush’s! Deregulate, tax cuts for the wealthy, increase defense spending. We all know how that turned out!

        The fact that they didn’t invite Bush or Cheney to speak at their convention shows how much they don’t believe in their own policies.

      • flan says:

        Well said, Mln76 and Tiffany.

        The GOP is all that now PLUS a large dosis of promoting anti-women laws and rhetoric.

    • brin says:

      Tanya, I agree with you on everything you said. I don’t watch network news because it’s a joke. These reporters are so biased.

    • Chattycat says:

      Tanya I am with you. Before the last election I read up and listened to all I could about both candidates, and what I found or couldn’t find on Obama made me wary enough to not vote for him…not because of his party, (I am an Independent) but because of Obama the man. I have less confidence in him in both regards now after his 4 years in charge.

      Oh, and I learned early on that only cowards blame and point fingers at anybody and everybody else for their deeds, or lack thereof.

      I have always taught my kids that you “own it”. No blame games! Perhaps you deserved that “D” that the teacher gave you because you didn’t study enough, turned your paper in late, goofed off and didn’t pay attention in class. Or maybe I even said, maybe the teacher was having a shitty day and your last name was at the end of the alphabet and you she/he was sick of grading papers by then and was more picky so take yourself to the teacher and ask her/him why? See what the answer is and perhaps you could work together to improve your grade. Work it out, own it, don’t sit wasting time and energy blaming, fix it and move forward!

      • flan says:

        Just to point out the simplest reason why your comparison does not make sense: a kid does the test alone and did not get a torn and burnt paper from another kid before starting on it.

        Being president is a little more complex than doing a test. It also involves lots of people who do everything to try and make you trip and fall.

      • Chattycat says:

        Well let me make it simple for you flan…it’s called personal accountability for your actions or inactions. Sorry my analogy of teaching my kids to own their actions went over your head. And just think, maybe one day one of them might become the POTUS and they’d actually be able to not “blame” everything on everybody else because they were taught and learned that they might have contributed to the problem and therefore fix it instead of pointing fingers and saying “it’s all his/her fault”. How novel!

    • normades says:

      “depency breeds complacency…the mindset of so many has morphed into entitlement and handouts and we just cannot afford all of this any longer and something is going to have to give.”

      Mitt would be proud of you. What crap. Americans aren’t looking for handouts. They NEED fair health care, ANY health care. I am shocked at the number of my friends in the US that don’t go to the hospital when they need to because they don’t have health care or are afraid it will raise their premiums. Keep telling yourself stuff like that and FOX news wins, big corporations and pharma companies win. They all win and regular people loose.

      • Chattycat says:

        Actually Norm it isn’t that the other side doesn’t want every American to have access to healthcare, it is that they don’t want it to be a government mandated, funded entitlement. They propose to clean up the corruption at the insurance company level and make it a competetive free market endeavor monitored by the government, not run by the government. But of course it is harder to convince people to achieve those standards then it is to hand it to them. The American nature/culture of hold your hand out and the government will provide. That is why we are so divided as a nation today.

      • flan says:

        Healthcare is a potential thing for a huge amount of people, including you.

        If you worry about handouts, you’d better worry about the relatively small amount of people who sold equipment to the government for the wars. Where did those trillions of dollars go to, you think? I bet it was not back to your pocket.

      • Chattycat says:

        Yeah flan, because the government is so ethical about spending my money (I am in the 53% that pay taxes as are my husband and all 3 of my kids who work) then a corporation! I’ll take my chances backing a free market society over that of a government run one any day of the week. I have friends in England that have “state run” healthcare and they wait weeks for doctor’s appointments, and dental? Pffff forget it, have the blacksmith pull your teeth and move along because that is even more of a muddled mess government run entitlement.

        America has the best healthcare system in the world, it is flawed, it needs to be retooled, but it doesn’t need the corrupt politicians running it that’s for sure.

      • videli says:

        Um, wait a minute, being healthy and staying that way is an entitlement? It is not a right? It’s like saying: you, sir, do not have a right to be healthy, it is your sense of entitlement speaking! Being healthy is only a function of how hard you work, and if you’re not healthy, you don’t work hard enough, and people who are healthy and can stay that way are by definition hard workers. Wait, I have to catch my breath from chasing my tail so much. Oh,by the way, that doesn’t sound like America, a country of justice. It sounds like a social Darwinist colonial Africa! Which, we all know, is simply a model of prosperity right now. Also, ask a bunch a random Brits if they care to get rid of their health system.

      • Chattycat says:

        Videli what are you talking about? When did I ever say being healthy is an entitlement? I am trying to figure out how you twisted my position on government run healthcare coverage compared to free market competetive healtchare insurance/coverage out of your post and I’m coming up blank.

      • videli says:

        Oh, yeah? Try again then. You phrased having health care coverage, a condition of being healthy, as an entitlement. What’s wrong otherwise with our insurance system as it is now? It’s free market, right? It’s not competitive, because corrupt? And how do we secure a permanent non-corrupt system? Through government intervention, I presume. Or we’ll just ask them nicely.

      • normades says:

        Chattycat say: “America has the best healthcare system in the world”


      • normades says:

        Chattycat say: “America has the best healthcare system in the world”

        hahahahahahahaha!!! Ever hear about a little place called Europe? Also Canada and the Scandanavian countries. They ALL have some form of government run health care systems. The US is the only industrialised “western” country that does not.

        “They propose to clean up the corruption at the insurance company level and make it a competetive free market endeavor monitored by the government, not run by the government.”

        It’s already a free market endeavor. Free markets are good for profits, not people. I am not anti-capitalist, but there are some things that need to be organised and controlled by governments for the good of the people, and when it comes to a basic right (I agree Videli, it is a RIGHT) you cannot count on competition and free markets to work for the common good.

        Just two little stories here:

        1. A friend of mine in the US was hit by a car and was taken to the emergency room. She is inbetween jobs with no health care. When she woke up in a hospital bed she RAN because she was more scared about the bill than her health.

        2. I know many upper middle class Americans with health care who get basic services like teeth cleaning, check-ups when they travel to Europe because the services are just as good and cheaper (even without having European healthcare benefits). They don’t want to use their insurance in the US unless it is a dire emergency.

        I find this totally shocking and Romney would not do a damn thing to help average Americans get basic healthcare. Because he is all about big business. And while he says he doesn’t care about the 47%, I think he really doesn’t care about the 90% who are just regular struggling people (he’ll just pretend to care about you if you vote for him).

    • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

      I don’t think I understand what is it exactly people want from the man Barack Obama as opposed to the president Barack Obama.

      For years, people said that they felt disconnected from him because he was an ‘elitist’ and a ‘snob’. Now, there are condemnations of his work ethic because he’s campaigning, it seems. That seemed pretty clear when the firestorm over his appearance at the pizza place to meet the blood donation guy erupted.

      In elections past, especially during terms of G.W. Bush, that common touch with common sense salt of the earth image so integral to defining him as a leader.

      I’m not here to talk policy or bash people for their political leanings from my armchair, but G.W. Bush simply wasn’t the Good Ol’ Boy he was purported to be. He was a legacy from New England whose father went from Head of the CIA to president of the United States, to boot. Had a brother governor, sports teams and all of that, a relative with his own TV show, another relative who is a model who married Ralph Lauren’s son (I Went To The Bush-Lauren Frontier Wedding/Galveston Fantasy Camp And All I Got Was This Lousy Dysentery.

      I’m not denying the man’s right to have an affluent/successful (nepotism-laced) dynasty, but he created an image and Americans hailed it as the triumph of the ‘common-type’ man who wasn’t an efficiency automaton, but someone with whom you could imagine yourself having a beer and wouldn’t talk down to you, but give you the story in a humane matter that could be understood by all.

      Why is one president allowed to be ‘user-friendly’ and gets called a fame chaser for doing the same thing? Why would fellow Ivy-Leaguers say he’s a snob for taking that road when they probably passed by him walking the halls between classes? Why did everyone suddenly decide that President Obama is the first acting or hopeful president to ever appear on late-night television, afternoon talk shows, print interviews with publications whose audience might not comprise of readers who only crack the cover of a magazine after Meet The Press has ended? If you think the current president is disingenuous, so be it, but he’s definitely not President Ranch Hand. The same rules have to apply to everyone.

      • Chattycat says:

        It is all about the spin. You described “Bush” and how he was spun as a good ole’ boy from Texas when in fact his roots were New England “elite”.

        Well the same holds true for Obama, his persona was spun as a “man who came from humble roots” and should be considered the epitome of the average guy to have a beer with and understand the plight of the common man. The not discussed part of his heritage is that he lived for 4 years in Indonesia, in the most affluent neighborhood in the area attending a private school, then went to live with his grandparents at 10, whose Grandmother was a Bank Vice President, lived in a upper middle class area and attended a prestigious private school in Hawaii then went on to Columbia, Harvard etc. That is not the path of the average middle class American male either.

        When one is able to look at any person, without any spin, just facts of their upbringing, then you can decide for yourself that what that person really brings to the table…when those realities are covered or skewed, then people make assessments based on what they are fed as opposed to what they really need to consume…truth and honesty.

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        Fair enough. I see that we differ on several points but that’s not really the concern as my queries weren’t policy-based. I sincerely appreciate that you recognised that and I thank you for your polite and measured response to my questions. Cheers.

    • mln89 says:

      “Dependency breeds complacency?” and you’re saying this about the poor and needy? really, how DARE you. people who want basic f&!king healthcare so they don’t have to go to the emergency room to be seen by a doctor are complacent? people who may need government grants, scholarships, and loans just to get a mother effin education are complacent? people who may need the basic necessities of life like food, shelter, and clothing are complacent? i’m tired of ignorant as* holes like you who vilify people who have the nerve to be POOR (or working poor/middle class).

      what about the idle rich? what about their dependency on the government to help them hoard their money and the complacency many of them exhibit by not even working or using their “MERITS” to increase their often times INHERITED wealth? what about those who depend on the government to give them low taxes rates on all the income they NEVER WORK FOR like captial gains? what about those who depend on lucrative no-bid GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS that they bribe government officials for? are they using their “merits” to get contracts? are they the “best” for the job? or do they just have enough money to buy out everyone else so that they can add to their already considerable wealth through GOVERNMENT, TAX-PAYER MONEY, that they will maybe pay a 17% income tax rate on, a 12% corporate tax rate, or he!l, pay NO TAXES ON AT ALL. (because these super rich people are going to let some of that money “trickle down” to us plebes and hire more employees, right? no, course not silly. that’s not how it really works! they use that money for their offshore accounts, investments, private jets and any other way they can think of to hoard and spend their even LARGER amount of untaxed money on themselves. thank you repugs!).

      what about those who depend on being able to bribe (or “lobby”) the government to deregulate, so that they can exploit customers and put even more money in their pockets (2008 housing crisis, anyone? predatory lending?)…while not even paying taxes on that ill gotten income? and THEN depened on the government for the biggest welfare scam of all: being bailed out of their deregulation cons by the same repug government that allowed them to deregulate in the first place. i mean, suffice to say: you’re an ignorant, unsympathetic cretin who demonizes the people who need government “handouts” the most. please do the world a favor, shut F!!K up and crack open a book or a newspaper.

      • Chattycat says:

        Wow mln its great to see somebody be passionate about their position but really, all the cursing and name calling diminshes your argument. Oh and just so you know, I have worked since I was 15, put myself through college, raised three kids, own my own home, pay for my own healthcare, and have done it all without any government help or loans. I have a mortgage because I work, I have health insurance because I work at a job that provides it and I pay towards it, it isn’t my dream job, but it is what I must do to see for my family. I grew up middle class and am still today middle class. My kids have all had part time minimum wage jobs so that they can pay for their IPhones and entertainments because I can’t afford to provide those things to them…they get it and don’t complain because somebody else’s parents can afford it and we can’t. I am proud to be able to say all that about myself and my family.

      • mln89 says:

        Here are 30 multi-billion dollar corporations that got away with paying no taxes for THREE YEARS. They had SO many tax breaks (thanks to repugs of course, who love to reward the rich by making them richer) that they not only paid NO TAXES, BUT GOT TAX REBATES from the government ON TOP of paying no taxes. they had NEGATIVE tax rates. i dare you (or any of the other fox & friends) to try and come up with an explanation of how THAT isn’t a government handout.

    • mln89 says:

      This is a list of 30 multi-billion dollar corporations that had so many tax breaks that they not only paid NO TAXES for 3 years, BUT GOT TAX REBATES from the government ON TOP of paying no taxes. they had NEGATIVE tax rates. i dare you (or any of the other fox & friends) to try and come up with an explanation of how THAT isn’t a government handout.

  27. Anon says:

    Mitt Romney prefers fund raisers with Marc Leder, known for parties where “where guests cavorted nude in the pool and performed sex acts, scantily dressed Russians danced on platforms and men twirled lit torches to a booming techno beat”. Learning more about good ole boy Romney every day, wonder if any of those 47%’ers are Republicans? If they all called off work on the same day, if the country would grind to a halt?
    Mitt happens.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      This actually makes me like him more. I wanna go to a Romney sex party and dance naked to techno music!

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        I’m getting visions of a rave in the Playboy Mansion circa 1999. PLUR, man! Also see: ‘Wazzzzzuuuuuuuuppppp!’

    • Chattycat says:

      So Obama and Romney both have poor choices in fund raising “friends”/ associates…as you say Mitt attends a fund raiser with a man who likes cavorting with nude guests and techno music and Barak is hosted as a guest at a club by a misogynist “prior” drug dealer who sings/plays rap music calling woman bitches and whores (well hos). Doesn’t sound like either of them is making very good choices about their fund raising associates to me.

  28. jensational says:

    @mln – not that this will do any good for you BUT~~ Obama HELPED make the country as it was when he “inherited” it. Whomever wins this next election will inherit the illegal and unconstitutional crap that he has created SINCE Bush. Let me just educate you on your hero – here is what he’s done to us all: He has violated his Oath of Office to protect and defend the Constitution by signing his name to bills that have essentially suspended all of our constitutional rights (NDAA, Patriot Act, etc.) so that you no longer have a right to a fair trial, no rights to due process and no protection from being detained without proof for a crime you may or may not have committed. You don’t think NDAA applies to you, you’re sadly mistaken. If you don’t know what NDAA is, you have no right to even speak about how great this man is. His penchant for spending money we don’t have is unlike any president before him, adding 6 TRILLION to the debt and borrowing more every day – that puts the responsibility on the backs of the taxpayers for at least an entire generation, including your kids. Your president has consistently used executive orders to legislate which, again, is against the law, but no one in the senate will stop him because, they, too, are dems and will never press charges unless it’s a republican. Allowing QE3 is going to set us back even more but Obama doesn’t care. We had an American citizen/Ambassador killed by Libyans and he went to JayZ’s party instead of finding the people who did it to bring them to justice and he lied to you about why our ambassador was killed. You really need to bone up on your current events because your judgement of this man as a president is severely obstructed. You have no money and no constitutional rights any more because of him and that’s just the beginning.

    • mln76 says:

      Lol I’ve never called Obama my hero in fact mostly I’ve called out Romney for his desire to be president of only the rich people. I’ve also called out the silliness that Obama wasn’t vetted you know he took on the Clintons in the primary right if that isnt a vetting then I don’t there ever has been one . Nowhere in my comments have I defended Jay-Z or Beyonce but I’ll say this much Obama is smart enough to take the money and run from celebrities. instead of giving them 20 minutes unscreened during his convention on Prime Time TV. As or he other stuff please don’t put words in my mouth as I was amoing those on the streets on 2001 protesting the Bush policies. It’s dissapointing he hasn’t revoked them but only a dolt can claim with a straight face that Romney has any desire to revoke the Bush laws. So yes although I would rather a third candidate I’ll vote for the one who seeks to end wars instead of start them and who won’t limit my right to reproductive choice…and I’ll hold out hope that in the 2 nd term you are so eager to prevent Obama will work on derailing more of George W’s awful legacy.

    • Tiffany says:

      “His penchant for spending money we don’t have is unlike any president before him, adding 6 TRILLION to the debt and borrowing more every day”

      It is hard to take your comment seriously when you throw out infactual statements like that. The amount that OBAMA has added to the deficit is no where near close to that. The vast majority of the programs contributing to the deficit were started under the Bush administration. All of these programs were never funded: Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Medicare Part D, Bush tax cuts….etc.

      Programs from the last administration do not stop when another is sworn into office. In addition, the economy collapsed at the end of Bush’s term, and the resulting lack of tax revenue because of the drop in income taxes (because people were unemployed) also figures into deficit numbers in big ways.

      If you are going to complain about a President’s spending, make sure you are crediting the correct President for that spending.

      • Chattycat says:

        Tiffany you are not providing accurate facts…the amount of money added to the deficit is the sole responsibility of the reigning administration. Both Dems and Rep’s agree to that. It is the obligation of each Administration to control spending, therefore either increasing, decreasing or flat lining the amount. Obama & Co own 6 trillion dollars in additional debt that they incurred over the last 3 years and 8 months because of the policies they didn’t change or declared. Just look at Clinton’s or Reagan’s record of deficit/debt strategy and how their policies and leadership handled it. That should give you accurate factual data to digest.

      • Tiffany says:

        “the amount of money added to the deficit is the sole responsibility of the reigning administration”

        Chatty, that is fantasy. Just take the wars for example. When an adminstration starts a war, it does not end when they leave office. In this case they still had hundreds of thousands of troops in foreign countries fighting wars with expensive equipment. Not to mention the long term care that the wounded will need for decades after the war is fought. Obama is bringing an end to both wars, but that doesn’t mean he could have ripped them and their equipment out of the middle east with a snap of his fingers, or deny them care once they returned home. Bush decided to start 2 wars, but he also decided not to fund either of them.

        If you are so confident about Obama’s spending, show me the numbers that are directly related to Obama legislation. What did Obama pass that added to the deficit? What portion does that legislation create in comparison to the total amount of the deficit?

        Here is a good reference. Be sure to click on the graphic (pink and green at the left side of the screen half way down).

      • Chattycat says:

        Well Tiffany, he came into office with an existing accumulated total debt of 9.6 trillion. In 3 years and 8 months he has added 6.4 trillion(the most in % of any administration ever in US history)on top of the debt he “inherited” to a grand total of just over 16 trillion (and counting) today. Of course every administration since 1836 has inherited the previous administrations debt (since that was the last time the US was debt free ) so I am not a math wizzard or anything but he’s increased an accumlated running debt by almost 65% in 3.8 years. To me, that’s equals a problem.

      • Chattycat says:

        Tiffany, from “The national debt went up 4.899T in the eight years Bush was in office, doubling. Since President Obama has been in office the national debt has risen a staggering 6.344T dollars in 3.8 years.” There is more… “Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending each year, while Obama is running up an average of 1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year.” Againm, I am no math wizzard, but simple math tells me Obama is spending 1 trillion more a year in deficit spending then Bush did. All I’m trying to say is, numbers don’t lie, and he is out spending the Bush administration, so if it cost Bush $400B in spending with all “his” wars and what not, what increased Obama’s spending by 1 trillion a year? It isn’t on war since he has brought many troops home, he’s cut the defense spending, it isn’t NASA he cut that, so I have to think stimulus 1, stimulus 2, QE3 and Obamacare, all of which are “his”, have to incorporate alot if not all of the 1 trillion additional dollars spent yearly more then the previous administration.

    • Nicolette says:

      Thank you. The Middle East is burning, our flag is being burned and torn to shreds as these fanatics shout “Death To America”, (does that not bother anyone here?) our embassies are under siege, four Americans were murdered on 9/11 during such a raid in which our Ambassador was tortured and his body dragged through the streets, and the American flag was taken down and the flag of Al Qaeda was hoisted in it’s place. So in response to this he goes on Letterman and hangs out with Beyonce and Jay Z? WTF? We don’t need a celebrity in the White House, we need a President that actually gives a damn about our flag, our people, our country and our way of life. There are many out there globally with a lot of hate, and will not stop until they see the destruction of this country to it’s fruition. Iran is thisclose to obtaining a nuclear bomb in which they have clearly stated their desire to wipe Israel (referred to as Little Satan by them) as well as the United States (Big Satan as referred to by them) off the map. They believe in a little something called the Twelveth Imam, and they must have as much blood shed as possible for his coming. Google it, learn a little about what we are facing. We are being perceived worldwide as weak and a joke. Israeli PM Netanyahu asked for a meeting and was turned down (yet the head of The Muslim Brotherhood was granted one) so our illustrious one could hang out with his celeb buddies? Come on already people! Something wicked is brewing in the world, and if you think it wont affect us you are very much, and sadly mistaken.

    • Lisa Marconi says:

      Yes! It’s about time somebody mentioned the NDAA. Obama has zero regard for the rule of law. WAKE UP, PEOPLE! We live in a police state. jensational is right – just because you have your head in the sand doesn’t mean you won’t be affected by this draconian unconstitutional legislation put in place to allow our government to target us as the enemy.

      Btw, if you think Romney will make a better president I have news for you: both these candidates are run and handled by Big Money and push Big Money’s agenda. This is how they manage the people, by letting us fight between freaks. If we could pull the veil off our eyes and see these monsters for what they really are it would be like a scene from “They Live”.

      And one more thing: the elections system in this country is broken. Just BELIEVE your vote counts and everything is okay. Just try to ignore the tons of evidence from around the country proving election fraud, both by Dems and Repubs. Or you can start trying to fix the problem:

      • OriginalTiffany says:

        Wow, I bow down to all you ladies.

        Educate yourselves, the big money, big pharma, and Monsanto and the lobbyists own this country.

        Freaking Robamney for president, it might as well be. I pray that someday we have a legit 3rd party.

        The world is falling down around us, it is not time to hang with N****** in Paris. The Presidents are puppets of the Banking system and the rhetoric between the dems and reps is just there as a freaking playtoy to keep us distracted like a kitten with a ball of yarn!

    • Hotpockets says:

      Thank you Jensational. I don’t understand how Obama even has supporters anymore. Yes, he inherited a bad situation and then he perpetuated it and tore up the constitution while he was at it.

      I also don’t understand why people think Obama is any different then Bush, because he is not, they are cut from the same cloth. As another commenter pointed out, the BANKS run the world, not politicians.

  29. Joanna says:

    this has to be the most controversial election in history, imo.

    GO OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!

  30. Would Vincet Cassel Wear This? says:

    Beyonce is great role model for your daughters? Dude, you’re the President of the USA!

  31. misstrishm says:

    We are all going to die no matter who it is that wins.

  32. Angiele says:

    Beyonce is no kind of role model for little girls. P-popping, conceited lyrics, suggestive outfits and videos. Well, maybe her work ethic, but that’s it. His wife should be the number one role model for his girls, not Beyonce. There is nothing appropriate about her music and performances that little girls should be seeing. She’s shallow!

    Obama is just kissing ass, because he knows that Beyonce and JayZ are big donors and have millions of fans who will vote for him in the election. HipHop is huge. The world is full of followers/stans who unfortunately look towards celebrities to guide them. He’s trying to appeal to the young voters like he did in his first election. If beyonce and JayZ said they hate Obama, stans would hate him too.

    I voted for Obama, but come on. The ass kissing has got to stop. He’s trying to be hip and cool.

    • TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

      Fully agree angiele WHy anyone would pay any attention to any celebrities’ opinions is beyond me; the media fawns over them because they give easy simple answers unlike scholars,academics, intellectuals that speak/write in nuanced sophisticated ways. Bey’s fingernails have more intelligence than bey.I don’t want to say that Obama’s shallow but this doesn’t help him at least for me.

  33. Nikita says:

    ooooooooooooh i love him

    Greetings from Europe :-)