Mike Gallagher's Foreign Policy Fail

By Jeff Simpson

One of the biggest national races this November is the 8th congressional District in Wisconsin.  Far right Freedom Caucus member Reid Ribble, has decided not to run for re-election so  it is a wide open race.  

The Republican nominee, who won a primary handily, is Mike Gallagher. The New York born Gallagher joined the Marines after college and has also earned his Doctorate.  

Very impressive individual, until(as Capper says, there is more, there is always more), and take a quick peak at his resume.   There is a huge gaping blemish on it.

Scott Walker's Foreign Policy Advisor - Mike Gallagher
(reported by Politico's Darren Samuelsohn on Feb. 18, 2015; start early March)Professional staff member at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from Aug. 2013.  Captain in the U.S. Marines Corps, June 2006-Aug. 2013.  M.A. in government (2013) and M.A. in security studies (2012) from Georgetown University; M.S. in strategic intelligence from National Intelligence University (2010); B.A. in international relations and affairs from Princeton University, 2006.

I know it was short moment in time, but a quick refresher, Scott Walker has been running for President his whole life and when he "officially" announced a run for President, he ended up officially running for President for approximately 3 months, where he spent over $7,000,000 and ended up with a whopping 0% approval from GOP primary voters.  

A big part of his epic crash and burn in the Presidential primary was his foreign policy stances.   The first was when asked about Syria, let everyone know he had no problem sending troops in.  Of course not his kids, but yours.  Most of us have seen that play out poorly before so we were left scratching our heads that Scott Walker has not learned any lessons from the past.  

The second was probably the most ridiculous thing said, in a season of ridiculousness, that made even the most die hard supporters surprised.   Donald Trump was gaining traction by telling everyone as President, he would build a wall on the Mexican border.  Ever the opportunist, Scott Walker was going to out wall The Donald and said he would be willing to wall off Mexico and (You can not make this stuff up) Canada.    

So the candidate, who was probably the biggest foreign policy failure and quite possibly the most ridiculous foreign policy proposal in the history of our great country, has sent his foreign policy adviser to run for Congress.    Bizarro land!  

Luckily, the people of the 8th Congressional District have a sound choice in Tom Nelson.   Nelson is former majority leader in Madison, and current Outagamie County Executive.   Nelson is running fr Congress trying to make sure the people of the 8th Congressional District get actual representation for a change.  

Now is the time to help Mr. Nelson out.  Head to his Facebook page and his website and send him a couple dollars or go volunteer some time knocking doors for him.   

Congressman Nelson has a very nice ring to it! 

Scott Walker - Wrong Again

By Jeff Simpson 

I know he did not register much of a blip on the radar screen, but for those of you who remember, that Scott Walker actually thought he could be President of the United States.   After 71 days and blowing $7 MILLION dollars(he still owes the taxpayers of WI hundreds of thousands of dollars), he dropped out of the race while polling 0%.

One of his major issues(and really everyone on the R side who is running for President) is they are going to "rebuild the military" after President Obama has "destroyed' it.

On ISIS, Walker stated(amphasis mine), "you've got to take them out entirely--it takes a combination of building up force in terms of the United States military, which I think has fallen to woefully low levels here, it standing up with our allies like Israel, it means working with other allies around the world, but it also means making partners even in the Arab world--Jordan, certainly Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others--Egypt, for sure, of late have seen what's happened, they want a leader in America."

For those of our friends on the right who spend their day with Obama Derangment Syndrome, this just happened:

BATH, Maine (AP) - The largest destroyer ever built for the U.S. Navy headed out to sea for the first time Monday, departing from shipbuilder Bath Iron Works and carefully navigating the winding Kennebec River before reaching the open ocean where the ship will undergo sea trials.
More than 200 shipbuilders, sailors and residents gathered to watch as the futuristic 600-foot, 15,000-ton USS Zumwalt glided past Fort Popham, accompanied by tugboats.
Kelley Campana, a Bath Iron Works employee, said she had goose bumps and tears in her eyes.
"This is pretty exciting. It's a great day to be a shipbuilder and to be an American," she said. "It's the first in its class. There's never been anything like it. It looks like the future."
Larry Harris, a retired Raytheon employee who worked on the ship, watched it depart from Bath.
"It's as cool as can be. It's nice to see it underway," he said. "Hopefully, it will perform as advertised."
Bath Iron Works will be testing the ship's performance and making tweaks this winter. The goal is to deliver it to the Navy sometime next year.
"We are absolutely fired up to see Zumwalt get underway. For the crew and all those involved in designing, building, and readying this fantastic ship, this is a huge milestone," the ship's skipper, Navy Capt. James Kirk, said before the ship departed.
The ship has electric propulsion, new radar and sonar, powerful missiles and guns, and a stealthy design to reduce its radar signature. Advanced automation will allow the warship to operate with a much smaller crew size than current destroyers.
All of that innovation has led to construction delays and a growing price tag. The Zumwalt, the first of three ships in the class, will cost at least $4.4 billion.

So a $4.4 billion dollar new naval destroyer is proof that our military is decimated?  The so called fiscal conservatives want to drastically increase our military budget while cutting on social services?

Think about that when going to the polls in November!!

Muslim Advocate: Walker is Enabling ISIS

Scott Walker, like many of the other GOP wannabes, insists on using the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" to differentiate themselves from President Barack Obama. Obama refuses that term because he doesn't want to give any legitimacy to the terrorists of ISIS or al Qaeda.

But Muslim advocates say that Walker's bravado is having a negative effect:

A representative for America's largest Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization said Gov. Scott Walker is "enabling ISIS" by allowing the terrorist group to co-opt the Islamic religion.

"With this, Scott Walker is actually enabling ISIS by characterizing their acts as being Islamic terrorism," said Robert McCaw, government affairs manager for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "He is taking a peaceful religion of 1.6 billion people and misappropriating it to ISIS, allowing them to wrap themselves in the religion's name and stake a claim to it."

McCaw was referring to Walker's first foreign policy address as a presidential candidate, delivered on Friday at The Citadel military college in South Carolina, during which he referenced Islamic extremists or radical Islamic terrorism 11 times.

[...]

McCaw said one of the best ways to defeat ISIS is to take away the legitimacy it gains by being associated with Islam.

"Scott Walker is enabling ISIS by ceding ideological ground to them that they have a claim to the peaceful religion of Islam," he said. "One of the best ways to defeat them is to take away that claim, take away their legitimacy. That helps take away possible support they might cultivate."

And lest we forget, Walker also put his foot in it when he said that there was only a "handful of reasonable, moderate followers of Islam."

Why Walker and the other Republicans would want to separate themselves from Obama, I don't know. Unless it's because of their jealousy that Obama did what they couldn't do by actually killing the bastard behind the 9/11 attacks.

Walker Fails In Foreign Policy And Geography

Juan Cole of Informed Consent looks at the cringe worthy foreign policy moments from the first GOP debate and absolutely destroys Scott Walker:

Then there was this gem from Scott Walker:

KELLY: Governor Walker, in February you said that we needed to gain partners in the Arab world. Which Arab country not already in the U.S. led coalition has potential to be our greatest partner?

WALKER: What about then (ph), we need to focus on the ones we have. You look at Egypt, probably the best relationship we’ve had in Israel, at least in my lifetime, incredibly important.

You look at the Saudis — in fact, earlier this year, I met with Saudi leaders, and leaders from the United Arab Emirates, and I asked them what’s the greatest challenge in the world today? Set aside the Iran deal. They said it’s the disengagement of America. We are leading from behind under the Obama-Clinton doctrine — America’s a great country. We need to stand up and start leading again, and we need to have allies, not just in Israel, but throughout the Persian Gulf.”

I mean, could the man even find these places on the map? First of all, what in the world does that mean, “You look at Egypt, probably the best relationship we’ve had in Israel, at least in my lifetime.” Does he think Egypt is in Israel? That “Israel” means something like “the Middle East”? If so, no wonder Congress is willing to do whatever Tel Aviv asks. I mean, how can you decline, when the Middle East calls?

As for having allies “throughout the Persian Gulf,” the US already does. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman are all US allies. Bahrain hosts the HQ of the Fifth Fleet. We have several thousand troops based in Kuwait. Qatar leases us the al-Udaid Air Force Base. Etc., etc. I’m not sure what the Gulf Cooperation Council states in the Gulf want the US to lead them toward, but their current campaign is in Yemen, which, although I am very critical of the Houthi rebels, I don’t think is a good idea. No doubt they would have wanted us to take the lead there. But, do we need another quagmire? But Walker seems weak-minded enough so maybe all sorts of foreign countries can bamboozle him into doing their adventurism for them.

Cole also destroys Walker with his saber rattling about the Iran Deal:

Then Scott Walker was asked about Iran:

“To me, you terminate the deal on day one, you reinstate the sanctions authorized by Congress, you go to Congress and put in place even more crippling sanctions in place, and then you convince our allies to do the same.
This is not just bad with Iran, this is bad with ISIS. It is tied together, and, once and for all, we need a leader who’s gonna stand up and do something about it.”

So OK, I know the guy hates universities and isn’t very well educated, but surely he can form complete sentences? What does it mean, “This is not just bad with Iran, this is bad with ISIS. It is tied together . . .”

Mr. Walker, I advise against using “this” as a pronoun, since it is vague and weak. It is better as a demonstrative adjective. “This house” is clear and strong. In the sentence above, you haven’t made clear what the referent of “this” is. The deal? How is the agreement reached on inspecting Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program “bad with Iran?”
In fact, I don’t think you are using “bad with” in a way recognizable as idiomatic English. Did you mean to say that the nuclear deal is unfortunate with regard to Iran? But how in the world is it also unfortunate with regard to Daesh (what you call ISIS)? Do you understand that Daesh is a hard line Salafi Sunni terrorist organization that kills Shiites on sight? And that Iran is a Shiite country that has been the most effective force in opposing Daesh? You see, it isn’t actually tied together.

How could a nuclear deal with Iran be “bad with ISIS?” The likelihood is that the US will be able now to coordinate more openly with Iran in destroying ISIS.

Sadly, this is after Walker has been boning up on foreign policy, as recommended by President Barack Obama.

I don't know, but it seems to me that someone who wants to be a world leader should be at least be able to know something about the world much less express it in a comprehensible way.

Scott Walker's Foreign Policy Nuclear Meltdown

As his presidential campaign starts to sink in its own mire, Scott Walker is becoming increasingly extreme in an effort to keep it afloat.

In regards to Iran, Walker had come out against the deal even before it was crafted, saying he would blow it up on Day One in office. More recently, he started saber rattling, saying that he would consider military action on Day One.

Now Walker isn't even willing to wait until he is in office to start mucking things up:

In an incredible show of hubris, Walker told John Harmon, guest host of On Point Radio (link is external), as he has in prior interviews, that he would “terminate the deal on day one” and added “but I wouldn’t wait for the first day, I would be on the phone on the day after the election working with our allies around the world because this is not only a long-term threat, they are a short-term threat, certainly to Israel.”

If Walker hadn’t dropped out of college perhaps he would have learned about the Logan Act which prohibits private citizens from meddling in foreign affairs. A violation of the act is a felony.

Being a president-elect does not confer any special status. A president-elect is just a private citizen up until the day of the inauguration. But again, he was absent that day in school.

So where is Walker coming up with such nonsense, albeit dangerous nonsense?

Kevin Hermening

Meet Kevin Hermening.

Walker has cited Hermening many times, including in his presidential kickoff speech.. Hermening was one of the 52 marines that were held hostage in Iran for 444 days from 1979 to 1981.

Walker made no secret that he and Hermining are of one mind, especially when it comes to Iran:

With Walker's status as a Republican frontrunner — not to mention a potential president — the introduction of Hermening as the face of his Iran policy was significant. While Walker has been mentioning Hermening for months during his stump speeches, his kickoff speech set the tone for his campaign.

Walker and Hermening are on the same page when it comes to the deal worked out by the Obama administration and other world leaders, which would end sanctions on Iran in exchange for controls on nuclear arms development.

One thing about Hermening though - he just might be even more extreme than Walker.

In 2001, Hermening wrote an op-ed piece in which he advocated for the immediate deportation of all illegal immigrants, especially those of Middle Eastern descent. Hermening also said that the United States should bomb the hell out of the capitols of Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Yemen - even to the point of using nuclear weapons.

Well, certainly Walker wouldn't stand with such insanity, right?

Wrong:

A Walker campaign spokeswoman stood by Hermening when asked about the views expressed in his opinion piece.

AshLee Strong, press secretary for Walker, emphasized that Hermening was one of 52 Americans held hostage for 444 days more than three decades ago by militant Iranian students. He was a 20-year-old Marine sergeant stationed at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran at the time.

"Mr. Hermening has bravely served our country, and any attacks on this service are shameful," Strong said.

She did not respond to particulars of Hermening's foreign policy positions.

One of Walker's handlers must have woke him up to the bad optics of it all because within hours, Walker was backpedaling and simultaneously throwing Hermening under the campaign bus:

"I'll speak for myself," Walker told the Journal Sentinel on Monday. "The reference I made to Kevin Hermening was as one of the hostages, the youngest at the time, and pointed out the things that hadn't changed. My policy is very clear, and it's not aligned with what he said in that particular column."

He said he does not consider Hermening an adviser, even though his campaign has featured him prominently. Hermening said Walker campaign manager Rick Wiley had arranged an interview with The Associated Press that ran last week that featured Hermening as the face of Walker's foreign policy.

Now, it could be that Walker is using this rhetoric as red meat for his base. It could be that he is trying to reassert his manhood after getting slapped down by Donald Trump.

But given the fact that Walker is nothing more than a coward and bully - the biggest example being the sneak attack he did on Wisconsin workers, which he set up even before he took office - one shouldn't put it past him to do something totally irresponsible and reckless and immoral as starting a war in the Middle East.  Walker does not have the leadership skills needed to negotiate with anyone and would rather sucker punch them first.

I know I wouldn't trust him with a BB gun, much less the command of the world's most powerful military or the keys to any nuclear missiles.

Walker Clarifies Foreign Policy With Double Speak, Gaffes

Scott Walker has been traveling the country, trying to convince people that a couple of sight seeing tours in Europe and boldly running away from protesters armed with signs makes him a foreign policy wonk.

And as a self-proclaimed foreign policy expert, Walker has been echoing George Bush by saying we need to take the fight to the bad guys, preferably in some oil-rich country like Iran, no doubt.

This past weekend, while campaigning in New Hampshire, Walker started to back pedal from the hawkish rhetoric by using double speak, citing Saint Ronnie and another one of his growing lists of gaffes:

Tough talk about taking on America's foes has been a staple of Gov. Scott Walker's rhetoric in the run-up to his likely presidential bid.

But on a weekend swing here, he mixed his fighting words with some qualifiers.

He's not for "open-ended excursions," he told GOP activists on a cruise on Lake Winnipesaukee.

"We don't need to get into open-ended, endless engagements," he said at a banquet speech in Manchester.

"I don't think we should be the world's policeman," he told his audience at the Snowshoe Club in Concord. "I don't think we should go in everywhere."

Those caveats seemed designed to assure voters that, amid the hawkish talk about facing down Vladimir Putin and eradicating the Islamic State, Walker, a foreign policy novice, isn't overeager to use military force.

Asked by a reporter about those statements, Walker cited his political hero, Ronald Reagan, arguing Reagan was able to use U.S. troops with restraint because he built up the military and "people knew that he would use force if needed."

He told reporters Saturday: "Now we face a different foe today than we faced then, and I think we're going to need to use multiple ways. But I just want people to know that while I'm ready to be firm, my first intention, my first instinct, isn't to send in military forces. But I'm certainly not going to rule it out."

Wait! Wut? "Open-ended excursions?"

Either Walker meant to say incursions or he was comparing going to war to a pleasure cruise. Either way, that should make anyone nervous at the thought of him leading the world's most powerful military.

Even though Walker is unable and/or unwilling to give a straight answer, we can make a pretty safe prediction based on Walker's past behaviors.

At the beginning of Walker's first term as governor, said he was willing to bargain with public sector workers. Then he dropped the Act 10 bomb on the state, taking away the unions' bargaining rights.

Likewise, while campaigning for his second term, Walker dismissed the notion that he'd sign off on Right to Work. He signed the Wage Theft bill at the first opportunity.

Walker also said that abortion should be a decision between a woman and her doctor but has since pushed for and signed some of the most restrictive anti-choice laws in the country.

In other words, if Walker says he's against something, the safe bet is that he'll go with it as soon as he can.

So when it comes to putting boots on the ground in another country, even though he says it's not "his first instinct," he'll have troops invading Iran before he finishes with his inauguration.

H/T to James Rowen for the gaffe catch.

Scott Walker Hates The Marines

By Jeff Simpson


Capper reported yesterday, on the further "Palin"ization of Scott Walker.  He has been on the national stage and embarrassing himself daily.  

"As a governor, I've been, just recently in Germany, in Spain and France," Walker explained. "Earlier in the year, it was the United Kingdom on trade related missions. A few years back in China and Japan. So, that's probably the most of any governor of either party has is that experience in terms of trade relations.

"Probably the most", of course he would not take the time to do his research since he has proven that the truth matters little to him.   Which is almost as bad as spending a day or two in six sovereign countries out of 196(3%) and declaring himself a foreign policy expert.  

The worst thing that he said in his gaffe filled appearance was this:

The possible candidate suggested that he would model his foreign policy after President Ronald Reagan, who he described "the best president" on foreign policy of his lifetime.

What was Ronald Reagan most known for foreign policy wise as president?

Yes a suicide bomber killed 299 people, 214 were American Servicemen and President Reagans response was to cut and run.   Brilliant.

But WAIT!  There's more!

We can not forget Reagan;s love affair with Saddam Hussein(remember him)?

Or the fact that Ronald Reagan played a direct role in Osama Bin Laden's ascendency into power.  Reagan also armed the Nicaraguan fighters, this time against the U.S.'s own treaties. 

That was not very successful either.  



If Reagan is Scott Walker's ideal of the perfect foreign policy expert, then heaven help us all if he gets elected!  

Walker Claims To Be Most Qualified On Foreign Policy

Via Crooks and Liars, we find that Scott Walker is claiming to be the most qualified GOP presidential wannabe on foreign policy because - get this - he visited six countries in the past two years!



Wowza!

In case you missed it, here's a partial transcript:

"And I do think if foreign policy plays an important role, the contrast will be clear because just about everywhere Hillary Clinton has played a role with this president -- under President Obama -- that part of the world is largely a failure, a mess," he continued. "Because of the policies we've seen from Obama and Clinton."

After noting that Walker had recently visited Israel, a trip partially paid for by billionaire Sheldon Adelson, Schieffer wondered what made the Wisconsin governor qualified to lead the county's foreign policy.

"As a governor, I've been, just recently in Germany, in Spain and France," Walker explained. "Earlier in the year, it was the United Kingdom on trade related missions. A few years back in China and Japan. So, that's probably the most of any governor of either party has is that experience in terms of trade relations."

The possible candidate suggested that he would model his foreign policy after President Ronald Reagan, who he described "the best president" on foreign policy of his lifetime. He argued that "one of the worst presidents" was President Barack Obama.

Of course, Walker fails to mention that he only spent a day or three in each country. Granted, that's more time than he's spent in Wisconsin since being reelected, but still...

To be honest, though, claiming to be the most qualified on foreign policy because he went sight seeing in six countries is better than when he claimed to be qualified by running away from protesters.

And even when he is in said foreign countries, he either is hush-hush about everything or he punts.

I'm just a little surprised he didn't count going to Taco Bell as another notch in his foreign policy credentials.

Obama Advises Walker to "Bone Up" On Foreign Policy

Last week, Scott Walker once again showed himself not to be ready for prime time when he gleefully announced that if he were to become president, his first job would be to cause war in the Middle East, by undoing any pacts with Iran.

When asked about Walker's grandiose statements of bravado, President Barack Obama wiped the stupid smirk off of Walker's face:



As my friend karoli at Crooks and Liars reported:

President Obama is a master of the subtle takedown, but this one wasn't even that subtle.

Speaking to NPR News' Steve Inskeep, Obama was asked about Scott Walker's remarks that he'd undo the Iran deal on Day One of his mythical presidency.

"It would be a foolish approach to take and perhaps Mr. Walker — after he's taken some time to bone up on foreign policy — will feel the same way," Obama said.

Obama goes on to point out that Walker's inanity could prove to be dangerous as it undermines the office of the president and could embolden our enemies.

We in Wisconsin can vouch that while Walker talks a good game, in reality he is a coward, as is common among bullies.

We at Cog Dis managed to get this candid shot of Walker when he first saw the video and heard the smack down by Obama:

Walker Performs Poorly With Big Money Base

It's not a good sign for Scott Walker when the Club for Growth, one of the dark money groups he needs to support his presidential bid, starts to slap him around:

Frayda Levin, a member of the Club for Growth’s board of directors who was moderating a question-and-answer session, told Walker that he left donors unimpressed at a meeting in New York earlier this month. That private session came one day after another controversial Walker event where Rudy Giuliani declared that President Barack Obama does not love America.

“To be honest, the feedback was you were not prepared to speak about foreign policy,” Levin, who supports Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) for president, told Walker. “So can you tell us what you’re doing to prepare for foreign policy should you run for president?”

Walker seemed a little caught off guard.

Walker then said he was ready to deal with all of the complicated foreign policy issues because he once had breakfast with Henry Kissinger.

Yeah, that's like saying that Walker is ready to deal with Putin because he's watched all the Rocky and Bullwinkle episodes with Boris Badenov.

After trotting out his tired and thoroughly debunked line about Reagan scaring the Russions by firing government workers, Walker then got caught flat-footed again:

On domestic policy, Walker gave vague answers about whether the Dodd-Frank financial reform law should be amended or repealed, along with what changes he’d make to the tax code.

“If you make something as fair as possible, people will be able to complete,” he said when asked about Dodd-Frank. “Let freedom drive the path.”

The non-answer bothered the moderator, so she gave him another chance.

“You have some of your constituents here who have just been audited” because of the law, she said. “You have several community banks, and this is taking a huge toll. Are you just not that aware of what’s happening with Dodd-Frank?”

“Oh, no,” Walker said. “I understand the concern. My point is I’m going to lay out a whole plan not just on this but a whole series of things should I choose to be a candidate for president.”

“It’s not just about Dodd-Frank; it’s about the entire regulatory framework,” he added. “You don’t just nitpick one piece at a time. You have to take on the whole package.”

Asked about what changes he’d make to the tax code, Walker promised “exceptionally detailed plans” down the road.

It should be noted that in 2006, the national Club for Growth (not to be confused with the Wisconsin Club for Growth) chose to support Mark Neumann over Walker when he first ran for governor. Their decision was based on actually looking at Walker's budgets as Milwaukee County Executive.

This also displays the truth about Walker. He excels at presenting a certain image and staying on his talking points, regardless of how full of holes and lies that they might be. But he is not smart enough or adept enough to think on his feet and cannot respond to anything that is not in his carefully crafted script.

Scott Walker Will Send YOUR Kid to War!

By Jeff Simpson

Scott Walker is running for President and he knows what it takes to win.   War Hawks are very popular in the Republican circles for numerous reasons and if Scott Walker has a talent, it is appealing to the mouth breathing hard core base.

Scott Walker runs to Fox News every chance he gets, to let you know, he has no problem sending our your children to war!

Scott Walker is supremely qualified in the realm of foreign policy, because he broke the unions.

You can not make this stuff up.   Scott Walker knows what its like in a war zone because, after "dropping the bomb" on the people of Wisconsin, his wife was forced to see a couple protests.   The events scarred her so deeply that she was given the "You too could be best friends with a blood thirsty Chilean dictator" award by Right Wisconsin.

Don't worry while your chidlren are fighting terrorists in the desert, Scott Walker's kids will be here holding down the dance floor:

Women of America Unite!

For anyone who was watching the last debate on Monday night, you may have heard Mitt Romney talk about the necessity of gender equality in the Middle East. My first reaction to that was, "wait, Mitt Romney said what?" because, of course, he's not one who tends to advocate for women's rights. My second reaction was, "how full of bs is this guy?" Mitt Romney, and especially Paul Ryan, have never been a friend to women's rights. Hell, if Mitt Romney couldn't even answer if he supported the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, really, what does that mean for our female future if he became president?

Richard Mourdock, a GOP senate candidate in Indiana, said in his debate last night, that if a woman gets pregnant from rape, it is "something God intended to happen." I mean, is it really? I don't think so. I think Republicans are just sick creeps who have a genuine disdain for women. Oh, and guess who just released a campaign commercial, proclaiming his support and adoration for Mr. Mourdock? Yeah, Mitt Romney. Isn't that nice? (but of course, Mr. Mitt "backed away" from Mourdock's comments. I bet.) These kinds of comments are not just out of the blue, once in awhile, off the cuff quips. This attitude has been a common theme with the GOP for a very, very long time. It just seems like this election cycle, it's been more solidified. They are becoming more open with their misogynist message. They've simply given up on caring whether or not the American public finds that kind of message acceptable.

We really need to ask ourselves a serious question - Do we want someone who, in one of his first acts as president, signed a law for fair pay? Someone who passed a healthcare law that made being a woman NO LONGER a preexisting condition? Someone who supports a woman's right to choose? Who supports women struggling to pay for school and find jobs? A president who treats us as equals? The answer is, of course, a resounding YES!

Mitt Romney and his campaign PUSHED for a personhood clause in the GOP platform at the Republican National Convention. If you haven't noticed, since then, Mitt has taken on a few interesting positions on birth control and abortion. In the second debate with President Obama, Romney said he wants women to have access to birth control. Uh...really? Because the last time I checked, he and Paul Ryan are fervently anti-choice. They play up to their extreme base very well, and it pays off for them. It's gross, and it's wrong, but that's the GOP for you.

What is really unfortunate, is that a lot of women will be voting for Mitt Romney this year. One of the Romney campaign cornerstones is repealing the Affordable Care Act. That legislation single-handedly put women back in control. Insurance companies could turn us away, our natural biological functions considered a "pre-existing condition." Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan want to go back to that, and no matter how many times Romney switches his position, we know that above everything, he wants to get rid of the ACA, and along with that goes pre-existing condition coverage. I don't know about you, but I don't want insurance companies to once again be allowed to tell us that our periods are grounds for denying us health care. It's not like we some how have the power to just shut that whole thing down.

Obama/Biden 2012!

Paul Ryan Sank His Battleship!

In the final presidential debate, President Obama delivered the line of the campaign season!

 You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916.  Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military has changed.  We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them, we have these ships that go under water, nuclear submarines, and so the question is not a game of battleship where we’re counting ships, it’s what are our capabilities.

We all know Paul Ryan lost his one debate vs. Joe Biden, and  while Ryan was weak across the board, he was particularly weak in the area of foreign policy.   After last nights debate, Paul felt like giving us a refresher course on just what a lightweight he is!

“To compare modern American battleships with bayonets, I just don’t understand that comparison,” the Wisconsin Republican said. “Look, we have to have a strong Navy to keep peace and prosperity.” “If all these defense cuts go through, our Navy will be small than it was before World War I,” Ryan continued. “That’s not acceptable. And, yes, the ocean hasn’t shrunk.”

Umm Paul, do you ever do any homework? The last US battleships, USS Wisconsin and USS Missouri,[12] were decommissioned in 1991 and 1992, and finally stricken from the U.S. Naval Vessel Register in 2006 and 1995, respectively.
Paul I know it was a while ago, but you should probably remember that Mitt Romney announced you as his VP pick on the DECOMMISIONED USS Wisconsin.

PS:  Psssst Paul, the Pacific Ocean is shrinking!

Mitt's Stumbling & Bumbling!

Everytime the issue is foreign policy.  Tonight's debate will be interesting,.  Who will Mitt Romney pretend to be tonight?  Do not forget, Mitt can not even visit our closest friends without upsetting them! 


Here is the real Mitt Romney on Foreign Affairs. 

Mitts Foreign Policy Fail

Here it is in two minutes!
The question to ask, is there any country he has not pissed off?



"Nuff Said!