Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Wolf Blitzer and Mitt Romney on NOW!

It's hilarious watching Mitt Romney trying to justify an amendment to ban gay marriage. Is it just me or do wingnuts completely lose it when they actually try to explain their positions? I can't see how explaining their position would even help people who oppose gay marriage; people who oppose it can't even stomach that sort of twisted rationalization. The only thing it can possibly accomplish is making people on the fence become pro-equality and people who opposed equality start to question their beliefs.

Keep on talking, Mitt.

13 comments:

StunnedVoter said...

Did I just imagine that, or did Mitt just say they're going to lose MA because he decided not to run for reelection? Wow. If Healey weren't a racist airhead who's running the ugliest most hate filled campaign, and if she didn't have such unshakeable faith the the voters are completely stupid, I'd almost feel sorry for her. Almost.

And if the MA Repub Party hadn't been fully well aware that Mitt was an empty suit who had no interest or residence in or affinity for the state before they decided to annoint him and push Jane Swift aside in that charmingly sexist way, I'd almost feel sorry for them, too.

Ryan Adams said...

Yes, Mitt Romney did just essentially throw Kerry Healey (and the entire State Republican Party) under the bus. It was what I like to call comedic gold. And, yes, I too *almost* feel bad for her.

Aaron said...

I hate Kerry Healey, and I will never vote for her, but c'mon, this can't go unanswered. Will one of the many people on various blogs (most recently the stunnedvoter comment above) who have called her a racist give me some evidence? That is an extraordinary charge to make, and one that should never be made unless there is evidence to back it up.

Anonymous said...

Um...are you just getting out of a coma? If so, turn on the TV, you've missed some things. Good to know you hate Kerry Healey, Aaron, and you'd never vote for her, you'd never know it to read your stuff.

Aaron said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ryan Adams said...

Well, Aaron, whether she's racist or not (and I'm not saying she is), her tactics certainly have played into the fear card. It really does smack of the old southern guard where a person screamed rape and the nearest black guy got lynched... I'm not even really exaggerating about that. There were countless lynchings and one of the tactics of the racists from the South was to play into people's fear by trying to make it seem as if African Americans would rape all the pretty, young girls.

It was dispicable then - and it's dispicable to see Team Healey use some of the same tactics now. Is it because they're racist? I doubt they're really racist, but I don't doubt that they'll use any tactics to get elected.

Aaron said...

Yeah, thanks...I've seen the ads and everything, I just don't see how it is so clearly racism that one can label her racist without any hesitation. Suppose everything about DP were the same except he was white. You don't think she would still be running on a similar attack theme on LaGeur, taxes, etc.? I don't see a racist, I see a rather desperate candidate who is far behind in the polls and is doing the only thing she can think of may boost her numbers: attack her opponent. This is not a new tactic, it's not as if she made it up. She is attacking a black man, yes, but she is not attacking him because of his race, she is attacking his record, which whether you agree with her or not is not in itself racism.

As for me, please point me the writings of mine that led you to believe that I am a Healey supporter, I'd be very curious to see them. As Ryan will attest to, I was an adamant supporter of the Attorney General in the governor's race. I don't particularly care for either Patrick or Healey.

Aaron said...

Thank you, Ryan. As usual, your explanation is far more reasonable than that of some of your readers.

StunnedVoter said...

Ryan, I don't think it makes a bit of difference whether or not Kerry Healey is personally racist in the sense of using the N word or whatever. She's running a racist campaign, therefore I have no problem calling her a racist. I don't care if she's the nicest person on Earth and has a lot of black friends. lol I think we're a little too quick to cut people slack and let them off the hook without so much as an apology, like hate the sin, not the sinner. If I'm going to behave in a racist way and try to stir up hate for my own personal benefit, then it's pretty damn disingenuous for me to try and defend myself by saying nothing could be further from the truth, I wouldn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. By your actions shall we know thee.

Aaron, nobody said she's a racist because she's attacking a black man. She's being called a racist because she's running the Willie Horton ads of the 21st Century. All of her ads are designed to advance the theme that Deval will unleash scary black men to come and kill and destroy hapless white America. It's not a coincidence that the scare ads she's chosen to run concern white victims and non white alleged assailants (there are many, many more cases of white-on-white and black-on-black crime, interracial violence is much more rare). It's not a coincidence that her ad ends with "Do we really want ONE as Governor?" written boldly across the screen. It's not a coincidence that someone from Deval's family (who he's not even blood related to, but that's really played down, you have to read really closely to see that "Deval's rapist kin" isn't really his kin) is splashed across the papers as a violent criminal. It's all part of the context that Healey knows exist where black men are portrayed as violent objects of fear, and it's an extention of her strategy to terrify white suburbanites with portraits of immigrant brown and black men running amok amongst our women. Can't trust that Deval, who's he going to be with, us, the law abiding white people, or the other kind? If you don't understand that, you should consider visiting some blogs run by POC, just to observe and read and think about the history here and the way these images have been used and manipulated through history. She knows what she's doing, POC know what she's doing, and the people who respond to these ads positively also know exactly the message she's trying to send.

Anonymous said...

please point me the writings of mine that led you to believe that I am a Healey supporter, I'd be very curious to see them. As Ryan will attest to, I was an adamant supporter of the Attorney General in the governor's race. I don't particularly care for either Patrick or Healey.

Didn't say you were a Healey supporter, Aar, I don't think I've ever seen you mention her at all. All I've ever seen from you is 9 million posts before and after le primary at every available venue "I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE Deval Patrick!" If you "hate" and "don't particularly care for her" as much as Deval, I'm not aware of it, but I'm interested to hear.

Ryan Adams said...

I don't disagree with you, Stunned. It doesn't matter if she really believes what she says or not, because it's wrong. A lot of her attacks and the attacks her allies (if not her own campaign) have made are dispicable. They go beyond attacking Patrick's record, attacking it in a way that plays up the fear and plays down the facts.

I've said this over and over again: If not for the fact that Kerry Healey has run the campaign she has, I would actually pity her. Mitt Romney has thrown her under the bus, so to speak, which is normally quite a sad thing... but I'm not going to let up on her now because she's run the most deceitful, nasty campaign I've ever seen.

Aaron said...

It is true that I have given far more attention to Patrick than Healey. The reasons for that are that I felt he was more of a threat than Gabrieli during the primary (turned out I was right) and many of my remarks about the race have been in response to others blogs, which have been predominently about Patrick over the past several months.

The reason why I have spent less time discussing Healey is because during the primary I was too focused on the Primary to give her much thought, and now, well...it's hard to be passionate enough to write about a race between two candidates neither of whom you like. But, should you wish to hear more specifics about my views on Healey, check my blog in a few days.

MassDemocracy.blogspot.com

Thanks for the comments!!

Laser said...

There is a chance to battle big and see the issue in lights.

Please look below at the foward message which was sent Directly to Colm F Connolly himself

We have provided proof of over 100 statutory violations in the bankruptcy matter of eToys 01-706 (Del Bankr. 2001)
The Dept of Justice did not seek disqualification of the attorneys who admitted to filing multiple, intentionally false, Rule 2014 affidavits.

Contrary to their oath of office, 28 USC 586(a)(3)(F) and in direct violation of 18 USC 3057(a) the United States Trustee actually & speciously sought immunity for the felony violations and the US Trustee has aggressively sought to assist defrauding our Court approved contract work by seeking to strike and expunge our proofs of fraud and perjury by powerful law firms connected to Mitt Romney.

The Asst US Trustee Frank Perch did motion to disgorge Traub $1.6 million, but mentioned nothing about the false affidavits of Morris Nichols (MNAT)

The Director of the Dept of Justice EOUST emailed us that he would take care of the issues.

The the US Attorney for the new Region 3 Trustee, Mark Kenney offered the right to circumvent the law and a "get out of jail free card" to the perpetrators.

MNAT represented both Bain and eToys when it the court approved the selling of the eToys assets to Bain. This is Collusion to defraud the estate for tens of millions of dollars.MNAT now represents Bain in the KB bankruptcy case (Del Bankr 04-10120).

We have now found the missing link, just this past week, that offers explanation of the "nolle prosequi" of the Dept of Justice, that being the reason why the US Attorney's office has refused to prosecute MNAT. For the US Attorney for Delaware is Colm F Connolly. Connolly was (and may be still) a partner at MNAT when eToys sold the assets to MNAT's other client Bain.

Lawrence Friedman, Frank Perch and Debra Yang (Pres Bush Corp Fraud Task Force) have all subsequently resigned from their key positions at the Dept of Justice, without providing an sufficient remedy of the matter.
The US Attorney in Delaware who has refused to prosecute MNAT or Bain is Colm F Connolly, who is now being considered for a Fed Judge position. As such Connolly's resume is now public knowledge.
.
While it seems to be a good career move not to investigate or prosecute your partners, associates and clients. Especially when such is connected to your future boss, a Presidential hopefull. (Miit Romney owns Bain,KB, eToys, Stage Stores, SanKaty)

It is however, a matter of grave concern when eventually get "caught"!

----------------------------------------
(please see http://www.wjfa.net/bk/etoys.html and the US Trustee Disgorge Motion eToys Docket item 2195, the Dept of Justice Settlement and immunity motion eToys docket item 2201 and the Court's Opinion approving the Settlement motion docket item 2302 which can be seen here http://www.deb.uscourts.gov/Opinions/2005/EtoysMNATfees.pdf)
The Disgorge motion only addresses 3 of the more than 100 statutory violations we have proven. They seek to cover up all the others with the Stipulation to Settle providing illegal permission to Circumvent the Law with the following clause agreed upon

"WHEREAS the United States Trustee shall not seek to compel TBF to make any additional disclosures"

Such latitude to deliberately circumvent the Law, specifically 327(a) is not even permitted of a Federal Justice, as can be seen in the cases such as In re Middleton Arms, First Jersey Securites and In re United Artist.
Which states, the Courts are forbidden from contravening clear, unambiguous statutory mandates of 327(a).
A finding of non disclosure of conflict of interest mandates disqualification.

About Ryan's Take