Sep 18, 2012

Still Hoping For Change

The same liberals weaned on Camelot, now resent Mitt Romney's success. Romney's assets are peanuts compared to the Kennedy Fortune, which has supported the families of a hundred different offspring since Papa Joe made the fortune running booze from Canada. Here in the local blogosphere, Mitt lost Bernie O'Hare's vote yesterday, when it was revealed that Romney knew that there was only 53% of the vote up for grabs this election. Actually, Mitt said that he wasn't going to worry about the 47% of the population benefiting from entitlements. It fits the Obama media machine to twist, pull and shape that statement into Mitt not caring about those people, as opposed to realistically writing off their vote. They discount the fact that he was a governor to many low income people in Massachusetts. They ignore the fact that he has a reputation of lending a hand in his faith based community. O'Hare is more offended by a candid statement made at a private dinner party, than the divisive statements made by Obama on the campaign trail. Obama has been dividing citizens by income since he was elected. Why is John Kennedy a hero on his sailing yacht, while Mitt Romney is portrayed as the captain from Gillian's Island? The Bernie O'Hare's feel guilty that they are so disappointed in Obama's reality. The eloquent words were not matched by expected deeds. What a relief to find a few words by his opponent, which can be pounced upon.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lending a hand in his faith based community.........

He's a leader in the LDS, the Mormons. Do a little homework and see what Mormons believe and what and who they control. See how transparent the Mormon church is. See if you can attent service at a Mormon Temple, like you could at any Jewish Temple or Christian Church.

Get on the Internet and do some research. I'm not talking about looney sites either. Check out their leaders Joseph Smith and B. Young. Look at LDS holy books like THE PEARLS OF GREAT PRICE. Look at LDS long time beliefs on race and marriage. There is some wild stuff awaiting you.

Oh, don't bring up a politicians religion! ( You brought it up MM referring to it above.)

Well Opama's beliefs were scrutinized ---- rightly so. Let's do the same for Mitt Romney ----no more. Do some research dear reader. Then draw your own conclusions.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond MM.
Keep up the good work.

michael molovinsky said...

@2:46, if you or anybody else has another specific comment critical of LDS, submit it somewhere else, it will not appear here.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Mike,

This is just the diversion of the day the media has produced to distract the viewing and listening public from the plethora of real problems the Obama Administration has produced or failed to resolve.
Once again this story is more about the media playing the part of mere hacks for the Dems than it is about news.

Scott Armstrong

Anonymous said...

Re: Comment 2:46

Michael,
That part of the comment that encourages people to consider Romney's beliefs to the same degree as Obama's were scrutinized strikes me as good common sense. Romney is a public figure running for president of the nation. The LDS Church has and does play a major role in his life. Ugly comments may serve no constructive role on your blog, but researching or reflecting on the role of Mormonism in Mitt Romney life is not in and of itself criticizing the LDS. If the LDS deserve some critcism for some part of their outlook or actions, then so be it.

I say this as a Roman Catholic whose church has been subject to considerably criticism of late, some fair, some not, but all necessary. We are about the very serious business of selecting a president at this time. A candidates core beliefs and major affiliations require scrutiny.

michael molovinsky said...

@ 2:45 and 6:00 you must know that when kennedy ran, the talk was that a catholic would serve the pope and church before country. it's apparent that a mormon doesn't pass your litmus test. i never heard any accusation that his faith interfered with his role as governor. no reply on this topic will be printed.

Anonymous said...

Mitt Romney's rich. So what. This is America and he has a God given right to be rich. I'm sick and tired of the class warfare from those who resent a man who worked hard to be rich and successful.
Mitt is a good hard working man and as such God has shone His light upon him. Good for Mitt.

Anonymous said...

No matter who wins they will only help there family plunder more from americas treasures! All the while america is falling apart at its very core. Housing in most inner cities have fallen into irrepearable conditions. We are killing one another and americas integrity is very quetionable. Than last but far from least there are very few good jobs that are life sustaining!

REDD

michael molovinsky said...

as warned, i have rejected several comments pertaining to romney's religion.

Anonymous said...

While it's convenient and easy to label the "liberal media" as the Big Bad Boogey-man, maybe you should start reading what some of your prized conservative writers are saying about Mr. Romney.

Read the editorial page of the WSJ, Peggy Noonan, or Bill Kristol. At least they are honest with themselves and recognize that this GOP candidate is a cartoon character who is floundering and sinking.

What he said is far from 'presidential,' and fortunately, for the American people, he really has no shot at presidency anymore.

michael molovinsky said...

@6:16, pundits do pontificate. as for his shot at the the presidency, I don't see this as a game changer. i do not believe that there are any undecided voters in this election. you reveal your bias by saying fortunately he no longer has a shot. although he may have given bill kristol more to write about, he hasn't lost my vote.

michael molovinsky said...

@6:16, neither kristol or noonan said that romney is sinking or a cartoon character, although they did express disappointment about the tape fallout. a host of lessor liberal pundits have taken their remarks out of context, which one did you parrot?

Anonymous said...

"Why is John Kennedy a hero on his sailing yacht, while Mitt Romney is portrayed as the captain from Gillian's Island?"

Easy, but here are two quick reasons:

1- In 1960, we were idealistic. Assassinations, illegal wars, Watergate, stolen elections, pedophilia and more has jaded us, big time.

2- Presentation. Really?...you cannot see a difference between a rich guy who at least tries to show empathy, compared to one who would not know empathy if he fell into a pile of it?

Really?


VOR

Dem Res of Atown said...

I am a Dem who votes on the issues and not the party.
I think the sticking point is Romney's b.s.generalization is that 47% of Dems are looking for entitlements. I'd expect this bombastic nonsense coming from one of my Repub friends' emails in which they like to bash Dems, but not a presidential candidate. I understand that he was speaking to a group that believes the entitlements should be for the upper class alone (ouch! too generalized and simplistic?) and he was feeding these people exactly what they wanted to hear for $50,000 a pop, but is this really the attitude of a future Prez or just a put-on? As much as I know he says what he must to get elected, I have to wonder how much of this crap he really believes.

michael molovinsky said...

VOR, i think a main difference between 1960 and now is the change in the press and technology. at that time, we had journalists who attempted to repress their bias, and report the news as objectively as they could. now, news and entertainment have merged, and every word and image can be captured. neither of us really knows anything about kennedy's, romney's or obama's true empathy. at best, your preconceived notion was fulfilled.

Anonymous said...

JFK and FDR were "silver spooners" for sure. But they were not cynical to the point where they opened themselves up the the kind of criticism MR has. Even conservatives have decried his lack of warmth, lack of basic empathy. For a smart fellow, he sure misspeaks alot. BTW- the 47% includes an awful lot of Rebublicans. Mitt better hope that they forgive and forget because except for people wanting to vote against Obama, they have relatively few reasons to vote for Mitt Romney.


VOR

Guy Williams said...

Very dissapointed in how politics has come to be of late.Voted for RR in past and just cant believe that Romney is the best that the R's can come up with.Is he there because of the left wing bias in the media?I dont think so.As i stated in past I did not vote in 2008 because I thought the campaign was nothing more than an american Idol competition.Still think he lacks the experience for the big time.Now i feel he will win again simply due to his personality.Hard to believe that in a down economy the R's cant come up with a winner such as in 80.Believe the final blow to romney will come at the debates.

Anonymous said...

Mitt Romney put his dog on the roof of a car --- what more does one need to know?

I think the Lame Stream Media should be more focused on truly important stuff, like when the first puck drops at the record-smashing (state-sponsored) Palace of Sport.

Only Democrats and RINOs can give me the basic necessities of life.

VOTING FOR THE FREE LUNCH GUY WHO CARES MORE THAN MITT ROMNEY

Anonymous said...

Mike,

The issue with the left leaning is that they are the god of their religion. What they feel, how they will benefit, or how they will be impacted is what matters. They do not consider the nation or the state at large as long as their needs are met. I have learned that a big part of their religion is not offending; at least not offending certain people. Which is why you are attacked as a racist from time to time for what you write and they say nothing about how Pawlowski and council have destroyed or pushed out minority owned businesses. They are blind to such things until the day he puts an R next to his name. I have even seen some liberals write that if R&R are elected they will raise taxes. Isn't that what the Democratic party has been trying to do for 11 years now.

Keep up the good work.

Steven Ramos

michael molovinsky said...

steve ramos, thanks for the note. for the record, the accusations of racism against me originate with bill villa, who doesn't really care if i'm a racist or not; to him it's just a hammer to use. he cites a comment posted on this blog a couple of years ago by someone else about hispanics, and holds me responsible, because he says that my blog was moderated at the time, thus i own the comment. in reality, the blog was NOT moderated at the time the comment was placed. ironically, the blog was moderated previously, intermittently, and currently, because of unwanted comments by him. now back to you; you offered the general and hispanic population informed representation on city council. unfortunately. you ran with a R behind your name. ironically, the voters robotically pulled the D lever for any name on that column. We are now about to appoint our third D, they don't even have to run for office anymore, just wait in the wings.