House of Eratosthenes

President Obama told a crowd at a Democratic fundraiser in Boston Wednesday night that he was able to pass a national health care bill “with a little assist from the former governor of Massachusetts.” The reference to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, and to the health system Romney enacted in Massachusetts, drew laughter from the crowd of about 900 at the Boston Center for the Arts.

“With a little assist from the former governor of Massachusetts, we said that health care should no longer be a privilege in this country,” Obama said. “It should be affordable and available for every American.”

A short time later, at a smaller fundraiser in a private home in Brookline, Obama said, “Our work isn’t done. Yes, we passed health care, with an assist from a former Massachusetts governor.” The crowd, which had paid $35,800 per couple to attend, broke into laughter and applause. “Great idea,” Obama added. “But we still have to implement it.”

Obama’s quick jabs at Romney are a brief preview of what will come in the general election campaign if Romney wins the Republican presidential nomination. Under pressure from some conservative leaders to repudiate his Massachusetts system, Romney has instead defended it, although he says he does not support its enactment nationwide. Of course, no matter what Romney says on the issue of health care, Obama will attack him for it. Obama’s re-election team is said to be eager for a match-up with Romney. If they get their wish, we’ll hear a lot more about Romneycare from the author of Obamacare.

Mittens has consistently been a front-runner, enjoying a potent lift from a large campaign war chest, and vague-to-non-existent definition of his positions on the issues. But lately, there’s been a reshuffling in the crowd of contenders coming just after him. The number two spot is taken by — oh, my, it’s that awful, horrible woman who isn’t actually running and is supposed to be stupid or something:

With Mike Huckabee’s exit from the race, Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin are now on top of the Republican field, according to a Gallup poll released Wednesday.

Twenty percent of Republican and Republican-leaning voters say they’d support the former Massachusetts governor, while 18 percent say they’d support the former Alaska governor.

Newt Gingrich comes in third place with 11 percent.

Quick recovery there, Governor. Seem just last week the wise chattering sages were measuring a coffin for your campaign. Interesting, since you don’t actually have one yet…and you running statistically neck-and-neck with the lead dog, just a short time later, still without having announced any decision to actually run, is also interesting.

I wonder if Birther Zero can make a quick “jab” at the hot granny over some Alaska socialized-medicine plan. I’m thinkin’ that’s a negative. Not that she doesn’t have vulnerabilities in other areas…she’s hated by important people somewhere, who don’t want us to know who they are, how many of them there are, why exactly it is that they hate her or why we should care. They don’t seem to be the brightest bulbs on the tree. But she certainly is hated, along with everyone in recorded human history who ever posed a threat to something.

Mitt isn’t hated. He isn’t defined with enough detail to be hated, and it looks like he isn’t posing enough of a threat. President Obama, obviously, feels like He can deal with the Mittster with a tap. Or a “jab.”

If it’s down to these two former governors, the Republicans need to figure out if they will rally behind someone who says nothing, or someone who says something. They have always lost when they cast their lot in with someone who says nothing. They have always won when they fall in behind someone who says something.

…while 18 percent say they’d support the former Alaska governor.

Newt Gingrich comes in third place with 11 percent.

Yer Gal only has a seven point lead over Newt after Gingrich did his best self-immolating-Buddhist-monk impression this weekend? Doesn’t that tell ya ANYTHING, Morgan?
- bpenni | 05/19/2011 @ 12:40
Like I said, she’s tied with the number one guy when she isn’t even running.

Does that tell you anything?
- mkfreeberg | 05/19/2011 @ 13:09
Gentlemen, please: Sarah Palin ain’t gonna be the Republican nominee. Not because of any qualities or lack thereof — all of which, and their absence, have been examined ad nauseam — but because that’s not how the GOP works.

The GOP goes with the “centrist,” milquetoast “moderate,” who (thanks, MSM!) is by definition the guy who grins and says “I agree with my respected opponent” whenever Obama calls him a racist. That’s why Mittens won’t be the nominee either — he’s a Mormon, which the evangelical right considers scary. I’m guessing Pawlenty — nobody has heard of him even in Minnesota, and most Americans, certainly including myself, couldn’t pick him out of a police lineup.

Give him a few talking points on “preserving medicare” and “smart regulation” of Wall Street and he’s a shoo-in for the nomination. Especially since the GOP, blithering idiots that they are, refuse to close their primaries, which allows the left to astroturf and keep destructive stalking horses like Gingrich and R*n P**l afloat well into spring. The whole system conspires to produce the blandest nonentity possible.

Obama ’12, boys — get used to it.
- Severian | 05/19/2011 @ 14:08
Two problems with that:

One, the GOP has not been consistent in selecting milquetoasts. It has been consistent in losing when it selects milquetoasts, going all the way back to Taft a century ago, with negligible exceptions…like in ’88 maybe. But, in fact, it has won the White House about three fifths of the time, depending on what decades one wishes to include or exclude, because the country has always been somewhat rightward-leaning compared to the choices it is given. When it wins, it wins by choosing a candidate that makes a statement & doesn’t apologize for making it.

Two: Cumulatively, there has been a vast expenditure of effort, energy and just-plain-blather along the lines of “Palin no chance Palin just go away.” If there was truth in this, if the message had potential, it would’ve borne fruit by now. Well, she’s still out there, getting mentioned even when she isn’t saying anything. And the other fine fellas are, pardon my vulgarity, pretty much just slipping on their shit and not getting anything besides that accomplished.

I’m pretty sure she’ll drop out for good if someone shows some potential for carrying the football. It hasn’t yet happened at this late date. Which suggests, rather strongly to me, it won’t.
- mkfreeberg | 05/19/2011 @ 14:15
I’m with you, Morgan.

Sev does pose an interesting point, though. His comments remind me of the disastrous 1996 presidential campaign. I was in college at the time, had only been political four-five years or so, and had spent four years watching Clinton take the Reagan-Bush legacy, along with pretty much everything else that made the US a great nation…and run it right through the shredder.

I watched as he said boneheaded things like, “Mend it, don’t end it (affirmative action).”
I watched as he entertained all manner of criminals and scum at the White House.
I watched as he and his veep brazenly violated US election laws.
I watched as he sold our most coveted nuclear technology to our enemies…for a few bucks in Chi-com campaign contributions.
I watched as he played “wag the dog” with Osama Bin Laden and pussyfoot around in Somalia with some tinhorn warlord.
I watched as he tried to put his freakin’ WIFE in charge of the US healthcare system/
I watched as federal spending skyrocketed out of control on his watch.
I watched him cut the military in half.
I watched him try to force all kinds of absurd social experimentation on that military.
I watched his administration try to ban an entire class of firearms based only on their appearance.
I watched him do all other kinds of ridiculous, absurd, illegal, immoral, ill-advised things in office.

…you get the idea.

All that crap, and finally 1996 rolls around, and we have a chance to unseat the SOB….

…and we nominate a tired old man (apparently because it was his “turn”) to run against a young and admittedly well-spoken and popular president.

And then we act surprised when we get the crap kicked out of us.

Again.
- cylarz | 05/20/2011 @ 01:00

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Obama “Jabs” at RomneyThursday, May 19th, 2011

Obama “Jabs” at Romney
Thursday, May 19th, 2011