Laura Ingraham slams Romney: 'Mitt missed many opportunities'

No campaign is perfect, but Romney did many things right. He performed well in the debates, energized grassroots supporters, and raised lots of money.

Would he have fared better if he had talked about the fiscal cliff? We have our doubts.

  • Dwight Spainhoward

    Laura is human too she is not always right. Romney had the plan and people called it trickle down and got scared. We would not be in near as much trouble right now if Romney had won…….Just my opinion everyone has one.

    • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

      If Romney was elected, things would bottom out and we’d see massive economic growth.

  • Tara

    Yeah, but he certainly didn’t do alot of things he could have. He fared well in the first debate, but totally backed down on and wussed out on actually hammering O on things. It also seemed like the last few weeks he just lost steam. Yup, he sure did raise lots of money. He did NOT energize grassroots, we rallied behind him not because of who he was but because so many of us rallied around ANYBODY BUT OBAMA. He could’ve pushed harder than he did. But, what’s done is done.

    • shimauma

      well said. fact is, romney was a progressive RINO, picked by the media to lose to barry hussien. until real conservatives get back by the RNC, we will continue to see our country headed lefturd down the progressive slope.

    • Grace656

      He certainly DID energize grassroots, at least where I come from. Huge crowds and unbelievable energy made me a believer in the possibility of a win. I worked my butt off and had a wonderful time with my fellow grassroots conservatives.

  • crosspatch

    In my opinion he stayed too focused on economic growth and tax issues and didn’t broaden that discussion to explain to people at the bottom of the economic ladder how this helps them. He also didn’t concentrate on being a guiding light to those people as a path out of perpetual poverty across generations. And finally, he didn’t present a larger picture of everyone pitching in together and bringing us back the way Reagan did. Go to youtube and watch Reagan’s 1981 inaugural address and you clearly see the contrast in message. The common folks of America were Reagan’s heroes, you didn’t get that so much from Romney. He came across like a financial consultant being brought in to turn the countries finances around but not so much as an inspirational leader in other aspects.

    • journogal

      I also don’t think they wanted to hear it. Unfortunately we are in a different period than with Reagan. Many on the dole want to stay on the dole. Don’t you remember the frightfully (because they can vote and have children) funny (in a sad way) posting on Twitchy of Twitterers getting upset because they “thought” Romney was going to take away the $1 menu at McDonalds or other strange things (tampons, etc.) Truth is, we are dealing with a dumbed-down electorate. They think they can sit at home and live the high life through government. Is it possible to reach them?

      • http://twitter.com/lazypadawan lazypadawan

        You’re right. Obama could’ve beaten Jesus and George Washington, unfortunately.

  • http://pinterest.com/j0s1395/ Josephine (D)

    Maybe he should have emphasized what a bully and uncouth spender Obama is; he should have also not been afraid to talk about the HHS mandate.

  • http://twitter.com/cpilch123 claire123

    “Slams” Romney? If that’s all she said, it is definitely not a “slam.”

  • TheOriginalDonald

    Nobody…AND BY GOD I MEAN NOBODY COULD BEAT BARACKA CLAUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • nc

      This is the sad truth. The fix was in long ago (and you can read that any way you want). We could have had a fearless conservative like Santorum or Gingrich, and you saw how the media marginalized them as fringy extremists. No one could have withstood that.

      So we got the squeaky cleanest smart guy we could find who yes, played it too safe. But like I said, the fix was in. He never had a chance.

      • JimmyJusticeUSA

        If Gingrich or Santorum had been nominated they would have been called RINO’s also. Santorum would have been a RINO for supporting Bush’s spending and being pro-union and Gingrich would have been a RINO for compromising with democrats as speaker.

      • Jack Deth

        I hear you, Donald and nc:

        Conservatives got hammered with the express assistance from Republicans on high, who shan’t be mentioned. A media so far up Obama’s backside that it’s sickening. Creating slips and faux pas where none existed to marginalize a decent pack of contenders. Who were deliberately and gleefully destroyed by the left.

        Conservatives and the GOP were out manned, outgunned, out numbered (With some classically vulgar 141% voter fraud) and out Generaled. Those Obama Phones were given out for a reason. For low intelligence voters to be spoon fed all things wise and wonderful about Barack A Claus. And all things evil and repugnant about an ever thinning number of Republican candidates. And where to go and at what time(s) to cast a ballot. Or ten for Obama.

      • kssturgis62

        We got the MOST FAR LEFT LIBERAL IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY a TRUE MODERATE LIBERAL, so liberal he passed Romneycare and never mentioned Obamacare at the end, so liberal he was for abortion before against it, so liberal, he was for gun control before against it, more liberal than John McCain and we were told by Ann Coulter, Laura Ingrahm and several others that we had to do that. Please Squeaky Clean Yes, but Liberal in every sense of the Word.

        Another thing the Reason 3 Million stayed home and i say more, they were Christians, who mentioned them in this race. NO ONE. Romney didn’t care about the Christians like me and that is a fact. I voted for him anyway. Reagan courted the Christians they came out in droves and voted for him and So did George Bush number 2 and we came out and voted for him. In these last 2 elections NOT ONE WORD about the christians, not one. wow they stayed home no difference seen in either Mccain or Romney. Please I voted for McCain and romney, i knew it was better than electing a communist, but when you have the same or some of the same beliefs as Obama, they are going to stay home. now our Religious freedom is being taken away.

        He told the Republicans in congress to get rid of Article II in the constitution to not have to have appointees by the President vetted by the Senate, wow that is gone now. He also Changed the rules at the RNC to kick out grass roots activists, and john sununu and john boehner had a lot to do with that. Michelle Malkin wrote about it, and it HAD NOTHING to do with Ron Paul.

        Yeah smart, But liberal, squeaky clean but liberal. The fix was in alright, the two parties have melded together. I voted for Romney, but in 2016 you can forget it – I am not voting for a Republican unless i am guaranteed for sure this time that they are NOT Dole, McCain or Romney. they are the Same. don’t give me the Line oh but if you don’t then the Liberal will win. Guess what the LIBERAL COMMUNIST WON.

        • Kate

          It’s pretty obvious that American Conservatives do NOT want a moderate running on the GOP ticket. I hope they learned their lesson…

          • Andrew

            Kate: The conservastives want a “conservative” to vote for, not a wannabe RINO.

            If the liberal part of the GOP establishment/elites want liberals, then become democrats, not pretend conservatives.

            And yes, I learnt my lesson well. I will NOT vote for another RINO, ever. If that means that the republicans lose, well then as I mentioned before, change parties!!!

    • Alan

      Oh Gawd…I hate that you are correct.

    • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

      Thumbs up, but Santorum or Herman Cain could have.

      • Jesse Malkin

        no way.

        • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

          Come on…..all we needed was our base to turn out and we would’ve won.

        • kssturgis62

          At Least Santorum and Cain Courted the Christians with Newt. Newt would have clobbered him, We all know it, in the debates alone Obama would have been hanging with his tongue panting like a dog and we all would have paid to see Newt Debate Obama and the highest ratings in TV History ever would have happened. Admin I disagree, SARAH OR NEWT would have KICKED HIS BUTT TO THE CURB. The 3 to 5 Million that Stayed home who were Christians just like me, and I voted would have voted. Because they would have courted that vote. LOOK WHO VOTED FOR NEWT. :)

      • Andrew

        No way for Rick. Santorum is another RINO, I wouldn’t for him!!!

        • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

          None of the candidates were perfect conservatives but Cain was close.

          Those who did not vote for Romney got Obama re-elected.

          • Andrew

            Rulz: Actually the far left GOP establishment/elites got Obama re-elected by offering a “pale version” of Obama, Romney.

            If the leftists GOPers insist on the same liberal republican for 2016, then “Yes”, I will vote independent.

            I’m disappointed with the conservative media pundits who are also pushing the GOP party into ever more leftist territory. Thus making it appear as if conservatives are the new “extremist”.

          • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

            Those are good points. The only thing I am really is saying is that people who sat at home or voted for Virgil Goode, Gary Johnson or even for Obama won’t be taking too much longer to regret it.

            Some of them may already and the new government hasn’t even been sworn in yet.

          • Andrew

            You can’t blame the stay at homes folks if the GOP will NOT bring a conservative candidate to the table.

            Study your politics more and you will find that what I’m saying is true about the GOP leadership. Don’t be a “die hard” republican. Always, always question your leaders direction.

            Ironically the GOP mission statement/platform is conservative enough yet they run the party is run more like a bunch of liberal lunatics.

          • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

            Listen, I already know what’s going on with the GOP. I’ve published research before and I’ve worked in DC. I know exactly why the republicans don’t act conservative, and it’s the same reason the democrats are never honest about who they are and what they really want.

            There’s all kinds of examples besides John Boehner and Eric Cantor. Just look at Neal Boortz who grovels at the feet of the gay rights movement and independent women, but thinks that blind and autistic people are parasites.

            My personal favorites are so-called fiscal conservatives who think that if government mandates special rights for X group that it won’t affect the money supply or government growth.

            Then you have all these Midwestern people in the so-called Heartland who voted for Obama and they were the difference in the election. These are the people who live in Paul Ryan and Michelle Bachmann’s districts thinking they are “conservative” because they want everyone off of Section 8 and welfare but cash in on farm and ethanol subsidies.

            You even had people turn their back on Scott Walker because they were worried they might look bad at a PTA meeting.

            The republican leadership stinks and is whipped by the beltway left. But, the American people keep on putting them there.

            I voted for Santorum in the primary. I voted for Romney mostly because of health care and I knew the others had zero chance of winning.

          • Andrew

            My apologies to you then. You are well versed with “politics”. About Neal Bortz, I used to like him since he “claimed” to be a libertian. That changed when he bashed Ron Paul and his followers as hordes of zombies (as if democrats don’t have the core of brainwashed hordes).

            I’m with a N. Michigan Tea Party. We think (we are trying to educate) that alot of Americans (left/right) are saddened by how the parties are being hi-jacked by the elites. These are the Americans who are hoping that Rand Paul will step forward and take his dad’s place.

            The more I look at the libertian party/principles, the more is looks conservative to me.

            Lets hope for God Providence that we can turn America around.

    • http://twitter.com/jessegreathouse Jesse Greathouse

      Herman Cain could have beat him.

      • TheOriginalDonald

        So could Sarah

        • Jesse Malkin

          love Sarah, but doubt she would have won.

      • Jesse Malkin

        you’re dreaming.

        • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

          Think about it, admin……Herman Cain gets even 1/3 of the Black vote it’s over.

  • LeftistsStink

    Throughout the campaign, Ingraham would often rag on and on about what Romney ought to be doing. I found it so annoying that I quit listening to her show.

    • JimmyJusticeUSA

      obviously she knows what she is talking about since she has run many winning presidential campaigns

    • Vennoye

      Not only Ingraham…all of them. Everyday some “Conservative??” talking head(s) were all giving their opinion about what Romney was doing wrong, what the campaign should do, did he need to fire his campaign and get new people…on and on and on. Frankly, I consider them WORSE than the leftist media!! I don’t listen to any of them anymore! Talk about a circular firing squad….and they wonder why we find them disgusting……….and are leaving them behind!!

      • LeftistsStink

        Yes. After Romney/Ryan lost, I have found it difficult to continue paying attention to most of the “Conservative” pundits, as well. Fat lot of good they’ve done with all of their “brilliant criticisms,” other than solicit attention to further their own careers.

  • Michelle

    That’s not a “slam” it’s an observation. I also think he missed a few opportunities and a time or two, found myself yelling at the TV when Romney didn’t call Obama out on some hardcore lies during the last two debates. Example being: Obama repeatedly, in the debates and in speeches, said, “I ended the war in Iraq just like I promised.” Big. Fat. Lie. Not only did it not end according to the promise he made in 2008, all he did was follow the timeline Bush established BEFORE Obama took office. Obama didn’t end the war in Iraq, Bush did, but Obama takes the credit. Romney didn’t call him out on that lie, neither did he call Obama out on several other lies. There’s nothing wrong with pointing this out, he missed these opportunities.

    • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

      Did you miss the time Romney called Obama out on his lying & the MODERATOR jumped in & backed up Obama’s lies? Romney set the record straight but the MSM either didn’t show it to people OR told people Romney was lying (see, for example the 100% true Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep ad named “lie of the year” by Politifact). Throw in people like Laura Ingraham who spent most of the GE criticizing what Romney was “doing wrong” rather than Obama & it’s actually amazing that Romney got the 61 million votes he did.

      • Sketti

        And? Michelle’s statement is 100% correct!

      • http://twitter.com/WilloughbyAnnie Annie Willoughby

        You’re exactly right! We have a Socialist government with no prospects of anything else because of know-it-all Republicans who flapped their yaps (just like they’re doing here,) instead of supporting their duly elected nominee. Real brilliant pieces of work, they. How could Democrats lose with help like that?

        • Sketti

          Irony – Attacking Republicans for attacking Republicans! /rollseyes

      • Michelle

        I didn’t miss any of that, but neither did I say he missed all opportunities. What I said was he missed a few opportunities and then provided an example of a very important one he let slide – calling Obama out on his lie that he ended the war. Saying he missed a few opportunities is not the same as saying he missed them all.

        • Kate

          Agreed- Romney’s biggest flaw was being too nice, and assuming that his opponent was a reasonable man. Clearly, he wasn’t prepared for a nasty, Chicago-style campaign.

          • Michelle

            Bingo! That’s exactly what happened. A classy gentleman went up against an arrogant punk.

    • shimauma

      the limosine republicans are all up in arms about this “slam” because they can’t stand to think their rino turd horn sucking progressive candidate romney didn’t have any balls to call barry hussien out. We true conservatives were still willing to swallow the crap sandwich that was romney, but he didn’t really fight for it so he lost anyway, just like the media wanted him to do when they gave him to the RNC

  • shimauma

    This is what happens when a progressive libturd Rino gets the RNC nomination. They don’t have any balls to speak up. Too bad we couldn’t have had a real conservative run for president like Paul Ryan or Herman Cain. (not ron paul, that guy was scary)

    • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

      Paul Ryan was on the ticket — and he didn’t bring anything geographically or demographically to it– heck, he didn’t even bring the Catholic vote, so keep living in your fantasy land.

      • shimauma

        Tell me what about my statement was fantasy? romney IS a progressive RINO, he was worthless and NO conservative. Paul Ryan had more conservatism in his little finger than flip floppy romney had in his whole family

      • shimauma

        you’re one of those country club republicans that blame conservatives for the romney loss aren’t you? I got you pegged. fact is conservatives like me still didn’t want barry hussien to win, so we held our noses and voted for the flip floppy RINO because the libturd progressive RNC didn’t give us anyone else. And romney still failed miserably because he HAD NO BALLS.

  • Samh09

    Can we now say that Romney has been Ingrahammered?

  • http://twitter.com/WilloughbyAnnie Annie Willoughby

    Religious, mild-mannered, fiscally responsible, family oriented, patriotic American loses to a Communist/Marxist, bald faced lying, race-baiting, class dividing, evilutionary, wannabe dictator in a decaying, devolving, sick society.

    Look, Ingram, you dim, Dem-lite! Here’s my surprised face! The only advice you’ve been able to offer Republicans is that they lighten up on the murdering, pervert loving Dems and adopt their demonic policies for votes. Pound sand!

  • Gerry

    Hind sight is always 20:20.

  • http://www.facebook.com/steve.thegnome Steve Thegnome

    Romney was nothing more then the better of two evils, Cain would have been better, Bachmen, we need a true strong conservitive that won’t back off these fools, we need more strong conservitivies at the state and local levels who can prevent voter fraud and don’t care about a future voting block.

    • Jesse Malkin

      We love Bachmann but she would have lost, too. Cain was not a serious candidate. He would have been beaten by 20 points.

  • http://twitter.com/jessegreathouse Jesse Greathouse

    Mitt Romney WAS the missed opportunity. Republicans keep nominating the worst possible candidate.

    • disqus_BktOMwqkBg

      I used to think the republicans were all for union seniority when it came for presidential nominees, but I was wrong. The previous loser seems to keep his election machine intact and running and gets a insurmountable head start during the next election season.

    • Jesse Malkin

      Completely false. who could have done better?

  • TheRightAngle

    I do agree with Laura Ingraham on this one. Romney came out firing on all cylinders for the first debate and even won some of the libs over. Something happened for the 2nd and 3rd debates – he was timid, almost fearful to pull the trigger, and he had a ton of chances to close the deal.

    I remember hearing the pundits: oh that’s the plan, that’s plan, give Obama enough rope to hang himself. I remember adamantly disagreeing then as I do now. You don’t give the enemy any chances, which I feel Romney did.

    Would it have made a difference in the end? I tend to think not since this election was rigged from the start. Obama is the dirtiest slimiest guy walking the planet, let alone the president of our country. Read this to find out what this guy is really about: http://conservativeangle.com/socialist-framework-espoused-by-obama-to-takedown-america/

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Al-Lebo/100000804811637 Al Lebo

    When we run conservatives, we win. When we listen to Karl Rove we lose.

  • Selma Birch

    No one believed him about Benghazi and no one would have listen about the fiscal cliff. Stop blaming Romney, for the fact that we republicans have been sitting on our butts doing nothing but bitching that things aren’t going our way. Shut up about fiscal cliff while use support the owners of these news stations that lied. Stop going to disney world and dealing with JP morgan which are only a few of the owners of NBC, CBS, CNN and ABC. Stop buying the music video’s and tickets to the movies of these actors that want to take away our rights. You want to let the wind out of this Socialist movement than stop supporting their leaders with your money. You can google the owners of these news stations and than email those companies that own them that you will be boycotting them.. HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS!!! DO SOMETHING OTHER THAN COMPLAIN!!!

  • Grace656

    Romney was a decent man and infinitely better than Obama.
    It is a deceitful and disgusting media, the journOlists, that are winning these elections. They hide that which would hurt the democrats; they manipulate, connive, and have near sexual experiences with our dear president (tingles, and all that.) Many are not just democrats themselves, but are socialists and communists. They are the the most potent weapon the democrats have, though they are not their only weapon.

  • Sam

    The whole campaign I talking about how the Romney camp was not hitting back as hard as they could have. Many of the ads, in my opinion, were pretty weak. Though I think it would have been impossible to counteract all the fear-mongering I don’t find Laura’s comments spiteful and I think she has a valid point. Then again, I’ve always been a fan.

    • Jesse Malkin

      we are fans, too! but in this instance we think she is wrong. talking about the fiscal cliff more wouldn’t have changed the outcome.

  • http://twitter.com/lazypadawan lazypadawan

    That’s assuming most Americans would have cared about the fiscal cliff. They didn’t until now because there’s nothing else to talk about in the MSM and in that case, they are blaming Congress not Obama. Romney could have talked about the fiscal cliff until the cows came home; your fellow Americans would have ignored it and worried about his insidious plans to ban tampons and McDonald’s Dollar Menu instead. For America’s voters, what mattered were geographically-targeted stimulus bucks, Obamaphones, free birth control, and sticking it to Whitey.

  • Guest

    Point of order, please: Romney is said to not really have wanted to be our President, according to Tagg, one of his sons. Knowing this now, can you imagine if he had won? What kind of job would he have the heart to do?

    • disqus_BktOMwqkBg

      Sour grapes and revisionism. “i lost, but it doesn’t matter because I really didn’t want to win”. Right.(sarc). Fred Thompson in 2004 didn’t want to try or win. Mitt thought he had a cakewalk in the actual election, but he wouldn’t have burned all the rest of the republicans in the primary if he didn’t want to win.

  • Mark_Krieg

    Romney made a couple of Misevaluations #1, that people were wanting to go to work. People are lazy, they are a new breed of people they are lazy hand out wanting people.
    Obama fed that want, free phones, food stamps, no work requirement for un employment benefits. easy “no reason” retirement. just have a ache or pain get a Doctor to sign off wham, retired with disability.

    Romney was 100% correct about the 47% all lazy lack assed people standing with their hand out, they don’t care about tomorrow or what a future holds for them, they want free stuff now!

    It was a rigged election 51:49 but no one is willing to go forward and prove it right or wrong.
    The cliff is near and the future is going to be like Hitler’s Germany in 3 short years.
    This stupid gun band is the first step, too bad someone don’t say, ojk you want a gun ban? if anyone is killed with a banned weapon, the people that voted yes are liable to be sued for the deaths of whom ever was killed.

    Wishful thinking I know, but I can dream in this nightmare hell hole we are about to drive squarely into.

  • Howzah123

    Romney could have promised more welfare and hand outs than Obama and he still would have been painted as a murderer and criminal by Democrats.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CVRZE7H2ENKKMCYYOMIUIVWRW4 rhody

    Her and Huckabee…Is this a Fox News trend? I’m starting to think Mother “whatever”.com rumor about Soros controlling Fox may not be a rumor.

  • hbnolikeee

    Duh Bumbler had a vastly superior ground game which had been humming for 5 years. Mitt’s ground game and Orca (aka Dorka) program failed as well. Put those things with voter fraud and Pravda Mitt had little hope of winning. In fact I don’t know that in this climate and that election Reagan could have beaten these thieves.

  • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

    This is weird. People told me there was an alternate American reality where people actually thought, and apparently still think, that Romney was a good presidential candidate, but I wanted to see it for myself.

    I know people are going to insult and call me names and whatever else, but history has proven that America’s economy has always performed poorly under a conservative administration. Always. This is just fact. Conservative economic policy is just ineffective because it focuses on the retention of wealth in the hands of a few instead of a more generalized method of distribution.

    Mitt was a personification of this conservative mantra. He knows how to make a few prosperous at the expense of many. That is the exact opposite of what we need.

    It’s a good thing Romney lost. Now, if we can get the Tea Party out of government as well, we’ll be onto something.

    • mike_in_kosovo

      history has proven that America’s economy has always performed poorly
      under a conservative administration.

      Probably because the Dems have controlled Congress during those conservative administrations. You know, like Republicans getting the deficit down to 150 billion in FY 2007, before the Dems took control of Congress and tripled it to 460 billion, then tripled it *again* to what we’ve had for the last 4 years.

      You know – speaking of facts and all.

      • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

        Probably? Are you sure about that or just guessing? And you can make up whatever scenario you want, but the fact remains American economy is just better under democratic leadership. There is no ‘probably’ about that.

        And the fact is we didn’t have a deficit until, yup, Bush was elected, twice. And considering how Republicans have absolutely refused to work with Obama, or even offer any legitimate economic legislation, it’s no wonder the deficit is blooming. That’s what happens when public officials refuse to do their job to stick to some extreme party line that doesn’t help anyone.

        Republican dogma, if you go by the facts, are just bad for everyone, especially the people that keep voting for them.

        • mike_in_kosovo

          And the fact is we didn’t have a deficit until, yup, Bush was elected, twice.

          Are you *that* stupid, or does history not exist prior to 2000 in whatever universe it is that you’re inhabiting?

          And considering how Republicans have absolutely refused to work with Obama,

          You mean the guy that said “I won” as a response when the Reps tried to work with him?

          or even offer any legitimate economic legislation

          Check Harry Reid’s desk, you’ll find them.

          it’s no wonder the deficit is blooming. That’s what happens when public officials refuse to do their job to stick to some extreme party line that doesn’t help anyone.

          Like “Taxing the rich” to get 80 billion a year and touting that as the solution to the 1 *TRILLION* plus deficits that the Democrats have run up since 2009?

          • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

            I’m not sure what you are inferring because there was no deficit when Bush took office. That’s just common knowledge at this point. If you want to talk about history, how about no Republican president since Eisenhower has produced a balanced budget. Again, conservative fiscal policy just does not work.

            Ha, well, he did win, despite the GOP doing everything, including tanking the economy, to keep that from happening.

            I said ‘legitimate’ legislation. Most of the conservative ideas center around cuts with no revenue. That’s not how you promote financial growth. Every healthy economy on the planet knows this.

            At no point has ‘taxing the rich’ been pushed as the entire solution. It’s just part of it. And actually, it’s not a tax hike at all, but rather just restoring the rates on income, and, more importantly, estate and property taxes, to there proper levels.

            The frustration is that every politician in Congress knows we can balance the budget, but the GOP just refuse to work with Obama, despite the fact the majority of America has rejected the conservative platform. That’s just reckless and dangerous.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            I’m not sure what you are inferring because there was no deficit when Bush took office. That’s just common knowledge at this point.

            It’s also common knowledge that there were deficits before Bush took office – not the ‘we didn’t have a deficit until Bush was elected’ as you claim.

            If you want to talk about history, how about no Republican president since Eisenhower has produced a balanced budget. Again, conservative fiscal policy just does not work.

            Clinton’s balanced budget was due to the Republican Congress, just like the Republican capital gains tax cut is what brought the economy up for the last several years of Clinton’s 2nd term.

            Ha, well, he did win, despite the GOP doing everything, including tanking the economy, to keep that from happening.

            You mean the housing bubble that was found to be the fault of the Dems?

            I said ‘legitimate’ legislation.

            Pro-tip: Just because you disagree with it, doesn’t mean it’s not legit.

            Most of the conservative ideas center around cuts with no revenue. That’s not how you promote financial growth.

            And yet, millions of households realize that when you have “X” amount of money coming in, you can’t continually spend “X+Y”. Then, there’s you and Zero.

            Every healthy economy on the planet knows this.

            Which is why the Eurozone is cutting taxes, right?

            At no point has ‘taxing the rich’ been pushed as the entire solution. It’s just part of it.

            Where’s the rest of it, then? Are we gonna have another bill we’re gonna have to pass to find out what’s in it?

            And actually, it’s not a tax hike at all, but rather just restoring the rates on income, and, more importantly, estate and property taxes, to there proper levels.

            All the more reason to have EVERYONE paying those “proper levels” and not just the rich, wouldn’t you say?

            The frustration is that every politician in Congress knows we can balance the budget, but the GOP just refuse to work with Obama, despite the fact the majority of America has rejected the conservative platform.

            Really? Is *that* why Obama wouldn’t take the Bowles-Simpson recommendations, becaue the GOP won’t work with him? Is *that* why Obama couldn’t get a SINGLE vote for his budget, because the GOP wouldn’t work with him?

            That’s just reckless and dangerous.

            And you’re just delusional.

          • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

            Ha, obviously there were deficits before Bush. And most were created by conservative policy.

            Clinton balanced the budget was to due to cooperation with the Republicans, not because of. If Republicans had such sound fiscal policy, then why does the economy going into relapse whenever a Republican is in the White House. You’re just arguing against reality.

            There is no credible proof that the ‘housing bubble’ was caused exclusively by Democratic policy.

            Again, it’s not a matter of me not ‘agreeing’ with GOP’s platform. It’s just common sense derived from looking at the economic history of the US. The US just stagnates under conservative leadership. It doesn’t work.

            I said healthy economies. The irony of bringing up the Eurozone is that what is happening is the result of conservative economics. Austerity just does not work. We’ve seen this proven time and time again.

            Look at all the bills the GOP blocked and you’ll see how Obama is trying to fix the economy.

            What are you talking about? Everyone is paying their fair share of taxes except the wealthy. That’s what everyone is pissed about.

            Ha, what? Bowles-Simpson was voted down in the House of Reps, so, yeah, it is because of the GOP. And yes, it is well documented that the GOP haven’t supported any Obama proposal, so, again, yeah it is another case of the GOP refusing to be reasonable.

            You can call me all the names you want, but the facts are still the fact, my friend. Getting angry doesn’t change history.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Ha, obviously there were deficits before Bush. And most were created by conservative policy

            For someone that keeps *talking* about history, it’s quite obvious you don’t make any study of it.

            The Dems held the House throughout the Reagan Presidency, and took the Senate in the last 2 years of his 2nd term. They held both chambers through the Bush Sr. Presidency and the first two years of Clinton’s Presidency.

            Clinton balanced the budget was to due to cooperation with the Republicans, not because of.

            So, you either weren’t alive when Clinton shut down the gov’t over the budget in 95/96 or you’re lying…which is it?

            There is no credible proof that the ‘housing bubble’ was caused exclusively by Democratic policy.

            http://www.nber.org/papers/w18609

            Again, it’s not a matter of me not ‘agreeing’ with GOP’s platform. It’s just common sense derived from looking at the economic history of the US.

            Sorry, there’s no evidence in your postings that you have any sense at all, much less common sense.

            The US just stagnates under conservative leadership. It doesn’t work.

            Which is why we had 3 DECADES of growth from the result of those conservative economics – because it doesn’t work?

            I said healthy economies. The irony of bringing up the Eurozone is that what is happening is the result of conservative economics.

            Good Lord – if you truly believe the Eurozone is practicing conservative economics, then there’s no use in speaking with you any further, because you’re so far out in fantasyland there’s no coming back.

            Look at all the bills the GOP blocked and you’ll see how Obama is trying to fix the economy.

            Hate to tell you…voting down a bill isn’t ‘blocking’…it’s the natural function of Congress. Blocking is Harry Reid not even letting bills come to the floor. I know it’s a slight difference, may be a bit too subtle for you to grasp, but it’s there.

            What are you talking about? Everyone is paying their fair share of taxes except the wealthy. That’s what everyone is pissed about.

            The 1% ALREADY pays something like 40% of all income taxes… how much MORE of the bill do you think they should be picking up, pray tell?

            Ha, what? Bowles-Simpson was voted down in the House of Reps, so, yeah, it is because of the GOP.

            MORE revisionist history? S-B was a committee. Within themselves, they couldn’t get the requisite votes to put the recommendation forward. Within the board, Dems voted 6/4 in favor and Reps 5/3 in favor.

            So again, you prove that you really DON’T know anything about what you’re discussing, your information comes from bad sources, and you’re completely bought into the meme.

            Congrats…you’re a Democrat.

          • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

            Ok, let’s talk facts.

            America has ALWAYS performed better under democratic leadership.

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-25/democratic-presidents-are-better-for-the-economy.html
            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/economy-has-grown-the-most-when-democrats-have-been-in-power/2012/04/09/gIQA1VhS6S_blog.html
            http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economywatch/clinton-was-right-economy-really-does-perform-better-under-democrats-983087

            So everything you are saying about conservative fiscal policy is a flat out lie.

            The GOP did block multiple bills, not vote them down, so saying that did not is, again, a flat out lie.

            http://www.republicansforobama.org/node/8775
            http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/politics/senate-bring-jobs-home-bill-blocked/index.html
            http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-09-27/local/35497065_1_senate-republicans-disabled-american-veterans-procedural-objections

            Moving on, the most wealthy in America do not pay a 40% rate. Saying they do is a lie.

            http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2012/04/18/the-real-tax-rates-of-the-rich/
            http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2011/07/25/the-400-richest-americans-pay-an-18-tax-rate/
            http://www.cnbc.com/id/49939444/The_Millionaires_Who_Pay_the_Highest_Tax_Rate

            Simpson-Bowles was in fact voted down by the Hose of Reps, so, yeah, your just lying again.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/wonkbook-house-reaches-bipartisan-deal-to-reject-simpson-bowles/2012/03/29/gIQAfucdiS_blog.html
            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/simpson-bowles-plan-rejected-house-vote_n_1387601.html

            So, in the final tally, everything I’m saying can be easily backed up multiple sources. Ha, and I’m not even a Democrat. I’m just a concerned citizen that has the ability to read.

            I’m not sure what you political affiliation is, and frankly I don’t care. What I do know is that your commentary fits a narrative that is being pushed by conservative America. And, as I’ve shown, it is a complete and utter lie.

            Feel free to continue to argue against reality.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Ok, let’s talk facts.

            Well, that’ll be a first from you.

            *Various websites*

            Bloomy page: Tax receipts as a percentage of GDP is a detractor? Well, now I see how he got his rankings. A much better indicator would have been federal spending as a percent of GDP.

            So everything you are saying about conservative fiscal policy is a flat out lie.

            So, you can explain away the 30 years of gains from Reagan’s policies? Feel free.

            The GOP did block multiple bills, not vote them down, so saying that did not is, again, a flat out lie.

            If you let me know what part of ‘voting a bill down doesn’t equal blocking’ were you not able to understand, and I’ll try to re-phrase it using even shorter words so you can grasp the concept.

            Moving on, the most wealthy in America do not pay a 40% rate. Saying they do is a lie.

            And saying that I said they pay a 40% rate makes a great strawman. Unfortunately for your argument (and any lingering doubts about your intelligence), what I said was that the top 1% pays something like 40% of the income taxes.

            Simpson-Bowles was in fact voted down by the Hose of Reps, so, yeah, your just lying again.

            I quit following it after Obama said he wouldn’t implement it, to be honest. As for your Republican obstruction claims… here’s a tidbit from your own link:

            ” The final tally was 382-38. Twenty-two of the supporters were Democrats, while 16 were Republicans. But overall, the rejection was overwhelming, and overwhelmingly bipartisan.”

            Oh, snap! Of course, you can’t really blame the Republicans for not wanting to trust the Dems…after all, there’s years of evidence that their promises of “I’ll give you tax cuts next year in return for spending today” are all false.

            So, in the final tally, everything I’m saying can be easily backed up multiple sources.

            And history trumps your pundits – *actual* history, that is, not that made-up crap you’re subscribing to.

            Ha, and I’m not even a Democrat. I’m just a concerned citizen that has the ability to read.

            Yeah, the ability to read two of the most left-leaning blogs on the internet…but you’re not a Dem, no….

          • http://www.playvicious.com/ Ro

            When you provide any evidence to refute the evidence I’ve put forth from both conservative and liberal leaning sources, I will pay attention.

            Good day, sir.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            History itself provides the evidence, you just refuse to accept it.

            Oh – I was a bit off in my taxation statement, earlier.

            Per 2009 IRS tax stats:
            The top 2.79% paid 50.14% of the taxes. That’s those 200k and over folks.
            The top 0.52% paid 29.79% of all income taxes. That’s the 500k+ crowd.
            The millionaires and billionaires that Obama likes to talk about?
            They comprise 0.17% of filers, and paid 20.5% of the taxes.

            In comparison, let’s look at 2000:
            The top 2.14% paid 45.77% of all taxes. That’s the 200k+ crowd.
            The top 0.49% paid 30.83% of all taxes. That’s the 500k+ crowd.
            The top 0.19% paid 23.08% of all taxes. That’s the millionaires and billionaires.

  • obamayourenemy

    voter fraud = obama presidency quit slamming romney…he would have been one of our greatest presidents…..

  • irishgirl91

    He might not have won, but the wuss handlers made sure there was no blood drawn. He could have started hitting and not stop until the last votes were counted. Can we please accept that the precious independents were not offended by hitting hard on all the scandals and idiocy that is the Obama administration. The MSM is in the tank but social media would have spread the word, you couldn’t have contained our glee if someone had just had the audacity to speak the truth to this fool.

  • GTFOBigGovt

    I’m over Laura. She’s been squishy plenty of times since the 2008 campaign herself. Especially falling for the 2008 “the sky is falling nothing else we can do but bailout” drama.

    No need to remind us how she was so much smarter than Romney on Dec 30. We got it. Go tend to your new apolitical show now.

    Romney was in a lose-lose position the moment he got the nomination. No excuse for no show alleged Republicans staying home. Even the events he attended where he DID do a great job reflecting constitutional principles like the NBC Education seminar thingy, got NO coverage even by Fox. He exhibited a strong knowledge of the education system even at low level detail that Obama could NEVER show. He clearly told one town hall questioner “Why would I support funding your school district federal funds just because you decided to adopt the core [platform thing]? Nobody was listening.

  • Steve_J

    I think what energized the grassroots supporters were the bogus polls by Dick Morris and others, not so much Romney himself.

  • Andrew

    Romney did two major things wrong: 1) he showed up pretending to be “conservative” candidate and 2) went AWOL on debates #2 & #3

    Because Obama had tons of negatives going against him, this was Romney’s election was his lose to won or lose… he chose to lose.

  • Andrew

    If the GOP wants to field another RINO for 2016, don’t look to me for any support.

  • Andrew

    Then there was Ron Paul for whom both parties and media pundits ignored. Yet Ron Paul is able to energized the youth vote like no one since… Obama???

    Come on Laura, you of all people (including shameless Sean Hannity et al) know we have a two party dictatorship. expect more of the same for 2016!!!

  • Andrew

    Didn’t his son recently say that Father Mitt really didn’t want to run for president?

    Does anybody in the GOP establishment/elites vetted these guys anymore???

  • Conservative First

    Unless I’m missing something, I don’t see Ingraham making the point that he would have “fared better if he had talked about the fiscal cliff.” She appears to be saying Mitt missed many opportunities to use his bully pulpit to talk about the fiscal cliff, which includes massive entitlement spending.

  • bobbymike34

    The problem is that 20% of the voters the ‘low information voter’ (idiots) only hear Republicans bad/evil/support the rich/want to take your birth control/etc. while they hear the Democrats are kind/loving/caring/compassionate AND want to give them free stuff.
    Can ANY Republican overcome that?