Even The MSM is Starting to Dump On Obama: BYe, Bye Barry

Michelle Obama's Mirror ^ | 6-12-2012 | MOTUS

[NOBO2012]

What is it going to take to WIN around here?

It was bad enough that the Republicans declared War On Women, butt now it seems they’ve launched several new offensives, are advancing from behind the lines and have even established an underground of resistance fighters comprised primarily of former allies.(h/t Jayne)

And the Clinton wing of the Democrat Party continues to lob grenades at Obama, undermining his bleak message of scapegoating and diversion with shiny objects ("Look over there -- it's a woman who can't get free contraceptives!").

Isn’t it bad enough that we have to contend with this new Mitt Romney creature who came from out of nowhere to harass us nearly every day...

[cynwoody]

It's gotta happen before or during the Convention or it ain't gonna happen. They'd end up in protracted legal battles over getting her on the ballot in most states. America is not New Jersey.

Also, depressed turnout or worse in urban areas.

[giotto]

Win this battle, and the war effort gets set back a decade.

Lose this battle and we won't make it to the next decade.

[so_real]

Obama has NO intention of throwing the election to Romney.

Blatantly advancing the homosexual agenda, publicly expressing climate change to be priority one for the next term, and picking a fight with Catholics -- five months before the election -- in your opinion is not attempting to throw it? No one is that dumb. Not even Obama, and certainly not the marketing team he's used to get this far. He is systematically divesting himself of the large voting blocks.

If I called the shots for the other team, I'd direct Obama to toss this election. Heck, I'd split the vote using Clinton if I had to in order to get the job done. (And Romney is such a weak candidate that just might become necessary.) It's a reasonable gambit for a group bent on scuttling the advances conservatism has recently made. The move has no downside. If you were pulling the strings, what would be the downside of having Romney pickup where Obama leaves off for four years? What would be the upside? This is chess and they are making a brilliant move.

[NELSON111]

Really? Can I bet you?

You said I can bet on it...so I am assuming you're where I go to lay my money down?

[so_real]

Lose this battle and we won't make it to the next decade.

Deja Vu. Heard that in 2008 as the republicans rallied around McCain. Yet, here we are. And, we are stronger and more organized today than we were in 2008. In fact, we are gaining ground. Obama wouldn't even set foot in my state to campaign against Scott Walker. Why would I toss that progress away and sacrifice the next presidential election and the next three congressional elections just so I can call a liberal statist with an "R" behind his name "president"? Not a good move. Keep doing what we're doing instead -- supporting genuine conservatives -- in order to keep making progress.

We gave Scott Walker a greater victory in his recall election than he had in his general election. And, yet, I fully expect Wisconsin to be a blue state in November. Why? Not because we favor Obama. We generally can't stand him. But, we've had to deal with so much liberal trickery that we're finally starting to catch on to the game and won't fall for the bait in the trap that is Romney. November will be telling.

[so_real]

If you truly believe this, and I take you at your word, then you _must_ do what you can to get Obama elected. Can I then assume that you are endorsing Obama, for the eventual greater good? You plan on voting for him, right?

No ... that is a naive and simplistic line of reasoning. As I said, the best move is to continue doing what is gaining us ground. And that it is supporting genuine conservatives. Romney is no asset in the bigger game. He's a queen on the board I'd happily sacrifice to achieve checkmate. But that requires advancing and positioning our own pieces for the task while leaving him vulnerable. I will advance and position our true assets to the best of my ability.

[Little Ray]

Can’t argue with that. Much. However, the message to Putin about being “...more flexible after the election” might be a good argument, even for statist worm like Romney.

[BornToBeAmerican]

No ... that is a naive and simplistic line of reasoning. As I said, the best move is to continue doing what is gaining us ground. And that it is supporting genuine conservatives. Romney is no asset in the bigger game. He's a queen on the board I'd happily sacrifice to achieve checkmate. But that requires advancing and positioning our own pieces for the task while leaving him vulnerable. I will advance and position our true assets to the best of my ability.

---

And to do so with the best of our ability requires that we TAKE as much as CONTROL as we can WHILE we CAN.

This means a Romney WIN. He will gain us the control. WE can hold his feet to the fire, his and every rino representative and senator.

As for picking a leftist Supreme Court Judge. Let him try.

[Chuckster]

Remember the old adage: No one ever went broke under-estimating the intelligence of the American public.

[so_real]

Sun Tzu said "if ten times the enemy's strength, surround them; if five times, attack them; if double, be divide them; if equal, engage them; if fewer, evade them; if weaker, avoid them."

You believe we have ten time's the opponent's strength, that we can hold their feet to the fire, that we can direct the agenda, and thwart any leftward slide.

Were that so, FRiend, Romney would not even be our candidate today.

We have not reached that position of strength yet. Even our attempts to hold the line during the budget standoff failed us.

If we continue the course we've set, gaining in strength with a genuine conservative coalition, we will acquire the goal you desire. But to plan a battle based upon a presumption of superior strength where it does not exist is to guarantee failure and set back the entire war effort.

Our team is ready, willing, trained, and sensitive to the type of battle waged by Obama and his supporters. Be calm and willing to let them do as they've learned and been instructed. Give them aid and add to their ranks as possible. Resist the urge to give authority over them to one that does not share the conservative agenda of his own free will.

[Excellence]

Is this your blog?
“But,” meaning except, is spelled with one “t.”

[BornToBeAmerican]

Very well said and you will find no argument here. The USA is not the sleeping country it was four years ago. Last Wednesday proved that.

[BornToBeAmerican]

Very well said and you will find no argument here. The USA is not the sleeping country it was four years ago. Last Wednesday proved that.

[giotto]

we are stronger and more organized today than we were in 2008.

Speaking of deja vu...Remember when the Republican congress refused to investigate Filegate and other Clinton crimes, or to bring impeachment charges against him, because they wanted to keep him around to run against in 1996? They were absolutely certain he could easily be defeated. Thanks to them, we got four more years of his destructive actions.

We need to start putting country ahead of politics.

[so_real]

Yup, 1996 ... the GOP's Bob Dole candidacy was so weak that Ross Perot walked away with more than 8% of the vote. That pretty much handed the election back to Clinton on silver platter. Deja Vu is right; Mitt Romney is weaker than Dole -- and because of it we are poised to endure another four years of destructive Obama politics. Another stellar example of the GOP snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. You'd think the GOP would wise up. But there is a silver lining. The defeated Republicans steeled their spines enough to try impeachment proceedings against Clinton in 1998; they got their dander up. With potential Republican control of the Senate in 2012, far more impeachable offences committed by Obama, a disenfranchised Democrat party, and a repeat of the defeated Republican presidential candidate, maybe this time around we'll see better success. Putting country before politics in no way requires supporting a liberal for POTUS. In fact, just the opposite is required.

[arrogantsob]

Obama is an ideologue and to him the fact that he got where he is means that he believes more are followers of his ideals than not.

And I have seen no evidence that he is smart in any way.

There is nothing they can do about the colossal failure of this administration. It is clear that the voters want nothing more to do with this party or this clown. He can’t throw an election that is already lost. Nor is there anyone that can “direct” him to do so.