The Republic’s unutterably stupid Romney endorsement

23 Oct 2012 10:51 am
Posted by: Donna

Oh hi, AZ Republic ed board, here’s a chart for you:

debt chart

Too bad you guys didn’t peruse the actual numbers before you barfed up your predictable endorsement of Mitt Romney. Look, if you’re going to make twaddling over the deficit and debt the centerpiece of your Presidential recommendation it would make sense to consider how it happened. How can you claim to want to reduce the debt and cut spending while endorsing the guy who wants to continue all of George W. Bush’s economic policies?

The whole Romney endorsement is a hot mess of wild speculation but this particular passage really stands out:

That leader is Romney. The nation’s economy now is in desperate need of the kind of jobs-creating animal spirits that President Romney would encourage.

Animal spirits. Great, the Kieran from Dinner For Schmucks plan for economic recovery.

Jemaine Clement

9 Comments

  1. Comment by stephen ehre on October 23, 2012 11:04 am

    An endorsement usually points out the best sides and shortcomings of each candidate and then says one is better than the other because. The Az. Repugnant NEVER mentions the fifty shades of Romney as any problem…and is totally ignored. They can’t have any idea of how he would govern because he has been all over the place. Romney’s lies in the face of fact checkers means nothing to them. His ridiculous economic plan also doesn’t matter..it’s just accepted because Romney said it added up. It was a disgraceful editorial.

  2. Comment by Timmys Cat on October 23, 2012 5:43 pm

    Awesome post! I take my snark hat off to you.

    because it has been financial engines like Bain that have helped power the American economy.

    Gaaawd! That’s why Romney insists he had no part of Bain when it outsourced jobs and gutted and closed plants.

    Hey AzRepublicPac, you might do a little fact checking before you put up the endorsement the Goldwater Institute sent over for you to use.
    You guys have truly embarrassed yourselves with your overdone man crush.
    Sticking with the GOP game plan from last year with this and Flakes endorsement merely shows where your true values lie.
    Party first, country second.
    I would guess this endorsement was a done deal as soon as Romney won the primary.
    Another light in the britches GOP candidate needs the Republic to act as a creator of strawmen for their candidate to be the best to knock down.

    Then you Einsteins want to charge to view this kind of crap? Good luck with that.

  3. Comment by Timmys Cat on October 24, 2012 1:39 pm

    Completely off thread but a gotta see.

    In your face, CHRISTIANISTS.

  4. Comment by mike slater on October 24, 2012 3:22 pm

    The Republic endorsed Romney because Obama has been a dismal failure in his first term and doesn’t deserve a second term. Obama has been worse than Jimmy Carter and that’s saying a lot.

  5. Comment by Liberal Democrat Friend of Bruce Ash on October 25, 2012 8:07 am

    Keep whining, mike slater, when your insurance doesn’t kick you off coverage because you have ass cancer you can thank Obamacare.

  6. Comment by Timmys Cat on October 25, 2012 9:52 am

    A brain toomah?

  7. Comment by mike slater on October 25, 2012 1:41 pm

    Lib, once Romney is elected and the Republican take back the senate they can get rid of Obamacare.

  8. Pingback by Politics, elections, immigration in Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Governor Jan Brewer, Arizona blogs, Az blogs on October 29, 2012 3:03 pm

    [...] criticism of Romney compared to how empty and wishful the ones for Romney are. I linked to the idiotic AZ Republic one a few days ago. But here’s the equally inane Des Moines Register endorsement, which has the [...]

  9. Comment by Jessica on November 1, 2012 2:24 pm

    Allowing for the previous administration’s policies to count towards the first year of the next president’s term, which is what this chart does (you can see this for yourself if you look at the Treasury’s numbers), AND factoring in that Obama is finishing his first term where Bush completed two – Obama would still be set to create $11.1 trillion >additional< debt in 8 years VS Bush's $6.1 if you look at the average increases to the debt during their terms.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment