Thursday, November 01, 2012

Tails Obama wins, Heads Romney loses

I just don't get the liberals slamming Romney for asking for donations for hurricane victims. MSNBC spent a day criticizing Romney collecting canned food and donations from people who came out to see him on Tuesday. And now we get this.
Mitt Romney should have donated $10 million to the Red Cross instead of 'taking advantage of a tragedy', the Ohio Democratic Party chairman has said.

'I think Governor Romney ought to be focused on things he could do and say on behalf of the victims, rather than going to Dayton Ohio - the most important swing state in the country - and taking advantage of a tragedy,' said Chris Redfern according to the Washington Post.

'Look, I’m a partisan. I’ll let others judge this. But I think someone of Governor Romney’s wealth could have just written a check for $10 million to the American Red Cross and then spent today with his family. He chose to do something much different. He chose to politicise this.'
And can you imagine how the Democrats would have excoriated him for politicizing the disaster if he'd written that $10 million check? Clearly, there was nothing that Romney could have done that wouldn't have been criticized.

So who is it really who politicizes a disaster and looks for a way to use other people's suffering to try to score a political point?


mark said...

Of course there's nothing wrong with collecting items. But Romney chose photo-op over efficiency. Buying items to give to supporters to give back to the campaign to be shipped to New Jersey to be sorted by people with other things to to just wasn't efficient, as the Red Cross has made clear.

Rick Caird said...

Mark, the Red Cross is a suspect organization. They always want money and they don't always spend it on the relief efforts they are pushing. After 9/11/2001, they were collecting money for NYC relief, but not spending it all on that. Some if it wa just being banked.

In some ways they are like the panhandler on the street who asks for money for food and then heads to the liquor store.

The question you need to answer is "Did Romney work to get relief to the afflicted". If the answer is yes, you have nothing to complain about.

GAHCindy said...

How much did Obama donate? Of his own time and money, I mean? The amount expects to hand over through various FEMA and the like doesn't count. I do think Romney would be wise to help without fanfare, and as privately as possible, or else it *does* look like taking advantage for a photo-op, though I'm sure that's not how he meant it.

Chris said...

It's always slanted toward the Dems. The public is wise to this now and whatever the MSM says will be taken with a grain of salt.

I just can't take the way the Dems treat the public- they think we are fools.

AS a woman, I find them reprehensible, esp. after the pandering the BO administration has done. The last straw was the "first time" ad with the gal voting for BO. Disgusting.

I can't wait to vote for Romney/Ryan next Tuesday so that we can put grown-ups in charge.

Chris said...


mark said...

Unlike many here,I don't pretend to know which polls are accurate and which aren't. I'm hoping Nate Silver is right, but we'll see.

The certainty of people here would be impressive, except you are the same folks who are still pretending that W wasn't a complete failure. Yet nobody is clamoring for W to join Romney on the campaign trail to give him that final boost. Just more evidence that your partisanship trumps honesty.

mark said...

"In some ways they (the Red Cross) are like the panhandler on the street who asks for money for food and then heads to the liquor store."

Good God, Rick.
You're an idiot.

Rick Caird said...

Now, Mark, just because you don't remember all the controversy over the Red Cross soliciting donations for one disaster and not spending the contributions on that disaster, does not mean they did not do that.

Here is one reference:

Do not engage in name calling when you don't know what you are talking about (unless you want to look like the fool).

mark said...

How does the mistake of diverting money from one crisis to other crisis equate to a panhandler buying booze? The Red Cross is not perfect by any means, but right now they are doing important work.
Calling you an "Idiot" is mild. I guess you think the analogies like this one or the 'climate change spit analogy' passes for intelligent thinking. Think again.

Rick Caird said...

Mark, I can see you are "analogy challenged".

If I ask you for money for one purpose and then use it for another purpose, it does not matter how much or what I actually use the money for. The point is I asked for one purpose and spent it for another purpose. In this case, the panhandler and the Red Cross are logically equivalent.

It turns out that is elementary logic. I am glad I can help you with some basic mathematics.

Rick Caird said...

Oh, and Mark, the Red Cross diversion of funds was not a mistake, that was their plan for years. They just didn't tell anyone.

The "climate change spit" analogy was not me. But, I assume it is remarking on the fact that the CO2 effect on the atmosphere is tiny compared to the effect of water vapor. Spitting in the ocean would be a suitable analogy.

Sue in Ohio said...

As I recall, Gov. Romney already had campaign events scheduled in Ohio that day (I received an email alert several days beforehand saying that he would be in Dayton). So instead of having a standard rally, he chose to change the focus of the event. What in the world is wrong with that?

mark said...

There was nothing wrong with what Romney did. But he injected politics into it by showing his video bio, and he chose a less efficient way to help because it made better optics.
Anyone who doesn't think politics have entered the strategy and decisions of Obama, Christie and Romney is a fool.