Main Menu

Dialog

One of those memorable movie moments for me came in the 1989 movie Scandal, about the Profumo Affair, a true story of sex  and government secrets that brought down the British government in the early 60’s. There is a delicious courtroom scene where Bridget Fonda, playing showgirl Mandy Rice-Davies, is cross examined in the witness chair:

Mervyn Griffith-Jones: Are you aware that Lord Astor has denied impropriety in his relationship with you?

Mandy Rice-Davies: [smiles] Well, he would, wouldn’t he?
[crowd in gallery roars with laughter]

I was reminded of that by something Pat Buchanan wrote about an anti-Romney ad put out by one of the independent PACs supporting Obama. Buchanan blames Obama for the ad. Well he would, wouldn’t he? Could anybody expect Pat Buchanan to make a positive comment about Barack Obama? But here’s what Buchanan says of interest:

Was this ad the work of a rogue super PAC over which the Obama campaign had no control? Did the White House denounce the ad as unethical and malicious and wash its hands of it?

By no means. The White House, through its cynical silence, has been complicit in this moral atrocity as it reaps the benefits of it.

So, pray tell, where is Romney’s denunciation of the “Shady Past” video by an anti-Obama PAC, the Conservative Majority Fund? Does this indicate complicity in the video’s questioning of Barack Obama’s birth certificate and social-security number?

I guess that means Romney is a birther.

, , , , , , ,

28 Responses to Dialog

  1. avatar
    SluggoJD August 11, 2012 at 3:55 pm #

    Gotta test out this new avatar…

    I think it depends on what day of the week it is.

  2. avatar
    brygenon August 11, 2012 at 5:02 pm #

    “Shady Past” is not even worthy of denunciation by a serious candidate for the presidency. Denouncing it means talking about it, and would encourage more of the same.

    Just this week, Rachel Maddow did a piece in which she lambasted several Republican candidates for what she sees as back-handed denouncements that served to further spread their rumor. I like Rachel, and she has a point, but I don’t think all her examples were deliberate. One or two of them, frankly, aren’t smart enough. It’s tricky business.
    [The Rachel Maddow Show, MSNBC, 07 Aug 2012, “Schweikert plays dirty with Quayle”
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#48562032 ]

    I remember seeing “Scandal” shortly after it got to video, and thinking, “a government was brought down by *that*?” Yea, shouldn’t have done it; definitely shouldn’t have lied about it; but, still. That?

  3. avatar
    Scientist August 11, 2012 at 5:07 pm #

    There are 2 points in the Obama ad attacking Romney. One is debatable and one is not.

    The debatable one involves Romney’s role in the shutdown of the plant. This involves the exact details of Romney’s leaving Bain. The reason I say it is debatable is that as technologies evolve, there will be factories that become obsolete. Some can be refurbished, but sometimes that isn’t practical. A dynamic economy will sometimes have factories that close.

    The non-debatable point involves the US healthcare system and how workers lose their access to healthcare when a plant closes. Obama passed a law that will change that. Romney passed one that would change that too, but only in Massachusetts. Romney doesn’t think people in the other 49 states deserve that protection. So far, he has been unable to explain what offence the people in those other states committed that makes them less deserving than Bay Staters, but maybe at some point in the campaign he will get around to it,

    Of course, the anti-Obama ad is just nonsense and anyway concerns things that happened decades ago when Obama was a child or a young person. No one cares what he did in college. Whatever Romney did or did not do was as a mature adult.

  4. avatar
    Greenfinches August 11, 2012 at 7:23 pm #

    brygenon: “a government was brought down by *that*?” Yea, shouldn’t have done it; definitely shouldn’t have lied about it; but, still. That?

    hey think of the time – a nice hot ‘cold war’ and before the relaxation of sexual mores in the later 60s…… hardly surprising that there was a bad reaction!

    Profumo went on post-politics to do good work. He got involved with the poor and downtrodden and generally society’s rejects, in the East End of London – and made so much happen there, real progress for people that most of us care about only at a distance and certainly just don’t lift a finger for….A much better life than any politician’s!!

  5. avatar
    Keith August 11, 2012 at 9:04 pm #

    brygenon: I remember seeing “Scandal” shortly after it got to video, and thinking, “a government was brought down by *that*?” Yea, shouldn’t have done it; definitely shouldn’t have lied about it; but, still. That?

    There was the whole Russians using Keeler to blackmail Profumo, the Secretary of State for War, with the Kim Philby thing in the background. Both happened circa 1963.

    It wasn’t just a politician having it off with a call girl and American state Governments have been brought down for less.

  6. avatar
    G August 11, 2012 at 9:41 pm #

    Well, this is nothing but pure hypocritical crocodile tears by Buchanan and the rest of the crying bullies of the GOP.

    They never criticize any of the much-worse SuperPAC behavior that has been going on endlessly on their side (IOKIYAR)…yet the moment a Democratic supporting organization decides to fight back a bit and put out something a bit hard hitting, they throw an apoplectic fit!

    Just like any bullies, they are always trying to play dirty and dish it out, but become a bunch of thin-skinned babies, the moment anyone dishes back…

  7. avatar
    misha August 12, 2012 at 9:03 am #

    Scientist: Whatever Romney did or did not do was as a mature adult.

    Do you mean for “mature audiences”? As in, anyone else should not look.

  8. avatar
    misha August 12, 2012 at 9:06 am #

    G: Well, this is nothing but pure hypocritical crocodile tears by Buchanan and the rest of the crying bullies of the GOP.

    It has devolved to tribalism.

  9. avatar
    misha August 12, 2012 at 9:20 am #

    Greenfinches: before the relaxation of sexual mores in the later 60s

    In 1968 I started hanging out at a Unitarian church. Gawd, it was like a buffet.

  10. avatar
    Expelliarmus August 12, 2012 at 6:04 pm #

    Scientist: The non-debatable point involves the US healthcare system and how workers lose their access to healthcare when a plant closes. Obama passed a law that will change that. Romney passed one that would change that too, but only in Massachusetts. Romney doesn’t think people in the other 49 states deserve that protection.

    That is exactly the heart of the Priorities ad – & why it so strongly hit home with the Republicans. The guy in the ad doesn’t say that Romney killed his wife — he said, he lost his job, he lost his insurance, his wife didn’t get needed medical treatment and his wife died… and Mitt Romney doesn’t care. It’s the “not caring” part that is the accusation.

    Now magnified intensely by the Ryan choice for VP. Now they are the team of undo Obamacare + slash & burn every thing else. And, oh yeah, tax cuts for billionaires, because life would be oh so hard for Mitt Romney if he couldn’t shelter $100 million in an IRA and take a writeoff on his wife’s dancing horse.

  11. avatar
    Greenfinches August 12, 2012 at 6:28 pm #

    Expelliarmus: It’s the “not caring” part that is the accusation.

    exactly; and how did Romney’s people see it? As an accusation of murder. Projection, perhaps?

    and this is awfully OT – sorry………….

  12. avatar
    bgansel9 August 12, 2012 at 6:31 pm #

    brygenon: I remember seeing “Scandal” shortly after it got to video, and thinking, “a government was brought down by *that*?” Yea, shouldn’t have done it; definitely shouldn’t have lied about it; but, still. That?

    Monica Lewinsky almost brought down Clinton. it would have if Newt Gingrich had any say in the matter. (and let’s not forget, ol’ Newtie was doing his own womanizing at the same time).

  13. avatar
    bgansel9 August 12, 2012 at 6:35 pm #

    Scientist: The debatable one involves Romney’s role in the shutdown of the plant. This involves the exact details of Romney’s leaving Bain. The reason I say it is debatable is that as technologies evolve, there will be factories that become obsolete. Some can be refurbished, but sometimes that isn’t practical. A dynamic economy will sometimes have factories that close.

    That would be true if Bain didn’t systematically add huge amounts of debt to each company to topple them. The ones that survived only did so by some miraculous luck.

  14. avatar
    misha August 12, 2012 at 7:15 pm #

    Expelliarmus: take a writeoff on his wife’s dancing horse

    Here’s a dancing dog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A72x64SxPFs

    BTW, when Rmoney used the write-off, he actually was socializing his paper loss. Sounds like a socialist to me.

    He slammed the kibbutzim, and then did the same thing and called it good business. I call it hypocrisy.

  15. avatar
    Expelliarmus August 13, 2012 at 12:41 am #

    Greenfinches: exactly; and how did Romney’s people see it?As an accusation of murder.

    No, they got it — hence the statement that the jobless steelworker ” would have had access to health care if he had lived in Massachusetts”. (See: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/romney-spokes-says-priorities-usa-ad-subject-would-have-had-health-care-under-romneys-mass-plan/ ).

    Of course that statement didn’t go over so well with the base.

    The Priorities ad is brilliant. The dems are playing 3-dimensional chess this time around.

    Keep in mind that the ad in question has never been aired on broadcast media. We’ve all seen it precisely because the Republican response made it newsworthy.

  16. avatar
    Lupin August 13, 2012 at 4:26 am #

    Is it me or does Paul Ryan look like the Iceman serial killer on DEXTER?

    IMHO he looks like a total sociopath. If I was Mitt I’d worry about ending up in an icebox.

  17. avatar
    misha August 13, 2012 at 7:54 am #

    Lupin: IMHO he looks like a total sociopath.

    Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look,
    He thinks too much; such men are dangerous.

  18. avatar
    JPotter August 13, 2012 at 9:26 am #

    Lupin: Is it me or does Paul Ryan look like the Iceman serial killer on DEXTER?

    It’s just you, Lupin! 😛 He is a clone of Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz from Phineas & Ferb. A dead ringer in appearance and temperament. Just put Ryan in a lab coat…..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Heinz_Doofenshmirtz

  19. avatar
    Majority Will August 13, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    JPotter: It’s just you, Lupin! He is a clone of Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz from Phineas & Ferb. A dead ringer in appearance and temperament. Just put Ryan in a lab coat…..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Heinz_Doofenshmirtz

    And Ryan invented the Medicare-inator.

  20. avatar
    Horus August 13, 2012 at 12:32 pm #

    Buchanan is a useless old fart who needs to just go away.

  21. avatar
    sponson August 13, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

    Dr. C is correct in his application of logic; however the mainstream media of the U.S. applies a consistent double standard to Democrats and Republicans when it comes to any sort of tough, dirty, or negative campaigning. If Republicans do it, it’s “bold” and “tough” and a shrewd move; if Democrats do it, it’s unbecoming of them, “unfair” and cowardly. This double standard is regularly applied even by some of the newscasters most often labeled as “liberally biased.”

  22. avatar
    G August 14, 2012 at 12:21 am #

    BRAVO for pointing this out!!! This sad truism disgusts me to no end!

    In a nutshell, the entire mainstream media suffers from Stockholm Syndrome… and unfortunately, their lead and influence has affected too much of the US population in the same, sad way…

    But there have been slow signs, as the crazy gets out of control, that more and more folks are starting to wake up and see through the false equivocation and IOKIYAR hypocricy…

    So, I remain hopeful in America in the long term…

    sponson: Dr. C is correct in his application of logic; however the mainstream media of the U.S. applies a consistent double standard to Democrats and Republicans when it comes to any sort of tough, dirty, or negative campaigning. If Republicans do it, it’s “bold” and “tough” and a shrewd move; if Democrats do it, it’s unbecoming of them, “unfair” and cowardly. This double standard is regularly applied even by some of the newscasters most often labeled as “liberally biased.”

  23. avatar
    bob j August 15, 2012 at 5:49 am #

    Paula Sweet: I haven’t named any names but some very frequent commentaries here are written by a pretty amoral person. I guess it depends on your viewpoint, huh

    Maybe a dictionary would help; perhaps you meant immoral. The gist of most of the comments here involve the issue of President Obama’s eligibility; which is a right or wrong issue.

  24. avatar
    Scientist August 15, 2012 at 8:56 am #

    Paula Sweet: Of course, adulterers excuse their behaviors, ‘this is my life and no one’s going to tell me what to do’

    Maybe if you hadn’t had a “headache” every single night for the past 40 years, things would have worked out better…It takes 2 to tango, I’ve been told.

  25. avatar
    misha August 15, 2012 at 9:20 am #

    Paula Sweet: Women are supposed to have some kind of ethics.

    Yeah, just like Ilsa Koch, Kate Barker, or Orly Taitz.

    Scientist: Maybe if you hadn’t had a “headache” every single night for the past 40 years, things would have worked out better…It takes 2 to tango, I’ve been told.

    She’s jealous that no one pays attention, or is interested in her. She’s jealous that at her age, she doesn’t look like this. It’s that simple.

    Every time I hear this, I think of Dana Carvey’s Church Lady. I actually once worked with a woman who could have been the basis for that character, right down to the hair style.

  26. avatar
    G August 15, 2012 at 1:07 pm #

    Well, that post was quite the non-sequitur.

    Paula, it is fairly clear that wrongs you hae suffered in your own personal life are motivating your posts. Unfortunately, this is simply not the right place to address your personal internal grief and anger.

    The internet is full of all sorts of blogs on just about every topic imaginable. I’m not sure what brought you here of all places, but I don’t see how any good can come from your venting here, when you just pop in and drop things in such an off-topic way.

    While there is a certainly a community here, the topics of this blog are fairly focused and so, while everyone experiences pain and tragedy in life, that is no excuse to grasp onto conspiracy nonsense in order to create an imaginary target and outlet for your pain.

    Yes, there are others here who have had various personal losses and who have expressed their grief to members of this community and received some release and compassion back, which hopefully helped a bit in getting through their own troubled times. However, that only works when folks are able to just to just openly share and reach out, without having to cover their personal issues in the veiled excuse of either conspiracy, bigotry or any other bogeyman false-target.

    Quite frankly, I’ve already been stuck speculating too much, simply to post that back to you. What is clear is that you are obviously dealing with a lot of internal anger. What is also clear is that your posts here are not helping anything – as they come across as just bizarre and angry rants, completely unrelated to the topic at hand and with no clear connection to anything else in the conversation thread. Unfortunately, they have come across quite caustic too, which is why you’ve received quite a bit of blowback and ridicule. That will happen when you lash out at random strangers who have done you no harm.

    The bottom line is your personal pain, while tragic, is no excuse to unfairly target or abuse others. I recommend two things – that you find forums that can be more helpful to the real root causes behind your personal pain and anger. I’m sure that the internet is full of plenty of sites that deal specifically with the issue of relationship problems. Second, when you feel you need to reach out and vent, please learn to do it in a more open and honest way, instead of just bitterly lashing out at random, with no true corralative reason.

    Paula Sweet: My, my, one never knows when their infidelities will come to light, and what the result will be. Secret adulterers never know when they will be exposed, but they will be. Of course, adulterers excuse their behaviors, ‘this is my life and no one’s going to tell me what to do’.But when a man deserts his wife for a younger woman (and of course he has all kinds of excuses) without conscience, lives with that woman, leaving his wife to despair, sooner or later something will happen to bring the situation to light. It’s foolish to think otherwise. Why Bill Clinton thought his escapades would go undetected is amazing. Most of these adulterers are morally bankrupt. If a man is tired of his wife, he needs to tell her so, that way she can decide how to proceed. Only cowards deceive and lie and spend the retirement monies, leaving the poor wife to struggle. And the woman who shacks up with him is just as bad, if not worse. Women are supposed to have some kind of ethics. A warning to you, and you know who you are, time is going to catch up with you. I haven’t named any names but some very frequent commentaries here are written by a pretty amoral person. I guess it depends on your viewpoint, huh.

  27. avatar
    Rickey August 15, 2012 at 2:30 pm #

    Paula Sweet:
    But when a man deserts his wife for a younger woman (and of course he has all kinds of excuses) without conscience, lives with that woman, leaving his wife to despair, sooner or later something will happen to bring the situation to light.It’s foolish to think otherwise.

    Yes, it was a sorry state of affairs when John McCain did that to his first wife and when Newt Gingrich did that to his first two wives.

    You obviously have issues, but what do they have to do with Barack Obama?

  28. avatar
    Thrifty August 15, 2012 at 3:36 pm #

    Paula Sweet: Women are supposed to have some kind of ethics.

    Actually, human beings are supposed to have ethics.

    Your post was… weird.