Skip to comments.GLENN BECK: SECTION of Mitt ROMNEY’s “GHAFFE” TAPE You Haven’t Heard
Posted on 09/21/2012 12:49:14 AM PDT by Yosemitest
Listen to Romneys statement here:
Romney talks about the Fed
Why are we not talking about that, Glenn asked.
Do you hear what the presidential candidate just said?
Nobody knows nobody cares.
Nobody in the media cares.
This is a major revelation.
The Ron Paul people always harp on auditing the Fed and claim that no one will go after the Fed but Ron Paul.
Mitt Romney will according to his words caught on this tape in a candid moment.
While everybody is else paying attention to the 47% there is your answer.
Your answer is
This weak dollar garbage started under W with Greenspan, Bernanke’s continued it into oblivion. It’s insanity. Japan’s had a generation of QE and a stalled economy. At some point, an adult is going to have to say, we need to derail this train or go off the cliff. It’ll be painful short term but the best course in the long run.
GHAFFE? That's quite a gaffe.
(( ping ))
It WILL be painful short term, if by short term you mean 5-10 years. I pray this country can handle tight money and low federal spending and humility overseas, because it’s either us or the next 2 or 3 generations. We choose between austerity and delay. They won’t have a choice, because they will have tyranny.
If Romney gets this, you should hear it in the debates many times. If not you never will. The media is shutting out his message otherwise.
We were getting our international trading butts kicked because a strong dollar allowed everyone in the world to keep weaker currencies then ours, allowing our goods to be much more expensive while we were flooded with cheap foriegn goods. China artificially kept their currency pegged at 8 yuan to the dollar, therebye boosting their economy at the expense of ours. Allowing our currency to float against the world’s currency was an attempt to force parity and to force the Chinese to take themselves off the American teat, which they were finally forced to do so. As for any “debt” we may owe the Chinese, I believe we could make a case for theft on their part thru currency manipulation!
I think it’s Libyan-speak. You know like Quaddafi, Kahdafi, Ga-ghaffe?
Not to mention all the copyright and patent infringement.......
Yes I'm being vain, and yes I'll take credit for harping on this, but more importantly you've got to get behind him if you're not.
What I said was that you're not going to get a better man than Mitt now or in a long time, so please get behind him and have a little faith that he's more like you than you know. He MAY even be MORE like you than ... YOU.
The Ron Paul people always harp on auditing the Fed and claim that no one will go after the Fed but Ron Paul. Mitt Romney will according to his words caught on this tape in a candid moment.
While everybody is else paying attention to the 47% there is your answer. Your answer is he knows whats going on with the Federal Reserve, and he is warning us whats happening in the Federal Reserve.
Let me ask this: Where is Ron Paul now? Can Ron Paul get ANYTHING done about the Fed? Mitt knows what Ron is talking about, probably more than Ron.
Mitt's abortion stance is the same kind of thing. He despises it, but he despises it so much that he's not going to fizzle out his chance of having a powerful say about the future of (no) abortion by, as the saying goes, "spilling his candy in the lobby."
Thanks for posting this ... very important for people to know this stuff, partially for their own sanity. He's not going to waste political capital screaming in the streets like some ineffectual OWS idiot pooping on a police car about an ideal that is, at least at this moment, not possible in the physical universe because people aren't ready to hear it. You can't teach kindergarteners calculus. And unfortunately, at least for now, the American electorate is too mentally and spiritually underdeveloped to understand monetary policy, what a gold standard means, and what abortion really means.
First, there is a major collective hypnosis that has to be undone - from which people need to wake up, then that hypnosis needs to be replaced with the truth - about money, how value is stored, about killing unborn infants, most fundamentally, what freedom is and whence it comes.
If you're not already, please get behind him at least with your vote. It's really not a case of just "oh well he sucks but he sucks less than the others and certainly sucks less than Obama." No, here on Earth, he is far better than Ron Paul or certainly Newt or Palin. Ron is an idealist and in being one, reminds of what we're ultimately fighting for, even if he's a little kooky. The other two - they are right, but America has already spit them out. They'd be great in an America where half the electorate weren't idiots - where maybe only 40% were idiots. But it's an overwhelmingly stupid citizenry right now.
Final analogy: If you want to give a kid a vitamin, you've got to get a vitamin that will go down his throat to do any good - and to make him strong enough for the next vitamin. I love Sarah, but too many people viscerally can't stand her. Are they stupid? Yes. Jealous women? Yes. Sheeplike men? Yes. Doesn't matter. The kid won't swallow the vitamin.
Rant over, but this is important. And yeah - Mitt did need something to get him fighting (the 'secret' tapes) ... I'm not saying the guy is a star politician ("That is why it must be YOU Maximus,") and he has a reverse-anger-management problem. Feel free to piss him off to get him going, but do vote for him, and let him teach a little about the real world to Ryan and the younger crew ... because the real world is where people vote, right now the real world is incredibly ignorant, deceived, stupid even - and they don't even know that they have locked themselves in their own misery - that they can be - strong, free and happy again. But people do not vote in Ron or Sarah's correct vision. They vote in our fallen universe.
Arrrgghhhh, and so pirate's day comes to an end, and hopefully Mitt has learned that while he faces a truly wussified, mentally and spiritually crippled country, there are those who can still hear the truth, who pray for the truth.
Our fat friend, the Buddha, didn't want to teach at all after he attained enlightenment - he thought it to deep a truth for his silly human compatriots to grasp. But God whispered in his ear "there are a few with little dust on their eyes." So see clearly, but practically - we inhabit a fallen world. Our little Mittens understands his vision is good medicine, but viewed as poison for now, so few will swallow it.
And yes, vainly, I've been hammering this all along outside this board for months and predicting a 5% popular vote drubbing of Obama. Looking more like 6 to 8 % now. Back to bed ...
Some useless information: back in ancient times, the Etruscans ruled Rome and their religion relied on priests called Augurs who read the entrails of animals, observed the birds in the sky, things like that as a means to determine omens. When the Romans tossed out the Etruscans and began their own republic they ultimately embraced a variation of the Greek religion based on a pantheon of Gods like Zeus/Jupiter, Ares/Mars, etc. But they kept the Augurs to read the omens. They carried a lot of sway, for example an army might decide not to attack because the auguries were not favorable.
One other bit of useless information. When Roman politicians took office, an augur read the signs and if they were okay he would begin his term. He was thus inaugurated. And that word is still with us.
Yo, Semitest - I’m not going to bounce back at you on any of that, except to say that by ‘conservative pragmatist’ I’m neither coining a new political term nor even invoking anything political-historical about the words.
Romney is for everything a real conservative is for. What he says out loud and how he tries to move in that direction, effectively, on the Earth, is pragmatic.
Of course neither of us can prove anything. I only write to remove a little bit of the stress a lot of people are feeling about him.
The question ultimately is: If you are conservative, will you be better off in four years if Romney (in terms of your fight against abortion, fight for national fiscal stability, fight to curb the shredding of the Constitution, fight to preserve the idea that liberty comes before government because liberty comes from God) would you be better off than if Paul, Palin, Newt etc. were president. Forget personalities, forget ideology, forget how you feeeeeel, even if you have to swallow the puke in your mouth when you pull the lever.
You would be better off, because none of those 3, or many other figures, are actually capable of moving the country, of causing a result, rather than maintaining eternal ‘hope and change’ like some we know. You might hear what you want to hear for 4 years from your president, but hearing what you want to hear, having your guy in power, is not what actually changes the country. It doesn’t, in itself, produce results ... movement towards your goal. In some cases, it produces a backlash.
re: The Establishment: Yeah - he’s from the Republican Establishment ... but even a blind squirrel sometimes, even by mistake, even for all the wrong reasons, bumbles into a nut.
Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.
Lets begin with the argument against purism. To this line, two replies are in the coming.
As for the second objection against the Tea Partiers rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.
Every election seasonand at no time more so than this past seasonRepublicans pledge to reform Washington, trim down the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for compromise and patience.
Well, when the Tea Partiers impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.
thanks for doing your part to send us there!
Mitt. Its time you quit!
Your credibility isnt worth spit.
RINOs, the Establishment, and Democrats all agree,
But in the General Election, to Obama theyll flee.
Against Obama, liberals and moderates know youll lose.
But conservatives, Romney theyll never choose.
Mitt, our loyalty you cant buy.
Back to Massachusetts, youd better fly.
Just like Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, and John McCain,
Nominee Willard Mitt Romney will result in the same.
As a Governor, your record isnt that great.
Out of 50 states, your popularity was number 48.
Your experience, the Establishment types tout.
Defending federal bailouts and FDIC loan forgiveness will find you out.
Democrats and RINOs cower from their liberal wives,
Supporting Romney with nothing but lies.
In 1994 Ted Kennedy showed Willard to be a great bane,
With Mitts Bain, and Bain Capital, Obama will do the same.
Damon Corp, with Romney paid $119 million in a fine.
Yet Willard says, for his leadership, its time.
He claims jobs he can create and taxes he can lower,
47th out of 50 in growth he rates. Can it get any slower?
$740.5 million dollars a year, fees and taxes under Mitt increased.
Will the half-truths and lies from Romney ever cease?
For Liberty and Freedom, we dont need Flakes,
But Romney says Healthcare responsibilities belong to the States.
Conservatives stand for Self-responsibility, Self-accountability, and Self-reliance.
But against these things, Willards actions scream in defiance.
Establishment Republicans thinks Romney can help take back the Senate,
But they know that for President, Mitt can NOT win it.
Like everything the Establishment Republicans try to do,
It leads to failure, and we get the bill, as well as the screw.
In their corruption, little change do they seek,
They dont want our Freedom to peak.
Their craving for power has pushed their bravery,
To ignore our Constitution, and sell us into economical slavery.
So Willard, dont lecture us on the need for patience and compromise.
Romney, be selfless. Conservatism is on the rise.
Choosing the lesser of two evils, isnt what we desire.
You let them rewrite the language. Wheres your fire?
Romney, they accuse us falsely, and you do little.
Wheres your response, or can you only twiddle?
Mitt, you dont have what it takes to lead.
So with you I plead.
Do you really want to go from Obama-care to Romney-care?
With you, this nation will pull out its hair!
Go somewhere and quietly think and sit.
Know your own limitations! Mitt. Its time you quit!
There is way to much there for me to read. I’m sorry I haven’t replied for a week. I skimmed and tried to hit the bold.
The ‘purist’ and ‘giving away elections’ argument is the same argument. too pure, therefore lose elections.
You mention that the Tea Party’s birth, spiritually, was really during the disillusionment of the compassionate conservative Bush years. It’s fair, but only in not kind, not in extent.
My disillusionment was long, long before that. You might be mistaking me for a flimsy ‘conservative.’ The things we stand for are simple, but are considered loony. It is not we who are loony, it is the electorate. I’m going to be honest and balance that by saying I know Boston, MA, very well - I know lawyers whom it would take me 46 years to convince that economically, socialism doesn’t work, not to mention the hatred and loss of life. I’m going to double balance that by saying that demographically, you and I better off producing 6 kids each against the blue states’ average 1.2. Because they are running the show right now.
Red staters are carrying this nation demographically, thank God for them, but they are shrinking. Blue crowds into the country like an infection. They aren’t invading not consciously, nor by numbers or reproduction, but they are convincing the 90% who don’t really care to think about things enough to understand history ... and right now ... winning is determined by only a few points.
Sarah Palin is great, and literally a beautiful person (not a Biden quote - I mean - she’s pretty - and I think also beautiful,) I can’t think of an issue upon which I disagree. She is also unelectable in the current climate. That is wrong, that is unfair. But she is unelectable with this electorate. It’s just the reality.
Coming back ... philosophically, the most important moral code I ever heard was from a man who was challenged by a liberal friend of mine. My friend (not really a friend any more) yelled “OK Then what DO you believe in, what is YOUR code.” This man calmly responded “I do what works.”
That is a frightening philosophy if you are a communist. It is the only philosophy if you love liberty. There was a time when war was ‘what worked.’ And men went to war. This is not a time of war. This is a battle for ideas.
I repeat: This is not a time of war. I just want to make that clear for all the lurkers sniffing. This is the culmination of a battle for what was once poetically termed “an idea so delicate, you could only whisper it.” It can’t be proven in debate or battlefield. . Liberty ... can’t ... be ... proven. That’s why it was framed as “before any man made government” ... as created by a Creator. As a ‘given’. As ‘already extant.’ Freedom is equivalent to your birth.
It’s what Ayn Rand meant by ‘A = A.’ Self Evident. Tautology. Given. It’s Galt’s entire speech.
Can’t win this with people who want a free cellphone.
Your way won’t work in a society that votes. Mankind has always, historically, destroyed its great works.
The electorate has been gradually hypnotized, collectively, into a trance. they don’t think much about it, it’s accepted as revealed truth.
The only thing that will trump this is gradual change, and that change is against every inkling of mankind as a collective set of lemmings, according to his history, save for the fact that he has occasionally fought for it.
Mitt Romney carries this fight internally - the purer fight. Because he doesn’t carry it externally, is exactly why you don’t like him, and exactly why he’s electable.
Yosemite, your way is right, it is just, and it will fail in a country where not 47% should be allowed to vote, but where 80% would fail the barest history quiz. They don’t know that Obama is just a techno-stalin. It’s way too hard to grasp. They don’t understand credit swaps, derivatives, the allure of communism masquerading as equality. They don’t understand why atheist governments destroy their populace, and that religion, for all it’s mistakes, is, as Winston describe democracy, the least-worst set up.
Romney is a Trojan Horse. Reagan was the horse that set him up. This election isn’t about Romney. It’s a hope that Romney mentor’s both the country and Ryan, and others.
it’s the country itself, not these pols running, that need to change. Yes, I’d love many others than Romney. But he’s the least worst catalyst. Is he bending to win? Yep. And it’s why he has a chance.
It’s tempting to be a purist. But we don’t live in a pure physical universe. We live in a set of conditions. We have to address the conditions, not the the universe as we wish it were. You may die fighting proudly for your cause, you may impress your sons or daughters. But you won’t do the most possible to preserve liberty.
As of now, there is still a chance that cause can be won by ideas. Reagan’s presidency approached this. Bush 1 just didn’t have the charisma. Clinton’s demonstrated only that increased wealth is not a substitute for character. Bush 2 was a compromise, the distraction of war, the almost perfect terror record and it’s cost, was the real victory by Al Qaeda ... they beat us on the financial front - they handed Obama his entire hidden argument.
You’re taking into consideration, I believe, with respect, too few issues. I agree with the issues in your context, however. I just think your context would fail, because it doesn’t take into consideration a broad enough range of realities on the ground. ‘Realities on the Ground’ are what matter, not our desire for perfection.
True, Romney will make no difference for 20 years. Partially because he’s too weak. On the other hand, his chance of making a difference is that he’s electable - exactly because he’s so weak. It’s wrong! I agree, but it’s the only path. There is no 4, 8 year solution in sight. It’s the electorate’s fault, no yours or mine.
The struggle for liberty was never a piece of cake - was never the next election away. The country has to be guided. Right now, it’s recalcitrant, will buck against any tug.