Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Everybody Sing!

    Posted by Chicago Boyz Archive on April 10th, 2012 (All posts by )

    My New Mitt Romney Song
    (Lexington Green, 2012)

    (Sung to the Tune of “Give me that Old Time Religion”)

    Chorus:

    I’m votin’ for Mitt Romney
    I’m votin’ for Mitt Romney
    I’m votin’ for Mitt Romney
    He’s good enough for me

    Verses:

    He’s not Barack Obama
    He’s not Barack Obama
    He’s not Barack Obama
    That’s good enough for me

    He can beat Barack Obama
    He can beat Barack Obama
    He can beat Barack Obama
    That’s good enough for me

    (Repeat until Tuesday, November 6, 2012)

    Please feel free to make up as many additional verses as you want.

    Instrumental accompaniment may include: handclaps, banjo, clarinet, tin whistle, accordion, maraccas, farfisa, harmonica, tambourine, drums, sousaphone, foot stomps, kazoo, harpsichord, etc.

    Works best with one or more alcoholic beverages.

     

    42 Responses to “Everybody Sing!”

    1. Bill Brandt Says:

      I’m voting for anyone but Obama ;-)

    2. tyouth Says:

      I could be wrong, but; he’s better than McCain.

    3. Lexington Green Says:

      You are not wrong. Mr. Romney is better than any GOP nominee since Reagan. The Tea Party has shifted the GOP Center to the Right. Mr. Romney was a Conservative compared to Sen. McCain in 2008, now he is to the left of the GOP center, which puts him near the center nationally, which is … where the votes are.

    4. Jonathan Says:

      He’ll do.

    5. Dan from Madison Says:

      I am thinking at least three drinks. But yes, he will do. It is all about Supreme Court nominees at this point anyways.

    6. Bill Waddell Says:

      I’m not sure whether to vote for Mitt Robama or Barack Ombamney. Hard to tell the difference.

    7. Lexington Green Says:

      Bill, by November you will see that you are mistaken about any such purported equivalency.

    8. Bill Brandt Says:

      Honestly for a long time I was bouncing between Sanatorium and Romney – and Santorum supported earmarks. And, finding a candidate who reflects 100% of your beliefs would be impossible (and in my case maybe scary ;-) )

      Tactically I think Romney is the best we have – and the unions felt the same too – one putting over a million in FL trying to defeat him.

      I hope he runs against Obama with a lot more fire in him than McCain did – A lot of the future is riding on him.

    9. Michael Hiteshew Says:

      One thing primaries do is teach you how mainstream your personal views are. I supported Gingrich because he was the only candidate willing to tackle government growth, spending growth and bureaucracy growth right at the foundation, by eliminating entire outdated agencies and programs and vastly scaling back others. Clearly my views are not mainstream.

    10. J. Scott Shipman Says:

      Hi Lex,

      Given the choices, I’ll pull the lever (or push the touch-screen here in the Commonwealth) for Romney.

    11. Bill Brandt Says:

      Michael – I don’t think it is as simple as that.

      Money plays a huge role – not always the deciding role – but a dominant role.

      With the right campaign manager Mother Teresa can be made to look like an ogre.

      I was interesting in Gingrich too – but his publicly deriding Paul Ryan’s budget plan was a big turn off for me. It wasn’t enough that he was fighting the entire establishment.

      But i would have supported him had he won.

      But he didn’t have the money.

    12. J. Scott Shipman Says:

      @Bill Brandt–you make a very good point.

      I caught part of Mark Levin’s radio broadcast a couple weeks back. He said he’d received an email from a friend who was a founding member of the Tea Party in his area. He said this friend pointed out how the TP had energized the opposition to Obama, only to be co-opted by the GOP. With the 2010 off-year elections forming context, Levin’s friend observed that the anti-TP candidate Romney was in the lead (and he wasn’t happy).

      A Romney presidency will be interesting—particularly from the perspective of the right.

    13. David Foster Says:

      He won’t shut down oil drilling
      He won’t shut down oil drilling
      He won’t shut down oil drilling
      That’s good enough for me

      Won’t suck up to the Muslim Brotherhood
      Won’t suck up to the Muslim Brotherhood
      Won’t suck up to the Muslim Brotherhood
      That’s good enough for me

      Won’t bow down to anybody
      Won’t bow down to anybody
      Won’t bow down to anybody
      He’s good enough for me

    14. Robert Schwartz Says:

      Actually, the more the NYTimes campaigns against Romney, the more I like him.

      I was worried about Romney’s knowledge of and attitude towards the Middle East. If a President does not have strong opinions, the Arabists and Saudi peg-boy wanna-bes at the State Department will run roughshod over him.

      The NYTimes is worried also. So they published a long article on Easter Sunday to let us know that Romney was a Likudnik who would turn US foreign policy over to the odious Jews.

      “A Friendship Dating to 1976 Resonates in 2012” By Michael Barbaro
      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/us/politics/mitt-romney-and-benjamin-netanyahu-are-old-friends.html

      * * *

      in 1976, the lives of Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netanyahu intersected, briefly but indelibly, in the 16th-floor offices of the Boston Consulting Group, where both had been recruited as corporate advisers. At the most formative time of their careers, they sized each other up during the firm’s weekly brainstorming sessions, absorbing the same profoundly analytical view of the world. That shared experience decades ago led to a warm friendship …

      The relationship between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Romney — nurtured over meals in Boston, New York and Jerusalem, strengthened by a network of mutual friends and heightened by their conservative ideologies — has resulted in an unusually frank exchange of advice and insights on topics like politics, economics and the Middle East.

      * * *

      Of course, the NYTimes has to let you know that all of this bonhommie is a real serious problem, so they threw in the following observation:

      In a telling exchange during a debate in December, Mr. Romney criticized Mr. Gingrich for making a disparaging remark about Palestinians, declaring: “Before I made a statement of that nature, I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say: ‘Would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do?’“

      Martin S. Indyk, a United States ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration, said that whether intentional or not, Mr. Romney’s statement implied that he would “subcontract Middle East policy to Israel.”

      “That, of course, would be inappropriate,” he added.

      After reading all of this I was so happy that I wanted to get up and dance the hora.

      Santorum had centered his campaign on Obamacare, and Romneycare. If SCOTUS tosses Obamacare, as I think the President ensured last week by his injudicious attack on the Court, it will not be an issue in November, except as a token of Obama’s fecklessness.

      I am looking forward to the next NYTimes expose.

    15. Bill Waddell Says:

      Aw Lex, I’ll vote for Romney – I just have to hold my nose and do the right thing. What do you suppose is going to happen between now and November?

      You see I have to ask who counts Wall Street as their single biggest contributor? Who sees government as the solution to our ills as demonstrated by passing the biggest government take-over of health care in history?

      If you answered Obama to either of those questions, you would be right. Of course, if answered Romeny to either of those questions you would also be right.

      David – what do you think Romney really stands for? I mean, what is one thing that is non-negotiable, a rock solid principle that he will not compromise on? If there is anything abouut him that isn’t up for negotiation I haven’t seen it … including sucking up, curtailing drilling and chatting with the Muslim Brotherhood. I think he’d do any of those things if Wall Street told him to.

    16. Lexington Green Says:

      His advisor for judicial appointments is Robert Bork, for foreign it’s John Bolton. He shared the stage recently with Paul Ryan. He is a long-time friend of Mr. Netanyahu.

      That suggests to me that on judicial appointments, foreign policy, the budget and relations with Israel he will be BETTER THAN OBAMA.

      That’s good enough for me.

    17. bgates Says:

      The NYT sure hates him
      The NYT sure hates him
      The NYT sure hates him
      That’s good enough for me

      He doesn’t hate my country
      He doesn’t hate my country
      He doesn’t hate my country
      That’s good enough for me

    18. John Wolfsberger, Jr. Says:

      “That suggests to me that on judicial appointments, foreign policy, the budget and relations with Israel he will be BETTER THAN OBAMA.”

      Lexington, they only way to be WORSE than Obama would be to 1. close the courts, 2. disband the military, 3. confiscate wealth and 4. bomb Israel.

      Of course, if Obama gets reelected, all of these may be on the table.

    19. ErisGuy Says:

      by November you will see that you are mistaken about any such purported equivalency.

      I don’t see how November will highlight the differences (few or many) between Romney and Obama. Until January, should Romney win, it’s all political promises and political speeches; that is, words designed to manipulate with little relation to the truth.

      Romney could promise to abolish waste (the Department of Education), fraud (the Department of Energy) and abuse (the Department of Homeland Security), and I wouldn’t believe him Reagan promised to abolish the Department of Education. Instead, as a conservative candidate, he conserved the department.

      Romney has to run on his record: Romneycare. How will his compromises with Democrats expand bureaucracy and federal control once he is in D.C.?

      I’m votin’ for Mitt Romney

      Nice song. Stay motivated. And good luck. I admit the possibility that I’m wrong and that Romney isn’t another Reagan, Nixon, Bush, Bush, or Eisenhower, but I can’t vote on that vague a hope.

    20. Lexington Green Says:

      How about the vague hope of removing Obama? Will that motivate you? Obama would be preferable? if you sit it out, you are voting for Obama.

    21. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      Bill Waddell Says @ April 10th, 2012 at 10:40 pm

      I will go with Bill Waddell’s question to David, with the following additions. 1) I am a delegate to our state convention, and Saturday will be electing our delegates to National. I was called night before last by a Romney delegate as part of the only organized outreach that the Romney campaign has made to other delegates so far. 2) I asked him the same question I have asked all other Romney supporters in this cycle. “Leaving aside any questions of “inevitability”; given Romney’s 20 year political career that includes one term as governor and a couple of failed campaigns, in all of which he tried to run to the Left of the Democrat, can you name any Conservative stand, belief, or position where he has actually stood and fought against the Democrats?“. I got 20 seconds [by my kitchen clock] of stunned silence, because he could not come up with anything. 3) I then pointed out that the normal progression for a Republican campaign is to run right in the primaries to nail down the base, and to the center in the general. Romney ran a Center-Left primary campaign, and only has room to run to the Left in the general. The guy then stammered that we can hope [!!??!!] that Romney will start fighting the Democrats after the Convention.

      This is going to be a campaign where Bob Dole is going to look like a fighter in comparison. Romney is going to lose, badly.

      Saturday, I am going to vote a slate that includes all the TEA Party members running for National, and fills out the rest of my ballot with Newt Gingrich’s people, in a probably vain hope of getting a brokered convention.

      If the stupid inbred stack of meat is nominated, I will probably vote for him, unless he “grows” more as a candidate and starts attacking Conservatives [even the Republican Congressional Leadership is expecting him to attack their opposition to Obama as “obstructionist”]. If that is the case, I will undervote the ticket, and just vote for Patriots down ballot. I will also be sending money to Patriot candidates in other states. And I will be doing so as an unaffiliated voter; because after better than three decades of being a delegate, running campaigns, and trying to work within the Party, the Republican Party will have proved itself profoundly unserious about saving the country if they nominate Romney.

      Subotai Bahadur

    22. Mike Doughty Says:

      It seems obvious to me that the most important thing is to get a Republican elected President….any Republican….and to take the Senate. If the Republicans control the House and Senate, rollback of the Obama agenda is at least possible, as Mr. Romney will not veto Republican-passed legislation. If Obama is reelected, he will veto such legislation. His agenda won’t be rolled back, and would have 4 additional years to entrench itself. There never has been and never will be a “perfect” candidate. Romney is certainly good enough for me, and, in my opinion, the most electable.

    23. Jonathan Says:

      What Bgates wrote. Romney is unprincipled but there’s no reason to think he doesn’t like his own country. Obama has bad principles and appears to dislike this country. And Romney has actually created some wealth in his life.

      This is an easy decision.

    24. Bill Brandt Says:

      Jonathon – Romney’s father, George, was an accomplished man – chairman of American Motors and Gov of MI – when he died he left Mitt a decent fortune.

      But Mitt made his own money and donated his father’s fortune to charity.

    25. John Wolfsberger, Jr. Says:

      @Subotai, I could have written exactly the same post. But as Mike Doughty points out, a President Romney would not be likely to veto any bills passed by a conservative Congress. And he definitely will not have the naked contempt for the Constitution and Rule of Law displayed by Obama.

    26. David Foster Says:

      Bill….”I think he’d do any of those things if Wall Street told him to.”

      I think Romney might actually be *less* influenced by major WS firms than Obama is. Our current President has no concept at all of how the economy actually operates, any more than he understands metallurgy or partial differential equations. It’s all a black art to him. Romney’s knowledge of the economy isn’t as broad and deep as I’d like…I’d prefer more operational-management experience…but it’s a heck of a lot better than Obama’s, and he’s less-likely to be subject to the influence of those claiming expertise in the said black arts.

    27. Lexington Green Says:

      Subotai, you can spend as much time as you want focusing on Romney’s defects.

      But at this point, the ONLY question is: Romney or Obama?

      Whatever defects Romney may have, is he still preferable to Obama?

      Is Romney the least-worst choice between two and only two options?

      It is obvious that he is.

      The mere fact that Robert Bork is advising him, and he is likely to fill two Supreme Court slots, is enough to make him massively preferable to Mr. Obama.

      It is a waste of time to think about non-existent third options at this point.

    28. Tim Says:

      It’s not just Romney vs. Obama. Congress comes in to play also. If there is a Republican Congress, it may well be that we would be better off with Obama, as far fetched as that may seem. I don’t want a GOP spending spree any more than a Democrat one. True, Romney will spend less than Obama but that’s not enough, in my view, in the situation we are in.

      If it looks like the Democrats may retain the Senate or retake the House, I’ll probably hold my nose and vote Romney. If not, I’ll probably just write in somebody or vote Libertarian or some such party.

    29. David Foster Says:

      See this piece about IRS harassment of Tea Party groups. (via Instapundit)

      And, of course, we’ve seen Obama’s DOJ tolerating election-day thuggery by his political allies, and the DOJ project to enable electoral fraud by prohibiting voter ID requirements.

      Expect that interference with free speech/association and with the democratic process would be far, far worse in a second Obama term.

      By that point, displacement of the “progressive” hegemony would likely be almost impossible.

    30. Ken inTN Says:

      Take tne senete to make sure-oh, wait, worked well with Bush, didn’t it?

    31. Ken inTN Says:

      The Ken, The…

    32. Lexington Green Says:

      “…it may well be that we would be better off with Obama…”

      Insanity.

      People on the Right have taken leave of their senses.

      Obama has made relentless and improper use of executive orders.

      If he is in for four more years with no electoral pressure it will take us a generation to undo the damage.

      It is long past time to face reality on this.

    33. Ginny Says:

      My mother became a Republican in the thirties; her family tradition (not unusual perhaps in those leaving Kentucky & Virginia during Reconstruction) was Democratic. I’ve always suspected my father’s beliefs had something to do with it, but the reason she always gave was FDR’s attempt to stack the courts. And she did mean that. I hear arguments that the court bent more to FDR’s liking – I don’t know about that – but Americans don’t like power grabs and we’ve seen four years of it. Obama has cut off the money for women’s health in Texas, his subordinates have launched fast and furious from here, and he’s demonstrated in all the ways the corrupt Chicago machine would that we aren’t important. (Maybe I should be thankful – our economy is stronger that most of the rest of the country). I can’t imagine Romney trying to tell us what to eat or when to die – I can Obama. I can’t imagine that Romney thinks encouraging leveling and coveting is the best way to get the engines of our economy (or our spiritual lives) going.

      Let’s all grow up – we’re not going to get a perfect candidate, this isn’t a perfect world. So, live with it. Neither Adams nor Jefferson, neither Franklin nor Madison were perfect or even always took stands that look that good a couple of hundred years later. But they looked a good deal better than the alternatives; they were willing to agree to the better, even if they suspected a best might be down the line. They believed in flux. When I saw Ryan and Romney together they seemed to like each other – even if they didn’t, Romney has now pretty thoroughly tied himself to Ryan’s budget. That’s just one – a reset on Israel with two people that could speak to each other might be nice. and I’ll take some of Romney’s stiffness if it means we don’t have another moment of knee touching & begging for “space” from the Russians.

      I wish Romneycare wasn’t out there – sure. But Obamacare is, too. And it’s going to take a Republican senate, house, and president to undo it, whatever the Supreme Court decides. I think we’ll find it has been a trojan horse already and the battles will go on into the future.

    34. Bill Waddell Says:

      All of this Romney support seems to boil down to “he’s better than Obama”. Hell! My golden retriever is better than Obama. I had hopes the Republicans might actually come up with someone who might actually stand for someting, and might actually do something – that the Tea Partiers might actually have some influence. Instead we get an elitist compromiser, loved by the Washington Insider wing of the Republican Party, whose greatest asset is being better than Obama.

      Four years ago, few people actually voted FOR Obama – they voted against Bush’s record and the Republicans. This year, few people will vote FOR Romney, but a majority is likely to vote against Obama.

    35. Lexington Green Says:

      Bill:

      Your golden retriever did not get the GOP nomination. Only one person on Earth will have the credential.

      Voting against Obama is legitimate. I have never voted FOR a presidential candidate in my life, I always voted against the worse of two options. That’s normal.

      (I could have voted for Reagan in 1984 — that would have been a vote FOR a candidate — but I was at college, did not want to go to the hassle of registering in Illinois, and I correctly foresaw that he would win in a blowout without my vote.)

      The country is not yet ready for a Tea Party candidate. When a mass movement gets its guy too early, he gets clobbered: See Goldwater in 1964 and McGovern in 1972.

      The Tea Party does have influence. It is just not moving as fast as you want. You need to be realistic and be ready to play the long game.

      The Tea Party needs to build strength, and build a deep bench, and make inroads into the public mind. It is less than four years old.

    36. Subotai Bahadur Says:

      Lexington Green Says @ April 11th, 2012 at 3:09 pm

      The Tea Party does have influence. It is just not moving as fast as you want. You need to be realistic and be ready to play the long game.

      There are two questions implied there. First, whether there is time for a “long game” before economic and political collapse in the face of a blatantly unconstitutional regime? Second, whether the Republican party is willing to and can be part of any effort to restore America. As it stands, the Republican Party is more actively hostile to the TEA Party and Conservatives than it is to the Democrats. AFTER THIS ELECTION, the question is going to have to be answered whether the country will be better served by a separate Patriot movement, or if there is any hope in a time frame that will have an effect on national events, for sufficient influence by the TEA Party to force a fight against the enemy.

      In the piece I posted this morning, I noted that Romney is forced by the dynamics of the campaign to run to the Left. He has not even gotten the nomination, and there is a very good chance that he has started already; reneging on his pledge not to mention amnesty.

      http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/10/el-hecho-del-sketcho/

      I will vote for him as long as he does not blur the difference between himself and the Left. It is up to him.

      Subotai Bahadur

    37. Lexington Green Says:

      Subotai:

      “… the Republican Party is more actively hostile to the TEA Party and Conservatives than it is to the Democrats.”

      Of course it is. To the Democrats, the Tea Party is just one more opponents. But to the existing GOP, the Tea Party is an internal civil war that threatens to displace all of the insiders completely. To the existing GOP, the Tea Party is a mortal threat. So far, the Tea Party has wisely avoided the trap of being a third party. It is a growing faction in the GOP, and will eventually take it over, or become a powerful voice.

      As to whether we will have time for the long game, God alone knows. Gertrude Stein pointed out that only God could make a two year old mule in one minute. A political mass movement has to start from the bottom up, and only captures the presidency with one of its own late in the day.

      That process cannot happen fast.

      In my neck of the woods, the Tea Party is focusing on congressional races and state house and state senate races.

      That is the way to do it.

      An insurgency has to build the base area, train the cadres, and educate the masses. Then it can move the open phase of the revolution.

      The Tea Party came out with an initial burst in 2010. It is now, from what I can see, very wisely focusing on first phase revolutionary activities.

      See, I don’t just draw my inspiration from the Founders, but from Mao!

    38. Sgt. Mom Says:

      I’m not all that thrilled with ‘Mittens’ Romney myself, but considering that I would vote for Zeeba the Syphilitic Camel before I’d vote for Obama, I’ll hold my nose and vote for the RINO. It’s the long game, and from the ground-up, as Lex has pointed out. Even if we are stuck with Mittens this time around, there are a lot of local and Congressional offices up for grabs with candidates of Tea Partier sympathies. Remember this. Taking over the Republican Party from within was always the game with the SATP.

    39. Bill Brandt Says:

      Sgt – that is the right road to take – it is how the Left has become so entrenched in our society – from school boards on up.

    40. Bill Waddell Says:

      If Romney wins, the GOP will have no choice but to back him for re-election in 2016. How does weak Republican leadership until 2020 (if he wins in 2016) or giving the White House back to the Dems in 2016 if he governs as can be expected for the sole purpose of kicking Obama out now position the Republican Party for the long haul Lex?

    41. Lexington Green Says:

      You have no idea what a Romney presidency will be like. No one does. Eight years is an eternity. A Romney presidency with a grassroots conservative growing and getting more and more people elected could be good.

      But none of that matters. Obama is very destructive. Voting him out is critically important.

    42. Bill Brandt Says:

      George Bush squandered an opportunity – with a Conservative Congress – House and Senate – to really move the country to the Right.

      Just like his father squandered the political capitol built with the Reagan era. Historians generally believe he won “Reagan’s third term”.

      I can’t see how I could be disappointed with anything Romney might do considering the current occupant – and the specter of another 4 years with him.