1. McCullough says:

    That sounded like John Lithgow.

    SNL opened with a similar theme, Romney as Corp killer.

  2. jpfitz says:

    John Lithgow for President, ha. Americans for a better tomorrow, tomorrow.

    Uh, I thought tomorrow never comes. Funny.

  3. e? says:

    1/5/2012 at 8:42 pm

    Yeah, eventually the media arms of the democrat party will get around to putting down Romney just like every other Republican who has led in the polls. They just haven’t received their instructions yet from the central committee.
    As the general election approaches, they will tell a tale of a crooked Romney who wears funny undergarments and believes funny things and has too much money and probably made it unethically, and will fabricate as many stories of impropriety as they have to. They probably already have the scripts on file.

    Predicting that Democrats will attack every Republican candidate is like stealing candy from babies.

  4. #7--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist AND social critic says:

    Anyone want to bet high/low on Mitt, the Corporate Raider, Romnay paid 13% of his gross income in taxes?

    Why do you THINK rich people, generationally rich, inherited rich run for political office?

    for the fun?

    • deowll says:

      Predicting that either side will attack the other is like predicting the sun will come up but I still get seriously pissed when I believe the attacks are slander/liable.

      It is sufficient to state clearly why the other party is not suitable. For Obama you can run all the attack adds anyone should ever need by just repeating snippets of his old speeches noting the dates.

    • msbpodcast says:

      I know that electing another bunch of 1%er millionnaires is just going to cost us 99%er thousandaires… Not to mention all the laws, rules and policies they’ll pass are just going to shovel more of our money at billionaires who don’t even use the meaningless number to count coup anymore.

      Repubes or democraps, our politicians are equipped with the morals of gutter cats.

      If we want a representative government, we’ll have to RE-create it. (There were no parties in 1776.)

      If we want smaller government, we’ll have to take out the incentives for its growth too.

      We’ve become a government
      • OF the thousandaires (the 99%, that would be me and thee,)
      • BY the millionaires (the 1%, that would be the extremely insular privileged overlords and bosses,)
      • FOR the billionaires (the 12,400 individuals identified by the IRS as the people who count (though they don’t really count as they hire some thousandaires to run machines to do that.)

      The first thing we do is change from an ELECTED to a SELECTED form of government.

      Pick names at random out an eligible citizen pool and they’re stuck with doing the job for one, and only one, four year term.

      There could/should/would be no such thing as a career in politics. (The only thing worse than getting stuck with somebody who didn’t want the job is getting stuck with some idiot who did, figuring it was going to lift him a few rungs up the social/economic ladder.)

      • So what says:

        Go to a place where you tend to spend a fair amount of time other then work.

        Take a really good hard analytical look at the people around you. I mean really observe them.

        Do you really want those people in power?

        • msbpodcast says:

          YES I DO!

          For ONe and only ONE term and then they’re OUT.

          They’re going to be less organized, less venial, less cynical and they still respond to feeling like they should be ashamed of themselves when they try to screw us over. (Also they won’t be as sophisticated about it so we’ll be able to catch and stop them.)

          If one of the current crop of crap politicians tried to shake my hand, I’d have to count my fingers after, and I know that any jewelry would be gone.

        • msbpodcast says:

          That’s the cost of representative democracy. It has to represent you.

      • Cursor_ says:

        Wrong there were parties in 1776.

        Whigs and Tories.

        And the colonials were as divided by both points. But the majority was for a new replic on their own.

        Then they split into psuedo whigs and tories. With the Federalists as the tories and the anti-federalists as whigs.

        Cursor_

  5. Howard Beale says:

    Lots on Comedians have run for president in the past off the top of my head Pat Paulson, Bullwinkle, Tiny Tim, Rick PArry just to name a few but I think Colbert’s run is as much about running against the Citizens United decision as it is about getting laughs and ratings I’m all for it.

  6. EdZepp says:

    Did we not learn anything from the Movie “The Dead Zone”
    this guy is going to press the big red button
    Lithgow ftw!

  7. Friar Club says:

    I’ll tell you one thing, this election season is keeping of lot of hack comedians employed.

    • Oh baby, Oh Baby, Oh baby says:

      Ya for that hack crew over at Fox this stuff just writes itself.

      Fox they just do satire right?

    • wow says:

      HEY GUYS, THIS PERSON DOESN’T LIKE STEPHEN COLBERT AND HE CAME HERE SPECIFICALLY TO LET US KNOW. THANKS!

  8. orchidcup says:

    Corporate Personhood is a legal term that evades the understanding of the average person that has never studied law.

    Here is a brief introduction to the legal concept:

    Our Bill of Rights was the result of tremendous efforts to institutionalize and protect the rights of human beings.

    It strengthened the premise of our Constitution: that the people are the root of all power and authority for government. This vision has made our Constitution and government a model emulated in many nations.

    But corporate lawyers (acting as both attorneys and judges) subverted our Bill of Rights in the late 1800’s by establishing the doctrine of “corporate personhood” — the claim that corporations were intended to fully enjoy the legal status and protections created for human beings.

    We believe that corporations are not persons and possess only the privileges we willfully grant them. Granting corporations the status of legal “persons” effectively rewrites the Constitution to serve corporate interests as though they were human interests.

    Ultimately, the doctrine of granting constitutional rights to corporations gives a thing illegitimate privilege and power that undermines our freedom and authority as citizens.

    While corporations are setting the agenda on issues in our Congress and courts, We the People are not; for we can never speak as loudly with our own voices as corporations can with the unlimited amplification of money.

    For a complete primer on the issue, go here:

    Corporate Personhood

  9. deowll says:

    It would appear that Mitt has not released his tax returns nor his birth certificate however after viewing the likely full first and second names his parents have inflected on him the later is understandable.

  10. deowll says:

    I’m almost surprised that Fed Tax returns aren’t public information.

  11. General Tostada says:

    I can’t understand why anyone would pay much attention to this latest right wing republican fluff flailing around.

    It’s all like a brave new TV sitcom that will most likely vanish after a few boring episodes.

    Don’t worry, it’ll be over soon.

  12. Jeroen says:

    don’t call me friend, buddy.

  13. TheOne says:

    reality show that makes my day most days :) Can’t find classic idiots like this everyday you know, well maybe on DU. Would it be scary if one of them actually get to be the big P, except RP? Yes, yes it would.

  14. So what says:

    I give you podcast’s randomly selected president of these united states.

    http://tinyurl.com/86e8acq

  15. Glenn E. says:

    Check this out! Here’s the real dirt, you’re not hearing about Romney. Maybe they’ll pull this skunk out, after the RNC picks Romney. So Obama will easily defeat the bastard.

    http://webcasts.com/kingofbain/

    The mainstream news is clearly controlled, for not breathing a word of Romney’s corporate fat cat past. According to this short film, he a significant part of the reason so many Americans are out of work. Why hasn’t this come out on 60 Minutes or something? Clearly, it’s “hands off Mitt” time.

    • orchidcup says:

      This hit piece is produced by the PAC for Newt Gingrinch.

      Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Gingrich during his term as speaker. After extensive investigation and negotiation by the House Ethics Committee, Gingrich was sanctioned $300,000 by a 395–28 House vote. It was the first time in history a speaker was disciplined for ethical wrongdoing.

  16. Glenn E. says:

    Ya know, it’s hard to know what’s true anymore. One short film financed by Newt G. might be true. But the Washington Post suggests that it’s not. But can’t really prove that. While the Boston Globe said it is all true. But then was the Globe just a tool of Senator Kennedy, at the time of his re-election?

    One thing is for sure (I think), and that too damn much big money is behind whoever gets to run for public office. And presidency cabinet members are often chosen from the financial and corporate elite, regardless of who wins, as apparent payback for such sponsorship.

    It seems like the only news you get to hear, is because of someone has has a political stake in allowing you to hear it. What the hell ever happened to honest, unbiased journalism in the US? Freedom of the Press, my eye! The Press is under slavery. And it’s considered entertainment, by some. So it doesn’t have to get the facts right. But they all pretend that they do.

    • orchidcup says:

      Knowing the truth is somewhat the same as proving there is or is not a God or other Supreme Being.

      It largely depends on what you would choose to believe.

      The truth is not discernible most of the time and it is more elusive than vapor.

      Welcome to The Matrix. Would you prefer the red pill or the blue pill?

  17. Holdfast says:

    The voice sounded like John Bell.

    Please explain to someone from the other side of the Atlantic why anyone apart from fellow criminals ever vote for any of these corporate crooks.

    • wow says:

      There are two types of conservatives. The crooks you mentioned, and poor people who think that somehow the 2nd amendment will keep them safe from the police and that gay marriage will ruin the earth.

      Most of us don’t get it either…

  18. #36--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist AND social critic says:

    Orchi–you sure like to overgeneralize, as a general rule. Too much public analysis/commentary is based on that. “The Truty” is mainly discernible. Just because it is contested by those who don’t like its application doesn’t mean the truth isn’t discernible.

    Always dangerous to present two ideas at once: a marble cake if you will.

    Corporations are PROPERLY thought of as people under certain statutes but not for all statutes. Our conservative leaning court went totally activist in overruling common sense, 150 years of court rulings, and developing statutes passed by Congress. Likewise with property seizures and takings, likewise with Bush v Gore. No saying how activists these clowns will get.

    There really should be NO DOUBT that Mitt, the Vulture Capitalist, Romney did not create “net, net, net 100,000 jobs.” /// Some truths are evident by the ENORMITY OF THE LIE! Now–if Mitt, the uneertaxed interest forward crony capitalist, Romney said Bain Inc extracted its Billion Dollar profits and only caused a loss of 50,000 jobs, THEN we would have the type of debatable ambiguity you wish to raise.

    Other than that===you speak nonsense. Don’t confuse the obvious general rule with the much rarer exceptions. Think of it as low hanging fruit.

  19. EstCstCrkPt says:

    compaq always did suck, kb toys was a cool store when I was a boy. Lots o fun stuff there.