@The Truth from Becky

Sounds like you may need some "going down"!

@hjs11211

What you're suggesting, is that Christie's ass is just too damn enormous to lead??

I think you're on to something.

@BL -

Are you actually trying to be ironic in calling out the press for distorting Mitt Romney's 'I like being able to fire...' statement. Each and every speech that Gov. Romney gives will contain a distortion of the President's efforts to work with the obstructionist Congress to move the country out of the recession they created.

His latest stump speech coming on this weekend's announcement of 8.5% unemployment rate was to remind voters about the President's promise that unemployment would be no worse than 8% IF he got a stimulus package. The package that Congress passed was far smaller than the original request so holding the President's feet to the fire is, itself, a willful distortion. But as Mitt has proven over and over again, he is willing to say anything (regardless of the truth content) in order to get a vote.

I like being able to fire people that provide services to me as well - especially if the service is poor. Unfortunately, government like electrical power and cable service and increasingly health care is a monopoly. The crop of choices for those that will lead us is uncommonly poor this season.

I just heard the this possible 'interpretation' of Christie's snappy retort to one of the PaulBots incessant disruption, offered by BL and his guest.
To attibute to Chrystie that this is what he had in mind is ridiculous.
Chrystie's entire persona and image is based on the 'New Jersey' tough-guy/strongman, the guy that never backs down from any fight.
I heard the clip, and what the asserted sexual connotation of that expression was the last thing I, or likely anyone in that room, thought of.
By 'go down', he meant: 'if you continue to hassle me, you will soon go down, as in hit the floor'.
The woman was supposedly shouting that jobs had 'gone down' during Christies tenure, which led to him using those exact words.
Is this now going to be picked up by Democrats as the new 'meme', sort of like Romney wishing to exercise his right to dismiss people doing a lousy job, by 'firing people'?

Christie is a thug
and he is too unhealthy to be president

One of the tragedies is that with "politicians" and "the media" talking about "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" what you really get is "Dumber and Dumber".

There's hardly any "job creation" in a competitive economy that isn't targeted at "job destruction" too. That's always been how things worked. What CHANGED though is that the "net job creation" went from creating more to destroying more.

The environment changed... because a growing economy has been changing its environment as its demands on it increased. So... now there's less need for people to be more efficient at "picking low hanging fruit", and now more of a need for fewer people, so that a few winners can take more.

That's ALSO how economies have always worked,...at their natural limits.

Caller TIM, wrong choice of words, he is not an SUV there is no "buyers remorse" and it would take anyone more than 4 years to turn this train wreck around. ALSO Hillary is certainly NOT a better choice.

It's not about the "go down." It's the "sweetheart." Christie could be talking about beating someone up (as I think) or bedding her. Obviously, either of those connotations is offensive. BUT, take out that line. The "sweetheart" alone gets to me. Would he call Mitt or even Obama "Honey" or "Sweetheart"? He puts a woman in her place. I say "screw him," and I don't mean it literally.

As a republican turned libertarian, my only comment is that this entire debate about a contradictory statement reflects the misguided platform of the republican party right now. This primary is incredibly important in sending a message to the party that it is time to change... Vote Ron Paul!

Just to be clear, Christie meant "go down" as in "get killed". Presumably, this is better? Really?

I called in and informed your that I was wondering why your "story line" seemed to include Congressman Paul if he has not criticized Romney for his business practices at Bain (sp?) Capital.
My phone connection was lost.
Is there a report of Mr Paul making such a criticism? Or are you just including him in the "all of the Republican candidates" meme out of your medium's limitation to be accurate in the limited time you alot to your task?
Have a good day (no hard feelings for dropping my call - :-)

Gov. Soprano, Hey tony hows the mall building going!!

"prefabricated success". How well put, Moderate Republican.
Mitt complains about "entitlements", but this guy has no doubt felt entitled to the presidency since his first teeth cut...There's a lot of silver-spoon-suckers amongst the "job creators", and it's an issue that should get more attention if the income/wealth/opportunity-inequality discussion progresses.

These fine upstanding “women” were interrupting an event. The moment you do that (and generally show a lack of respect) you deserved to be called whatever the speaker chooses.

These folks were lucky to only be called sweetheart.

Just don't use 'going down' in public!! dumazz

Paul Krugman settled the matter of Romney and his Bain experience in a column a few days ago.

These BL show segments on American politics are really weak.

Brian, you and others on the show have referred to Romney's former firm potentially "raiding" pension plans. That's an evocative term, but does it actually mean in this context?

Not only did Romney take Obama even further out of context than his own words were taken--Obama was quoting McCain--Romney defended the ad when he was called on it.

I am a republican and will vote for Obama. He is the only option here and has done the best he can. Mittbot will get creamed in debates and in the Court of public opinion.

Sorry, forgot the link to the Washington Post piece:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/mitt-romney-and-100000-jobs-an-untenable-figure/2012/01/09/gIQAIoihmP_blog.html

With limited data, the Washington Post fact checked Romney's 100K statement and that in a 1994 Romney campaign ad, claimed:

“'Mitt Romney has spent his life building more than 20 businesses and helping to create more than 10,000 jobs. So when it comes to creating jobs, he's not just talk. He's done it.'

Now, apparently, those 10,000 jobs have increased tenfold, apparently in part because of Bain investments in which Romney had at best a tangential role."

And don't worry, Obama is going to beat up on Bain Capital and it WILL work.

People can already fire their insurance company under Obamacare--that's worth focusing on. Romney's whole premise is false.

It simply shows the quandary of the Republican Party. They need the votes of the white working class they have a contempt for.

As a moderate Republican, I *am* sensitive to these attacks on Romney as out of touch-- BUT: I've never voted in a Republican primary, and I'm not likely to. I sympathize with the working class; I believe Romney was born with a silver spoon in his mouth; and I resent his easy, prefabricated success in the business world. The business world hasn't been quite so kind to me, particularly since 2009.

David & Bobby G are exactly right. I would love to dump United HealthCare but I would never call it a "firing". For a rich guy to talk about firing service people who displease him sounds like a BBC/PBS "Upstairs Downstairs" script.

Talk about burying the lead. Who can fire their insurance company. You can't even get insurance let alone argue about price or performance. That's the real story.

David and Bobby, right on.
Whatever Mitt's actual meaning, his verbiage seems revealing. Specifically, he said he likes firing people who "provide services" to him, not "poor services", which would seem to be more consistent with his alleged meaning...

Sorry but he deserves it. Romney's been distorting and lying about Obama's record for months... These attacks are in the same vane as the attacks in the Dem primary in 2007/ 2008.

He did not say he enjoyed firing people. He said he enjoyed being able to fire people. This implies that it is the choice he likes.

In re the Romney comment about "liking to fire people" - even taken properly IN CONTEXT, just how easy would it be for a person to "fire" their health insurance company? He said "I want individuals to have their own insurance. “That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep you healthy. It also means if you don’t like what they do, you can fire them." Say what? it takes months if not ages to even GET health insurance, and most people truly have little to no choice, even folks with corporate plans! Without universal coverage, virtually NO ONE has the option to "fire" their insurance and casually switch!

And forget about "switching" AFTER you're sick! (eg, the health insurance company has "failed" to keep you healthy). Who on earth can actually do that? Except, maybe, Mitt Romney. #fail

Romney deliberately took a 2008 Obama quote out of context and used it in a Romney ad. He now gets to taste his own medicine.

looks to me the best republicans didn't wanted to run against obama this year. all the GOP had left is a bunch of bottom feeders and losers.

The problem, Brian, is the framing of discontinuing a service through "firing" someone. It's not a standard way to talk about changing insurance companies, certainly, and it's incredibly tone-deaf in an economy with 8.5% unemployment.

I changed from one cell phone provider to another. Never did I use the word "fire." Context or no context, Mr. Romney constructed his sentence using the word "fire." It reveals the way he thinks.

Bottom line on Romney's time at Bain:

Was he a net job creator or destroyer? (and what are the precise numbers and how can they be found?)

it's still shocking to look at these republican candidates. more embarrassing than ever and the addition of the citizens united decision and how it's just a battle of the donors is making is worse than ever. all except huntsman are ridiculous, extreme morons and i'm embarrassed for my country once again. think of our european friends when they hear these candidates talk about banning contraception! condoms should be illegal! this is not a joke, they really believe this. we criticize countries like saudi arabia for their archaic laws and customs but the right wing in this country is just as antiquated and unevolved. shameful.