Big Bird ad was a boneheaded move

[TitanTiger 18,799]

...and the Sesame Workshop wants it pulled.

Of course, the Romney camps rebuttal to it has some merit to it:

Romney's campaign countered that the ad shows Obama is focusing on inconsequential matters rather than urgent issues voters care about, like the economy and unemployment.

"Right now you've got 23 million Americans struggling to find work," spokesman Kevin Madden told reporters Tuesday. "I just find it troubling that the president's message, the president's focus 28 days from Election Day, is Big Bird."

To me, this seems like an unforced error by the Obama campaign. It's fine if you want to toss out a one-liner at a campaign stop about Big Bird, but putting this much focus on it opened them up to the attack that they are focusing on trivialities when there are serious economic issues at stake.

[80Tiger 882]

When I first heard it I thought it was a parody. It has a tone of late night TV, Leno etc.

[CCTAU 2,730]

When you have a president who wants to be a celebrity more than a leader, then you get the late night tone.

I feel like I am watching a bad reality show about the white house.......only it's real.

[TigerNBham 3]

I could do with a stronger President , but Mitt, come on folks.

Are you people listening to yourselves ?

The Mittster made the dumb remark in the first place .

MItt sees that as a problem.

Really ?

Don't get out much ?

All the democrats are doing is showing the shallow end of the reality pool that Mitt is swimming in.

And they say it is trivializing ?

[TitanTiger 18,799]

I could do with a stronger President , but Mitt, come on folks.

Are you people listening to yourselves ?

The Mittster made the dumb remark in the first place .

It wasn't a dumb remark. It was funny. He simply said that funding for PBS wasn't a priority if it required borrowing money to pay for it. And he's right. The difference is, he was asked to give some specifics in a debate as to things he would cut. Obama's camp of its own accord chose to spend money to run an ad about it as if this was something that actually mattered at a time like this with the state the economy is in, continued unrest in the Middle East and so on.

MItt sees that as a problem.

Really ?

Don't get out much ?

All the democrats are doing is showing the shallow end of the reality pool that Mitt is swimming in.

And they say it is trivializing ?

Yep, it's trivial. You're the frickin' president. There are critical issues facing this country that your record right now is mixed at best on. That you think it a wise use of resources to run an ad about Big Bird says way more about you than it does about your target.

[AURaptor 1,114]

Did the Obama campaign higher the writers from SNL , or what ?

Wow... that's really, REALLY lame.

[AURaptor 1,114]

I could do with a stronger President , but Mitt, come on folks.

Are you people listening to yourselves ?

The Mittster made the dumb remark in the first place .

What 'dumb remark' are you referring ? The govt paying for that which it doesn't need to pay for, with 16 + trillion in debt, and YOU think Mitt said something dumb ?

Wow...

[rexbo 104]

Ironically, the head executives at Sesame Workshop, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are all 1 percenters. Even the actor that plays Big Bird makes $300k+. And a big chunk of it on our dime as taxpayers. Mitt got it right again...

[AUMed 0]

Ironically, the head executives at Sesame Workshop, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are all 1 percenters. Even the actor that plays Big Bird makes $300k+. And a big chunk of it on our dime as taxpayers. Mitt got it right again...

PBS receives funding that amounts to 1/100th of 1% of the annual deficit. Mitt's only specific program to cut (aside from gutting medicare for the future to line the pockets of insurance companies) is to cut a program that is barely a blip on the radar. Meanwhile, he wants to increase military spending by an absurd amount to pay for... God only knows.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/08/1141896/-Rachel-Maddow-Puts-Romney-s-2-Trillion-Proposed-Defense-Budget-Expansion-into-Historical-Context

That link shows a pretty easy to understand graphic of the kind of defense spending Romney is proposing.

[TigerNBham 3]

Ah and old friend,

I knew you'd show up

Mitt keeps shooting him self with trivia and the elephant people try to make the bullets turn into gold.

Barring The PreZ getting caught with a dead woman or a live boy, the blue states will carry this election.

I keep hoping GOP comes up with something of substance but if they haven't before probably won't now.

From where I sit economy is showing some signs of life .

Work orders are picking up and firms we work for, and see hiring major industrial and transportation sectors

here in Alabama. It won't matter Al goes red, but nation wide, might be enough to swing some voters.

Hard to say if just an election year push or a real mini recovery, we shall ( C)see.

Opps gotta go check my spell check.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Mitt will not win this year, or any other for that matter, because he is not real man. I hate them both, RON PAUL 2012!

[TitanTiger 18,799]

Ironically, the head executives at Sesame Workshop, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are all 1 percenters. Even the actor that plays Big Bird makes $300k+. And a big chunk of it on our dime as taxpayers. Mitt got it right again...

PBS receives funding that amounts to 1/100th of 1% of the annual deficit. Mitt's only specific program to cut (aside from gutting medicare for the future to line the pockets of insurance companies) is to cut a program that is barely a blip on the radar. Meanwhile, he wants to increase military spending by an absurd amount to pay for... God only knows.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/08/1141896/-Rachel-Maddow-Puts-Romney-s-2-Trillion-Proposed-Defense-Budget-Expansion-into-Historical-Context

That link shows a pretty easy to understand graphic of the kind of defense spending Romney is proposing.

I sort of get tired of the idea that unless a program or expense is big enough to take a huge chunk out of the deficit by itself, it isn't worth cutting simply because some people like it a lot. It's that mentality that allow for "financial creep" where we spend huge amounts of money on programs that need to either go away or be paid for through private means and people say, " it's only a few million...only that's not the point. This is the hard earned money of the American people, not your personal expense account. Regardless of what you think the level of defense spending should be, at least we know that is a constitutionally mandated expense... The defense of our country. Funding your favorite high brow show on NPR or, yes, even Big Bird is not. It's a luxury. We aren't in position to fund luxuries right now.

[AUloggerhead 1,955]

PBS receives funding that amounts to 1/100th of 1% of the annual deficit. ...

That fraction sounds like a really insignificant number ... until you realize that the current annual deficit is $1,327 Billion. Which means one per cent is $13.27 Billion, and 1/100th of that is still a whopping $133 Million. If Sesame Street can afford to pay $300k for an actor to portray Big Bird, then they can stand on their own & no longer need the government's help.

The point is, we have to collectively start cutting out the needless programs and this is a prime example of where to start. The operatative word being "start."

[TexasTiger 11,579]

I could do with a stronger President , but Mitt, come on folks.

Are you people listening to yourselves ?

The Mittster made the dumb remark in the first place .

It wasn't a dumb remark. It was funny. He simply said that funding for PBS wasn't a priority if it required borrowing money to pay for it. And he's right. The difference is, he was asked to give some specifics in a debate as to things he would cut. Obama's camp of its own accord chose to spend money to run an ad about it as if this was something that actually mattered at a time like this with the state the economy is in, continued unrest in the Middle East and so on.

Got any evidence Obama actually spent money running this ad? Many ads are never actually run on TV, except for cable news showing them. I agree that it would be a mistake to make a major ad buy for it. But as it was pointed out today, the USA spends $450M total on PBS, which helps kids learn to read. The Pentagon spend that much in only 6 hours. MItt wants to increase that amount. Think about that. PBS funding is so insignificant for Mitt to single it out shows how trivial his thinking is.

MItt sees that as a problem.

Really ?

Don't get out much ?

All the democrats are doing is showing the shallow end of the reality pool that Mitt is swimming in.

And they say it is trivializing ?

Yep, it's trivial. You're the frickin' president. There are critical issues facing this country that your record right now is mixed at best on. That you think it a wise use of resources to run an ad about Big Bird says way more about you than it does about your target.

[AURaptor 1,114]

Ironically, the head executives at Sesame Workshop, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are all 1 percenters. Even the actor that plays Big Bird makes $300k+. And a big chunk of it on our dime as taxpayers. Mitt got it right again...

PBS receives funding that amounts to 1/100th of 1% of the annual deficit. Mitt's only specific program to cut (aside from gutting medicare for the future to line the pockets of insurance companies) is to cut a program that is barely a blip on the radar. Meanwhile, he wants to increase military spending by an absurd amount to pay for... God only knows.

http://www.dailykos....torical-Context

That link shows a pretty easy to understand graphic of the kind of defense spending Romney is proposing.

So, taking 700+ billion from medicare, as Obama has done, isn't 'gutting' it ?

Mitt's been saying we should stop govt support of PBS for a while now, and it makes perfect sense. Why pay for that which can likely survive on its own, with private sponsorship, when we're 16+ TRILLION in the hole ? It's the easy cuts like this that are the 1st and best to make. Even fans of Dave Ramsey know that you get rid of the little expenditures first, and then work on the really big ones.

The Dems are 100% wrong on this, and their desperation over such a trivial matter shows how out of sync they are w/ the rest of the country. Libya was a colossal cluster , and this admin is waist deep in the cover up, and Big Bird is what they're spending all their energy on? Amb Stevens would still be alive if Obama had spent 1/2 as much time protecting him as he's spent protecting Big Bird.

[japantiger 3,899]

Ironically, the head executives at Sesame Workshop, PBS, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are all 1 percenters. Even the actor that plays Big Bird makes $300k+. And a big chunk of it on our dime as taxpayers. Mitt got it right again...

PBS receives funding that amounts to 1/100th of 1% of the annual deficit. Mitt's only specific program to cut (aside from gutting medicare for the future to line the pockets of insurance companies) is to cut a program that is barely a blip on the radar. Meanwhile, he wants to increase military spending by an absurd amount to pay for... God only knows.

http://www.dailykos....torical-Context

That link shows a pretty easy to understand graphic of the kind of defense spending Romney is proposing.

I sort of get tired of the idea that unless a program or expense is big enough to take a huge chunk out of the deficit by itself, it isn't worth cutting simply because some people like it a lot. It's that mentality that allow for "financial creep" where we spend huge amounts of money on programs that need to either go away or be paid for through private means and people say, " it's only a few million...only that's not the point. This is the hard earned money of the American people, not your personal expense account. Regardless of what you think the level of defense spending should be, at least we know that is a constitutionally mandated expense... The defense of our country. Funding your favorite high brow show on NPR or, yes, even Big Bird is not. It's a luxury. We aren't in position to fund luxuries right now.

BINGO....PBS gets $440m per year from our dime...$440m friggin $$. A great place to start cutting. We spend $1Trillion more than we take in...there is no expense to small to cut. This is what businesses and households do every day...why would the rules be different for governement? If PBS is worth having; the private sector will pick it up. Let's BB earn his pay or be Thanksgiving dinner.

[BamaGrad03 146]

The best way I've seen it described in this thread was an "unforced error." It's not so much that the topic is a bad one, it's just the wrong message at the wrong time.

And it opens them up for a pretty solid counter-attack. They need better strateegery.

[Weagle1787 601]

Look, I'm all for making cuts wherever we can to cut down this deficit. That being said, Mitt would have alot more credibility as a fiscal conservative if he addressed defense spending, or had a plan to sufficiently address Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Quibbling over small potatoes like PBS while Robamney increases spending on 80% of the federal budget is exactly what they want us to do.

[TitanTiger 18,799]

He mentioned other things besides PBS including Obamacare. It was just one of a list of a few things he threw out as examples of things that could be cut, gotten rid of and so on. PBS was just one of those smaller things he used to illustrate his "rule of thumb" for whether it was worth keeping in the budget, which was: Is this budget item of such importance to the country that it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?

[au2004ece 30]

Look, I'm all for making cuts wherever we can to cut down this deficit. That being said, Mitt would have alot more credibility as a fiscal conservative if he addressed defense spending, or had a plan to sufficiently address Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Quibbling over small potatoes like PBS while Robamney increases spending on 80% of the federal budget is exactly what they want us to do.

Romney does have a plan for Medicare -- partial privatization.

[AUMed 0]

He mentioned other things besides PBS including Obamacare. It was just one of a list of a few things he threw out as examples of things that could be cut, gotten rid of and so on. PBS was just one of those smaller things he used to illustrate his "rule of thumb" for whether it was worth keeping in the budget, which was: Is this budget item of such importance to the country that it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?

Obamacare reduces the deficit... so I'm not sure how that counts as a cut.

The point is that Romney is harping on cutting PBS which wouldn't make any difference while at the same time promoting a $5 trillion tax cut and a $2 trillion increase in defense spending. He plans to pay for this by cutting loopholes (of which there are not enough to cover the cost, not nearly) and then relying on economic growth that we haven't seen since the 40s, in the height of WW2.

On another note... Obama doesn't cut a single dime fro Medicare. The ACA reduces the future costs of medicare by $716 billion by reducing fraud and waste in the future. You guys would be surprised to know that out of a hospital stay, about 60% of your bill is due to unnecessary care. Should medicare/the government/YOU pay for poor healthcare? No. The ACA sets new standards of care to REDUCE costs.

What I find increasingly hilarious is how the GOP attacks Obama and the ACA on the idea of this $716billion "cut" when Paul Ryans plan includes THE EXACT SAME "cut."

[AUMed 0]

Look, I'm all for making cuts wherever we can to cut down this deficit. That being said, Mitt would have alot more credibility as a fiscal conservative if he addressed defense spending, or had a plan to sufficiently address Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Quibbling over small potatoes like PBS while Robamney increases spending on 80% of the federal budget is exactly what they want us to do.

Romney does have a plan for Medicare -- partial privatization.

Actually, the Romney/Ryan plan would end medicare as we know it within 10 years. Why? Because their plan reduces the solvency of the program to 2016 whereas the ACA extends it from 2018 to 2024.

Not only that but even if somehow medicare survives to the point where the "premium support/voucher" system goes into effect, private insurers will still deny care to the sickest of the elderly/disabled which will, in effect, turn Medicare into a very high-risk, government run program while private insurance companies can cherry-pick the healthiest of those with vouchers.

[TitanTiger 18,799]

Obamacare reduces the deficit... so I'm not sure how that counts as a cut.

He was proposing replacing it with something that would reduce it more.

The point is that Romney is harping on cutting PBS

That's just the thing...he wasn't harping on it. It was one thing mentioned quickly among some other things and was just an example of something that didn't fit his criteria of "is this of enough importance to borrow money to pay for it." It's you guys and the Obama camp that are harping on it.

which wouldn't make any difference while at the same time promoting a $5 trillion tax cut and a $2 trillion increase in defense spending. He plans to pay for this by cutting loopholes (of which there are not enough to cover the cost, not nearly) and then relying on economic growth that we haven't seen since the 40s, in the height of WW2.

Except he's qualified his tax cut by saying he wouldn't cut any tax that added to the deficit. In other words, if he can't offset it with closed loopholes, broadening the tax base and so on, it won't happen.

[CCTAU 2,730]

Anyone on the left defending this STOOPID ad is lost and out of touch with what is happening wiht the world today. When the American public realized after the debate that WE were paying for big bird, they took notice. It resonated with the intelligent households. If we have to borrow to pay for it, do we realy need it?

Is that not the question that intelligent responsible people ask themselves every day before buying an item?

I guess if you expect the governemnt to provide you with everything, then you never even entertain a thought such as this!

[BamaGrad03 146]

Obamacare reduces the deficit... so I'm not sure how that counts as a cut.

Please read with an open mind: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/07/27/cbo-obamacare-will-spend-more-tax-more-and-reduce-the-deficit-less-than-we-previously-thought/