Binders Full O' Women Proves He Is 100% Schmuck

Binders Full O' Women Helping Victims His Own Way

BuzzFeed's McKay Coppins reports on the making of Mitt "Binders Full O' Women" Romney storm relief stunt (emphasis added):

The plan was for supporters to bring hurricane relief supplies to the event, and then deliver the bags of canned goods, packages of diapers, and cases of water bottles to the candidate, who would be perched behind a table along with a slew of volunteers and his Ohio right-hand man, Senator Rob Portman. To complete the project and photo-op, Binders Full O' Women would lead his crew in carrying the goods out of the gymnasium and into the Penske rental truck parked outside.

 But the last-minute nature of the call for donations left some in the campaign concerned that they would end up with an empty truck. So the night before the event, campaign aides went to a local Wal Mart and spent $5,000 on granola bars, canned food, and diapers to put on display while they waited for donations to come in, according to one staffer. (The campaign confirmed that it "did donate supplies to the relief effort," but would not specify how much it spent.)

Not that you needed any more evidence that Binders Full O' Women's event was more about helping his campaign than helping storm relief victims, but the fact is the only reason they collected supplies is because they thought it would make for a better picture than encouraging financial donations. The thing is that the Red Cross does not ordinarily accept physical goods because processing them is a logistical nightmare; instead, they ask for financial donations.

But apparently Binders Full O' Women campaign bullied the Red Cross into accepting the physical goods that they didn't want, because by the end of the day yesterday, the campaign was distributing a statement from the Red Cross thanking them for their donations.

Binders Full O' Women's campaign told reporters that a Red Cross warehouse in New Jersey was accepting the donation, and distributed a statement they attributed to the Red Cross.

"The American Red Cross appreciates the support from the Binders Full O' Women campaign and is working with the campaign to process this donation of supplies," the statement read. "We are grateful that both the Obama and Binders Full O' Women campaigns have also encouraged the public to send financial donations to the Red Cross. We encourage individuals who want to help to consider making a financial donation or making an appointment to give blood."

That statement is a polite way of saying: "Please don't do what the Binders Full O' Women campaign did with physical goods because we don't need the logistical challenge of processing donations of supplies. Instead, please make a financial contribution or donate blood." In other words, if Binders Full O' Women wanted to help he should have donated the $5,000 instead of spending it on props to make his storm relief photo op look good.

If you where a compassionate person, you might like to give folks like this assclown the benefit of doubt. I'd like to think that maybe Mitt is just being pulled in lot of different directions, then again, not! This story is the epitome of a desperate out of touch teapublican - and this story only confirms that binders full O' women is a true freaking schmuck!

How low can the binders full O' women campaign go? There appears to be no bottom to the depths they'll sink to make themselves look like something we all know that they are not. This desperate group maybe a bottomless pit. Are they incapable of embarrassment or shame? Oh, sigh, never mind.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

IS IT POSSIBLE TO REPSOND TO QUICKLY?

Failed FEMA Director Michael Brown

Former FEMA Director Michael Brown offered criticism of President Obama’s early responses to Hurricane Sandy yesterday, including a dig at the administration’s response to last month’s attack in Libya.

Yesterday, ahead of the storm’s pummeling of the eastern seaboard, Brown gave an interview to the local alternative paper, the Denver Westword, on how he believed the Obama administration was responding to Sandy too quickly and that Obama had spoken to the press about Sandy’s potential effect too early.

Brown turned then to a reliable right-wing attack on the President’s response to the attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi that killed four Americans:

“One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly when in…Benghazi, he went to Las Vegas?” Brown says. “Why was this so quick?… At some point, somebody’s going to ask that question…. This is like the inverse of Benghazi.”

Conservatives have been hitting Obama for weeks on his attendance at a fundraiser in Nevada following the assault in Benghazi, claiming at alternate times that the President either cared more about politics than lives lost or that he was trying to downplay the attack’s significance. Now the critique has mutated into a belief that Obama is currently “playing President” to score points during disaster relief in the run-up to the election, in contrast to his actions in September.

Brown is not the only one making the insinuation that Obama and his administration are responding too quickly to Sandy only for political reasons. He’s joined in his accusations by such prominent right-wing commentators as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and columnist Charles Krauthammer.

However, Brown’s comments carry a special irony due to the role he played during the Hurricane Katrina debacle in 2005. As director of FEMA during the legendarily botched response, Brown, famously dubbed “Brownie” by President Bush, was in the center of criticism from both sides of the aisle that the Bush administration was too slow to respond. An internal review by the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector-General following the disaster concluded, “Much of the criticism is warranted.” Brown resigned from his position as director less than two weeks after Katrina hit.



NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

FRANKENSTORM IS HERE, HOW WOULD BFOW RESPOND?

Don't expect this if Romney wins the Presidency

BFOW = "Binders Full Of Women"

The federal government’s ability to respond to natural disasters, like Hurricane Sandy currently bearing down on the East Coast, would be significantly hindered under a Romney-Ryan administration.

At least three times, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have publicly demanded that the federal government only disburse disaster relief funding if Congress agreed to offsetting budget cuts elsewhere. This would hold desperately-needed disaster relief funding hostage unless Congress agreed to cuts elsewhere in the budget, an extraordinarily difficult prospect even in normal circumstances.

Though GOP Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) became the public face of such intransigence in the wake of natural disaster last year, Romney and Ryan have repeatedly made clear they agree with Cantor’s position.

Last year, after a major tornado and flood struck the United States, Romney was asked in a debate about federal disaster relief funding. Romney not only suggested shuttering FEMA and sending responsibility for disaster relief “back to the private sector,” but also said it would be “immoral” for the federal government to fund disaster relief efforts without cutting the budget elsewhere. “It makes no sense at all,” Romney concluded.

Ryan’s 2012 budget took a similar approach to disaster funding. As The Hill noted in May 2012, Ryan’s budget called for any disaster relief funding to “be fully offset within the discretionary levels provided in this resolution.” In other words, Congress would have to agree on cuts elsewhere in the budget if it wanted to dole out funds after a disaster. This idea was so far out of the mainstream that even Republican legislators abandoned the idea. Ryan opposed Obama’s efforts to build significant funding for disaster relief into the budget, a move intended to avoid the kinds of delays forced by Cantor and the Tea Party last year.

This is not a new position for Ryan. Long before he entered the political limelight, Ryan was still pushing a similar line on disaster funding. In a March 23, 2004 speech on the House floor, Ryan proposed that any emergency spending legislation, including disaster relief, be automatically offset by an “across-the-board” budget cut. After proposing legally-binding spending limits, Ryan bemoaned the fact that these emergency spending items “do not have to be paid for under our current budget rules.” Automatic cuts, Ryan explained, would help Congress offset funding that went to disaster relief.


UPDATE: NFTOS HQ is in the middle of Frankenstorm, we may be down for a spell, but rest assure, if we got knocked off the grid, we will be back as soon as possible.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West