Pages

Monday, March 26, 2012

Newt: "children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working-have nobody around-who works"

Somehow I missed this little Jewel.......


Newt while expounding on his bizarre ideas about child labor explained why poor children weren't interested in honest work.
Newt Gingrich: Poor kids don't work "unless it's illegal"DES MOINES, Iowa - After saying recently that child labor laws are "truly stupid," Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich on Thursday told an Iowa audience that children in poor neighborhoods have "no habits of working" nor getting paid for their endeavors "unless it's illegal."
"Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works," the former House speaker said at a campaign event at the Nationwide Insurance offices. "So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of 'I do this and you give me cash,' unless it's illegal."
Newt blames poor kids for their poverty and also stigmatizes them as only being interested in criminality for a source of income. Another Republican myth blaming the victims of its radical right wing social engineering for its glaring shortcomings. Glaring economic shortcomings that leave most Americans at a disadvantage in a rigged game. It drips with racism against poor people of color.
This will come as news to all of the poor people who work two or three crappy low paying jobs trying to make the ends meet. And news to their latch key kids who wish their parents didn't have to work so much of the time. 

Supreme Court expresses skepticism over constitutionality of health care mandate




                                               


NBC's Pete Williams, who has been listening in as the Supreme Court hears arguments about President Obama's health care reform law, says he thinks it's "very doubtful" the high court is going to find the law constitutional.
Two years after a hard-fought victory, President Barack Obama’s signature legislative accomplishment -- the health care reform law -- seemed at risk of being struck down as the Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday.
“I think it’s very doubtful that court is going to find the health care law constitutional,” NBC’s Pete Williams reported after watching the two hours of oral argument before the high court. “I don’t see five votes to find the law constitutional.”

Court signals it will decide constitutionality of insurance mandate

While it's difficult to know for certain after Tuesday's oral arguments, the conservative justices appeared skeptical of the constitutionality of the mandate.
As the Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of the health care law, the Obama team shifts strategies to gather support.
They pressed Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, arguing the case for the Obama administration, who tried to defend the requirement that uninsured people purchase health insurance.
The mandate is backed up by a financial penalty the law imposes on uninsured people who choose to not buy insurance. This provision takes effect in 2014.
Justice Antonin Scalia, who upheld broad federal power in the court’s 2005 Gonzales v. Raich medical marijuana decision, “had nothing good to say about this law,” Williams said.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, a potential swing vote on the court,  “seemed to have grave concerns,” William reported, saying at one point in the oral argument “this is beyond anything Congress has ever done before.”

High court's ruling could return health care fight to Congress

It did not seem during the oral argument that Kennedy “found the justification that he needed” for the law.
President Obama's landmark health care reform law is under the microscope during a second day of arguments at the Supreme Court. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
The fate of the health care overhaul hinges on the issue the justices weighed during two hours of argument Tuesday morning: does Congress have the power to force individuals to buy a product they otherwise would not have purchased?
Much of Tuesday’s battle focused on the extent of Congress’s reach under the power to regulate interstate commerce which the Constitution assigns to it.
The court is expected to hand down its ruling in June.
NBC's Pete Williams contributed to this report.

Occupy 'Update'



Michael Moore: 'This is just the beginning of OWS'



Uploaded by  on Mar 19, 2012
Documentary filmmaker Michael Moore showed up at Zuccotti Park on Satturday. He led hundreds of people from the Left Forum conference to Zuccotti Park on Saturday where hundreds of protesters had gathered to mark six months since the launch of the Occupy Wall Street movement The famous filmmaker also gave a speech at the University.
Like us and/or follow us:
http://twitter.com/RT_America
http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica


Bagpipe solidarity with OWS!


Uploaded by  on Mar 18, 2012
On March 17, 2012, Occupy Wall Street celebrated their six month anniversary. It also happened to be St. Patrick's Day. 
Approximately 500 people gathered to spend the night in Liberty Square (Zuccotti Park), and just when things were getting quiet around 11pm, suddenly an ensemble of thirty or so bagpipers, drummers, and dancers arrived OUT OF NOWHERE, and marched on Zuccotti Park.
They were intercepted by the NYPD. We heard multiple reports that an NYPD officer even broke one of the musician's bagpipes. NYPD forced them to leave the area and would not allow them to play an encore. 
Mayor Bloomberg and Ray Kelly clearly fear the solidarity between the St. Patrick's Day and Occupy Wall Street crowds. But we showed them!



Occupy Wall Street- M17- Zuccotti Park - NYPD Arrests


Uploaded by  on Mar 18, 2012
On March 17 , OWS demonstrators gathered for their Six month anniversary, were people re-occupied Zucotti Park. This footage begins around 9 O'clock,and shows the gathering that took place along with many arrests.The NYPD orders all to evacuate in order for the park to be "Cleaned". Many stayed and were then arrested. Here are those events.-------- Wonderful music by Ignacio Nunez- song is called La cajita de musica----------


President Obama spotted caressing married mother of two

Thu Mar 08, 2012 at 01:31 PM PST


Michelle and Barack Obama
President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama talk in the Green Room of the White House before hosting a Smithsonian Museum of African American History reception in the East Room, Feb. 22, 2012.
(Pete Souza/White House)

Time to impeach!

Tea party protesters at Supreme Court say Affordable Care Act is all about Sandra Fluke

Mon Mar 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM PDT

crying teababy
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Did you know that the Affordable Care Act, being argued this week before the Supreme Court, is all about Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown Law student whose name no one knew until about a month ago? No, really, it's true! Via Evan McMorris-Santoro at TPM:
Fluke was a central topic among the several dozen tea party protesters who gathered outside the court Monday. As a much larger crowd of organized pro-reform activists from labor and other Dem-friendly groups marched in support of the law, one tea partier yelled, “Real women pay for their own birth control!” — a clear reference to Fluke and the fight over contraception access she embodies. Others were more direct. One protester carried a sign that said, “Sandra Fluke I don’t want to pay for your birth control[.]” [...]
Seattle Tea Party Patriot Kelli Carrender told me Fluke is a natural part of the debate as the HCR battle moves to the Court.
“She made herself relevant,” Carrender said. “She’s asking for free birth control.”
Riiiiiiiight. So even though teabaggers have been bitching and moaning since 2009 about how unfair it is of President Obama to expand their access to affordable health care, the real reason they're opposed to it now is because that slut Sandra Fluke explained at an unofficial House hearing that the cost of birth control can be hugely burdensome for students whose insurance doesn't already cover it. Never mind that Fluke never asked anyone to pay for her birth control. Or that not one of the "dozens" of teabaggers convened outside the court house have been asked, or are being forced, to pay for her birth control. Their hero Rush Limbaugh told them she's a slutty slut who wants them to pay her for her slut pills, so according to teabagger "logic," no one should have health care. Somehow, I don't think the Supreme Court justices will base their decision on that argument.

This week in the War on Women:

Sat Mar 24, 2012 at 04:00 PM PDT

  How about electing more, better women?




Republicans are scared. And they should be.
We've seen report after report that Republican women are saying they won't vote for Republicans in the election if the party doesn't stop attacking women's basic health care.
As Markos wrote this week, polls continue to show that Republicans are looking at a massive gender gap in this year's election.
Even some Republicans are starting to call on their party to lay off the ladies. Sens. Lisa Murkowski, Kay Bailey Hutchison and John McCain—all of whom voted for the Blunt amendment to allow employers to veto health insurance for women's basic health care—have all since expressed concern about their party's constant assault on women's basic health care. (Too bad they weren't concerned before they voted with their party.)
It's not as if these senators have seen the light and are now supporters of women's rights. But they've seen the writing on the wall, and they know that by screwing over women, Republicans are really screwing over themselves.
Meanwhile, the National Republican Committee is so terrified of the backlash it will inevitably face this year that it's trying to Karl Rove its way out of its self-inflicted mess with the "I know you are but what am I" strategy. The RNC released a laughably bad ad attacking President Obama for waging a war on women because of, um, Bill Maher and stuff so there shut up. Others, like Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, are trying to make it all go away by insisting that the War on Women is nothing but "political theater for the Democrats."
And then there was this remarkable speech from Republican—yes, Republican—Rep. Richard Hanna at a rally for the Equal Rights Amendment in New York this week:
"I think these are very precarious times for women, it seems. So many of your rights are under assault," he told the crowd of mostly women. "I'll tell you this: Contribute your money to people who speak out on your behalf, because the other side -- my side -- has a lot of it. And you need to send your own message. You need to remind people that you vote, you matter, and that they can't succeed without your help." [...] "This is a dogfight, it's a fistfight, and you have all the cards," he said. "I can only tell you to get out there and use them. Tell the other women, the other 51 percent of the population, to kick in a few of their bucks. Make it matter, get out there, get on TV, advertise, talk about this. The fact that you want [the ERA] is evidence that you deserve it and you need it."
He's right. The best way to stop the Republican Party from winning its war is to kick their sorry, woman-hating asses out of office, and, even better, to replace them with more, better women at the federal and state level. Like in Wisconsin, a state that has been particularly brutal in its war on women, where Republicans are actually trying to pass a law that would equate single motherhood with child abuse. They're even claiming that women in abusive relationships should focus on the positive and "get back to why they got married in the first place" because "it might help" them to stay in their abusive relationships. You know, for the kids.
This is the state where even a State Supreme Court justice feels free to physically assault a female colleague because, well, she just made him so gosh darned angry that he couldn't resist his "reflex" to choke her.
So here are this week's marching orders: Let's follow Rep. Richard Hanna's advice and kick in a few of our bucks to elect more, better women who will fight for us and against the Republican War on Women:
If we can elect more, better women to the halls of power throughout this country, we can stop the Republicans' war and start making women's lives better. And that's why Republicans are scared. And they should be.


This week’s good, bad and ugly below the fold.
  • Yes, the gender pay gap is real, and it's really bad in the financial industry.
  • It's also really bad if you happen to work for Idaho's Republican Gov. Butch Otter:
    Dan Popkey of the Idaho Statesman reports that Otter's 44-person Cabinet has 33 men and 11 women, with the men earning a median salary of $103,002 and the women earning a median of $85,446. The highest-paid woman on the Cabinet is Agriculture Director Celia Gould [...] Fifteen men earn more than she does, including Commerce Director Jeffrey Sayer, who has been on the job for less than six months and oversees about one-fifth as many employees as Gould.
  • Did you know women pay up to 81 percent more than men for their health insurance?
  • Fight like a girl.
  • Tennessee is considering a bill to create a public, online registry of doctors who perform abortions, including all sorts of personal and totally irrelevant information about their patients. If you think this sounds like just another way for anti-woman terrorists to target health care providers and their patients, you're right.
  • Just how bad is the War on Women in Alaska? This bad:
    And if you’re not fully convinced yet that Alaska is the next front in the GOP’s war on women, you just have to listen to State Rep. Alan Dick. He said in a House Health and Social Services Committee Hearing last week that he doesn’t believe that when a woman is pregnant, it’s really “her pregnancy.” As a matter of fact, he would advocate for criminalizing women who have an abortion without the permission via written signature from the man who impregnated her. He stated, “If I thought that the man’s signature was required… required, in order for a woman to have an abortion, I’d have a little more peace about it…”   He didn’t say whether a rapist would be able to send his signature by fax from prison, or not. But he’ll have “peace” and women will require a permission slip for their own bodies.
  • Stupid lawsuit of the week:
    A St. Louis business owner is suing the administration of President Barack Obama over the requirement that companies' health insurance policies include full coverage of contraceptives. Frank O'Brien, who owns O'Brien Industrial Holdings, said the birth control rule violates his religious beliefs, according to the lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in St. Louis. [...]
    "He is a very devout Catholic. He's got a religious statue in the lobby of his office," said O'Brien's attorney, Francis Manion. "That's what religious diversity and pluralism is all about. There are certain companies that you know don't do certain things."
    Yeah, because nothing says "devout" like having a statue. But dang it, Mr. O'Brien and his ceramic statues aren't going to stand by while women have insurance coverage of their basic health care, just because that mean ol' Obama forced him, against his religious liberty, to suddenly, out of the blue, start providing insurance coverage for birth control. But wait. What's this?
    The company's current United Healthcare insurance for its 87 employees includes coverage of birth control.
    Never mind.
  • Oh look. Two more executives jumped off the sinking ship that is Susan G. Komen for the Cure. And oops, there goes its chairman of the board. Such a shame that "employee morale is in the toilet" and founder and CEO Nancy Brinker is "in complete meltdown," as she ignores the increasingly desperate calls for her to step down. Too bad, so sad. Cry me a river.
  • This is why we can't have nice things:
    Tony Perkins, head of Family Research Council, today called the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) currently under debate in the Senate a “slush fund” that’s unfair to men [...] Calling Democrats the “real architects behind the ‘war on women,” and claiming the Left is trying to paint “Republicans as a party of sexist Neanderthals,” Perkins misogynistically cites the most anti-feminist woman alive, Phyllis Schafly and says she “explains how the bill discriminates against men and violates basic legal protocol. Even if a woman has no proof of the abuse, ‘any man who is accused of domestic violence effectively loses a long list of constitutional rights accorded to ordinary criminals’.”
    You know what to do, right? Click here to sign the petition to tell Senate Republicans to renew the Violence Against Women Act.
  • This is just so wrong:
    The New Hampshire legislature badly wants to tell women that abortion will cause breast cancer, despite the fact this is not true. In fact, they wanted it so badly they were willing to make it a felony if doctors don't lie to patients seeking an abortion.
  • Belvedere Vodka thinks rape is a hilarious way to sell alcohol. But don't worry. They're awful sorry if anyone is offended.
  • Women are continuing to find funny and clever ways to fight back against their anti-woman legislators. For you knitters out there, check out Government Free VJJ for instructions on how to knit your anti-woman representative his very own vagina so he'll stay the hell out of yours.
Now go forth, sluts, and raise hell.

Republican Congressman tells women to donate to Democrats


Thu Mar 22, 2012 at 04:11 PM PDT

ERA
Still waiting ...
Words I never thought I'd say, but this Republican member of Congress speaks for me:
As the only Republican Congressman at a rally for the Equal Rights Amendment on Thursday, Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) gave women an unexpected piece of advice: Give your money to Democrats. "I think these are very precarious times for women, it seems. So many of your rights are under assault," he told the crowd of mostly women. "I'll tell you this: Contribute your money to people who speak out on your behalf, because the other side -- my side -- has a lot of it. And you need to send your own message. You need to remind people that you vote, you matter, and that they can't succeed without your help." [...]
"This is a dogfight, it's a fistfight, and you have all the cards," he said. "I can only tell you to get out there and use them. Tell the other women, the other 51 percent of the population, to kick in a few of their bucks. Make it matter, get out there, get on TV, advertise, talk about this. The fact that you want [the ERA] is evidence that you deserve it and you need it."
(Via Laura Bassett at Huffington Post)

Kay Bailey Hutchison suddenly gives a damn about women's health care

Thu Mar 22, 2012 at 08:46 AM PDT



In her nearly two decades in the Senate, Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson doesn't exactly have the best record when it comes to women's health care. In fact, you can pretty much always count on her to oppose any bill that protects and expands women's access to health care, and if there's a bill to restrict or deny health care, you can usually find Sen. Hutchison on the floor of the Senate, arguing for it.
In 2009, she repeatedly spoke out against health care reform because, she falsely claimed, it included government funding of abortion. In 2011, she strongly supported repeated attempts by Republicans to defund Planned Parenthood and bar funding of women's health care, through bills like the Protect Life Act and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. Most recently, she was one of the few women in the Senate to vote for the Blunt amendment, allowing employers to deny health insurance to their employees for conditions or treatments they think violate their "religious liberties."
In other words, Sen. Hutchison is no friend to women.
So it's a little surprising to hear the senator suddenly wax concern about low-income women having access to health care. And even more surprising to hear her praise Planned Parenthood for providing basic preventive health care to those very women she's spent her career trying to screw over.
HUTCHISON: We cannot afford to lose the Medicaid funding for low income women to have health care services. We cannot. We keep turning back federal funds that every state gets and then try to find money in our budget, which is already being cut in key areas like education. I do think that the governor needs to sit down with the federal government and work it out so we can have our share — our fair share not more — of money for Medicaid to help low-income women have their health care services. TODD: So it sounds like you think he should not be excluding Planned Parenthood?
HUTCHISON: I think Planned Parenthood does mammograms, they do so much of the health care — the preventive health care and they’re doing that, we need to provide those services, absolutely.
Sure, it would be nice if Sen. Hutchison put her vote where her mouth. But it's probably a safe bet that Hutchison is finding herself in the unenviable position, like her fellow Republican senator from Alaska, Lisa Murkowski, of trying to explain to female constituents why she sided with the bishops instead of women. Murkowski also voted for the Blunt amendment, only to realize what a mistake it was, express regret for her vote, and then get good and angry about those awful Republicans and their war on women. It's not unlikely that Hutchison is finding herself Murkowski'd back in Texas. Now, all of a sudden, Hutchison is concerned about making sure women have access to the very health care, from the very provider, she's spent 20 years opposing. Hutchison isn't changing her tune because she's had a change of heart. Hutchison, like the rest of her rotten party, is seeing the damage it has done to itself by waging its war on women. Like John McCain, who called for his party to back off, Hutchison is probably reading the tea leaves (and the New York Times) and doing the math.
The harder Republicans fight against women, the more they lose. That's something even the staunchest anti-woman Republicans are starting to figure out. And that's very good news—for women.
(Via Think Progress)

Karen Santorum: 'Women have nothing to fear'

Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 11:54 AM PDT

  because Rick is 'completely supportive of women'




Are you a woman who fears what a Rick "No sex for anyone" Santorum presidency would mean?
Well, shut up, ya dumb broad, because your rights will be a-okay, says Mrs. Rick Santorum:
He is not anti-woman. And I can tell you, I’m a registered nurse, I’m a lawyer, I’m an author of two books. When I was doing my book tours, Piers, Rick was the one who was home changing diapers and making meals and cleaning the kitchen. He’s been a hundred percent supportive of me and my dreams and my career. It was my decision to stay home and be a mom at home and someday when I go back to work, Rick will be a hundred percent behind me. So I – it makes me really sad that the media tries to do that to him and try to make it look like he is something that he’s not. Rick is a great guy. He’s completely supportive of women. He’s surrounded by a lot of very strong women and I think women have nothing to fear. When it comes to contraceptives, he will do nothing on that issue. I think the real issue was what I had said about the religious freedom issue and not allowing the government to be intrusive in our lives and force us to do something against our conscience.
So because Rick once changed a diaper and loaded the dishwasher, don't let his policies alarm you. Like his health care policies "reflecting the views of [his] church." Or his willingness to toss his wife under the bus when he gets called out for blaming "radical feminism" for women in the work place. Or his objection to women in combat because it just makes it harder for the menfolk to do their job. Or his advice to women who are raped to "accept what God has given to you" and "make the best out of a bad situation." But never mind all that. Karen Santorum says Rick's great for women—some of his best friends are women, you know—so quit your bitching, ladies, about what a Santorum presidency would mean for you. As long as you're totally cool with letting Rick and his church make all your decisions for you, you've got nothing to fear at all.

Mitt Romney says women are free to have health care

Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 09:08 AM PDT

 ... as long as they can afford it

Mitt Romney
In Mitt Romney's "free society," you're free to do whatever you want—as long as he approves.
(Jim Young/Reuters)
Just because Mitt Romney wants to "get rid of" Planned Parenthood doesn't mean he doesn't have compassion for women who rely on it for their health care. In fact, he and his wife are on a charm offensive through Illinois right now, proving just how much they "love it that women are upset too" and golly, aren't soccer moms the bestest? So when asked where millions of women who rely on Planned Parenthood for their health care would have to go if President Mitt Romney had his way, Mitt displayed his usual compassion:
“Well, they can go wherever they’d like to go,” Romney told her. “This is a free society. But here’s what I’d say, which is the federal government should not tax these people to pay for Planned Parenthood.… The idea of the federal government funding Planned Parenthood, I’m going to say no, we’re going to stop that.”
Right. It's a free society. So that means low-income women who rely on Planned Parenthood for their basic health care needs are free to go anywhere they want—as long as it isn't the one place they can afford to go.

GOP's gas price politics could prove fleeting




Republicans have in recent weeks waged an all-out blitz against President Barack Obama over the issue of gas prices, but the political benefit could prove fleeting, if and when fuel prices decline.
The steady rise in gas prices this spring provides Republicans with their most immediate example of the pocketbook fleecing suffered by voters, prompting the party to pounce. While some indicators point toward a tentative economic recovery -- which could be to the president’s political benefit -- the lost income associated with higher gas prices has led the GOP’s presidential contenders and leaders in Congress to complain that it’s Obama’s energy policies that have contributed to upped costs.


Jae C. Hong / AP
Gasoline pricesare now averaging more than $4 in six states plus Washington, D.C.


And from Republicans’ vantage point, Obama is on the ropes on the issue. They point to his energy tour last week, which included a stop at the southern portion of the Keystone XL Pipeline, as an example of the White House’s response to Republican pressure.
“The issue of gas prices is near the top now in terms of what we're hearing from people,” said Republican Colorado Rep. Cory Gardner. “President Obama wouldn't be taking credit for a pipeline he has nothing to do with unless he weren't feeling pressure that he's not doing enough.”
Republicans are also encouraged by recent poll numbers, which make them think gas prices are a winning issue.
A healthy majority of Americans -- 57 percent in a Gallup Poll this week -- support the construction of the Keystone Pipeline, and four in 10 Americans called the energy situation in the U.S. is “very serious” right now.
But, for Republicans, living by the price of gas, might risk dying by the price of gas.
“We'll see how short-lived people's memories are,” said Oklahoma Rep. James Lankford, a Republican whose district is near the site in Cushing, Okla., that the president visited Thursday.
Lankford said he expected a drop in fuel prices this fall associated with the end of the summer driving season. But he also expressed concern that voters might grow accustomed to the higher gas prices, thereby allowing Obama to boast of the decline in prices before the election.
“I’m afraid we're going to set the same thing with gas prices where if we're down to $3.30 (a gallon), they're saying, hey, that's a good thing,” he said. “It does have the possibility of setting a new low and lulling people into that.”
There are other indications as to why Republicans might be taking a risk by betting the house on gas prices.
While voters call prices a serious issue, it ranks fourth -- at 8 percent -- among the most important priority among voters, according to the March NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. By comparison, 18 percent of Americans called energy and the cost of gas their top issue -- making it second most important -- in August of 2008, when prices were similarly high, and then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was voicing the slogan, “Drill, baby, drill!”
The administration hasn’t shown a willingness to sit back and concede the issue, either.
"Every time prices start to go up -- especially during an election year -- politicians, they start dusting off their 3-point plan for $2.00 gas," Obama said Thursday in Columbus, Ohio, mocking his Republican opponents. "They head down to the gas station and they make sure a few cameras are following them, and then they tell you how we’re going to have cheap gas forever if you just vote for them.  And it has been the same script for 30 years -- the same thing.  It has been like a bad re-run."
And liberal groups have come to the president’s defense, too.
“I think that the thing Americans understand is that giving oil companies everything they want is not going to solve our energy policies,” said Navin Nayak, the senior vice president for campaigns at the League of Conservation Voters.
Priorities USA Action, the pro-Obama super PAC, also went on offense by attacking Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney for raising fees on gas during his time as governor of Massachusetts.
For his part, Romney has called for the firing of Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar -- whom he dubbed the “gas hike trio.”
But in an effort to broaden his message beyond the exact price of gas (unlike rival Newt Gingrich, who’s premised his campaign on the promise of lowering gas prices to $2.50 a gallon if elected), Romney said he couldn’t promise to bring prices down.
“I'm not predicting they're going to go down to $2 per gallon. I know there are some who think that's possible. Anything's possible in this world, but I think gasoline prices are going to be high,” he said Friday on New Orleans’ WWL radio. “However, they don't have to be as high as we're seeing under this president, if we develop our own energy resources and provide them to the refiners ... in this nation.”
Romney’s comment belies the point, though, that gas prices are unlikely to go back to the lows they were at when Obama took office. The financial crisis and recession had driven prices to a relative low, though Republicans still figure to use that price against Obama despite the economic recovery.
“I think we just maintain the message,” Lankford said. “The easiest way to say it is that it was $1.87 when he took office.”

Bernanke’s comments spur strong rally; Dow surges 161 points

Brendan Mcdermid / REUTERS
Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
A word of caution about the economy from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke sent stocks soaring Monday.
Speaking at a conference in Arlington, Va., Bernanke said the U.S. economy needs to grow more quickly if it is to produce enough jobs to bring down the unemployment rate further. Instead of taking them as negative, investors saw Bernanke’s comments as evidence that the central bank is prepared to keep the cost of borrowing low, and that news boosted stocks across the board.
“Clearly, Bernanke is trying to tamp down expectations,” said Hugh Johnson, chief investment officer of Hugh Johnson Advisors in Albany, N.Y.
“To some, he seems to be suggesting that it’s very hard to reconcile the good news on employment with the performance of the economy,” he added. “So we may need more stimulus.”
Monday’s rally drove the market’s main stock indexes to their best gains in weeks. The market is now in track for its best first quarter since 1998, according to CNBC.
The Dow Jones industrial average closed the day with a gain of 161 points, or 1 percent, finishing just 11 points below its highest close of the year, seen on March 15.
The broader Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index surged 19 points, or 1,4 percent, to its highest close since May 2008, while the Nasdaq composite index jumped 55 points, or 1.8 percent, and hit a multi-year high. The tech-laden index has now risen for six straight weeks.
The healthcare sector was the strongest performer of the day, as the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday as justices began hearings on President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law.
Improving sentiment about the pace of economic growth has kept investors piling into equities so far this year, and investors and market watchers offered other reasons for the market’s continued strong performance Monday.
One put forward in The Wall Street Journal is that, as the debt debacle in Europe continues to fade and investors put the financial crises of recent years behind them, investors are taking on more risk instead of fixating on safe investments, such as bonds.
And Bloomberg News noted that hedge funds trailing the S&P 500-stock index over the last five months are giving up on bearish bets and buying stocks at the fastest rate in two years.
On the U.S. economic front, pending home sales slid 0.5 percent in February, according to the National Association of Realtors, confounding expectations for a rise of 1 percent. Equities were little impacted by the data.
Shares of Lions Gate Entertainment Corp rallied after the strong opening to its film "The Hunger Games," which made $214 million over the weekend globally.
Cal-Maine Foods Inc reported third-quarter earnings that fell from the prior year on rising feed costs, which the company sees persisting through the summer.
BATS Global Markets Inc on Sunday apologized for a system failure that caused shares in its own initial public offering to erroneously trade for less than a penny on Friday and resulted in Apple Inc's shares being temporarily halted.
BATS Chief Executive Joe Ratterman called the incident a "devastating moment," and said the company's withdrawn IPO was on hold "for the foreseeable future.
Reuters contributed to this report.
What’s driving the market’s rally? Share your thoughts on Facebook.