(Article in Humanevents)..For better or worse, many Americans invested a great deal of hope in President Obama’s election, and while we clearly can’t pass judgment on the entirety of Barack Obama’s presidency after just a hundred days, now seems like a reasonable time to take a step back and evaluate his administration to date.
....the level of debt that the Obama administration is encouraging will have dire consequences. according to the Congressional Budget Office the budget submitted by the President would double the national debt over the next decade. Think about what that means -- a debt that took us over 200 years to accrue will be twice as large just ten years from now. With debt levels of that nature you can paint a scary picture for things like the value of the dollar and the tax burden on future generations.
....So the bottom line is I’m not high on the policy component of President Obama’s first hundred days, and while I’d love to say I feel differently about the political front, unfortunately I can’t here either.
....While there’s clearly been a lot to disappoint in President Obama’s first hundred days, for conservatives there may indeed be a silver lining. It’s the notion that Newton’s Third Law -- for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction -- may not apply just to physics but to politics as well. We’ve seen some of that reaction with the Tea Party protests that rose up organically across this nation, and as the President continues to overreach conservatives have a real opportunity to present an agenda centered on fiscal sanity that will become increasingly attractive to more and more Americans.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Cantor: We will engage in a conversation with America
Eric Cantor: this group will focus on developing Republican ideas on energy, education, health care, national security and the economy.
" Today, we are launching the National Council for a New America (NCNA), a caucus of Congressional leaders gathering the expertise of national leaders and doers. We hope that will form the foundation of a concerted, policy-based forum to listen to, partner with, and empower the American people with ideas and solutions that speak directly to the needs of our great nation. This forum will engage in a conversation with America that seeks to remove ideological filters, addresses the realities we are confronting, and speaks to the challenges our citizens are facing".
" Today, we are launching the National Council for a New America (NCNA), a caucus of Congressional leaders gathering the expertise of national leaders and doers. We hope that will form the foundation of a concerted, policy-based forum to listen to, partner with, and empower the American people with ideas and solutions that speak directly to the needs of our great nation. This forum will engage in a conversation with America that seeks to remove ideological filters, addresses the realities we are confronting, and speaks to the challenges our citizens are facing".
Obama eyes second term, prime time speeches and townhall meetings are part of campaign strategy.
(CNNMoney.com) – President Obama has said if the economy doesn't turn around on his watch, voters won't give him a second term.
"If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition," he said in an NBC interview in February.
Policy experts agree Obama's presidency will be rated on the speed and depth of the economic recovery. But they think he may only have until mid-2010 to get the economy moving in the right direction before Americans start blaming him for what ails them.
"If we get back to an upward economy in 2010, it'll be good. But if we're in it [longer] … people's opinions will be formed. That's as much patience as Americans will have," said Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Reginald Jones senior fellow of the Peterson Institute.
And voters could take it out on Democrats in the November 2010 midterm congressional elections.
"Republicans could cut into Democratic majorities," said American University Professor Allan Lichtman, a political historian and presidential election expert.
"If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition," he said in an NBC interview in February.
Policy experts agree Obama's presidency will be rated on the speed and depth of the economic recovery. But they think he may only have until mid-2010 to get the economy moving in the right direction before Americans start blaming him for what ails them.
"If we get back to an upward economy in 2010, it'll be good. But if we're in it [longer] … people's opinions will be formed. That's as much patience as Americans will have," said Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Reginald Jones senior fellow of the Peterson Institute.
And voters could take it out on Democrats in the November 2010 midterm congressional elections.
"Republicans could cut into Democratic majorities," said American University Professor Allan Lichtman, a political historian and presidential election expert.
Palin is Twitting her way into Washington
(telegraph).Perhaps this is a tipping point for Twitter - conservative icon Governor Sarah Palin is now tweeting. Under the moniker @AKGovSarahPalin the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate has plunged into the social networking maelstrom.
Well, plunged is a bit of an exaggeration. More like dipping a toe in really. In the 14 hours or so since she's signed up she has sent three tweets. But there's certainly an appetite out there for all things Palin - in that time she's already gained over 5000 followers.
While the first tweet reads ominously corporate (declaring this is Palin's "official Twitter feed" from which "I'll provide updates on issues concerning Alaskans") the second one, encouragingly, accuses the AP of having "gravely misquoted my staff".
Republicans are gaining ground by Independents on Obama's Budget and More
This first Resurgent Republic survey of 1000 registered voters, conducted April 13-16, 2009, shows that President Obama remains quite popular, with 61% approving of his job performance and 32% disapproving so far. That is comparable to President George W. Bush’s job approval of 62 to 29 percent in the Gallup Poll on April of his first year in office.and lower than President Reagan’s in April after the attempt on his life (67%).
This survey verifies that America remains a center-right country. Voters prefer a smaller government with lower taxes over a larger government with higher taxes by a three-to-one margin. By a two-to-one margin, they think government should promote opportunity by fostering job growth, encouraging entrepreneurs, and allowing people to keep more of what they earn, rather than promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal.
Independents, who hold the balance of power in this electorate, are closer to Republicans than to Democrats on this issue. 56-33% oppose Obama's spending budget and the 1.4 Trillion deficit.
Republicans have far more to work with in the current environment than many suspect. The key to rebuilding a majority coalition is regaining the support of independents. Particularly on the overall philosophy of government and on national security, Republicans show signs of gaining ground.
This survey verifies that America remains a center-right country. Voters prefer a smaller government with lower taxes over a larger government with higher taxes by a three-to-one margin. By a two-to-one margin, they think government should promote opportunity by fostering job growth, encouraging entrepreneurs, and allowing people to keep more of what they earn, rather than promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal.
Independents, who hold the balance of power in this electorate, are closer to Republicans than to Democrats on this issue. 56-33% oppose Obama's spending budget and the 1.4 Trillion deficit.
Republicans have far more to work with in the current environment than many suspect. The key to rebuilding a majority coalition is regaining the support of independents. Particularly on the overall philosophy of government and on national security, Republicans show signs of gaining ground.
A Alternative Leader has emerged in 100 days
(thefix)Aside from Obama, who else won in the first 100 days? Our take -- gleaned from conversations with dozens of political operatives as well as our own observations -- is below:
Mitt Romney: The former governor of Massachusetts has done everything right in terms of positioning himself as the leading GOP contender against Obama in 2012. He kept his political team -- both in Washington and Boston -- largely intact, used his political action committee to flex his fundraising muscle and used his background in business to criticize the growth in government spending under the new administration. And, as the fight over health care begins to gear up over the summer and into the fall, Romney is already in place to emerge as the plan's leading GOP critic.
Mitt Romney: The former governor of Massachusetts has done everything right in terms of positioning himself as the leading GOP contender against Obama in 2012. He kept his political team -- both in Washington and Boston -- largely intact, used his political action committee to flex his fundraising muscle and used his background in business to criticize the growth in government spending under the new administration. And, as the fight over health care begins to gear up over the summer and into the fall, Romney is already in place to emerge as the plan's leading GOP critic.
Yes we can!! Romney and GOP Leaders Form 'National Council for a New America'
Looking to rebrand a struggling Republican Party, a group of party heavyweights including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) are launching a new group that will hold town halls around the country and look to produce GOP ideas on issues like education and health care.Republicans will announce today the creation of the "National Council for a New America," a group led by congressional party leaders that includes Bush, McCain, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal as its "national panel of experts."
"The NCNA will bring together citizens from across the country to begin a dialogue with the American people through a series of forums, town halls, and an online effort that will engage people in a discussion to meet our common challenges and build a stronger country through common-sense ideas," the letter says. "The NCNA will be a dynamic, forward-looking organization that will amplify the common-sense and wisdom of our fellow citizens through a grassroots dialogue with Republican leaders." The letter says the group is not "a Republican-only forum." But GOP sources said House Minority Whip Eric Cantor played a top role in crating it.
The group seems aimed at offering a conservative alternative at time when Democrats are lambasting the Republicans as the "Party of No" that simply attacks President Obama without offering policy ideas of its own. Its leadership does not include any Democrats. "We do this not just to offer an alternative point of view or to be disagreeable," the group's letter says. "Instead, we want to ask the American people what their hopes and dreams are. Since January, the President and the Democratic Majority in Congress have - rightfully so - put forward their plan for the future, now we must listen, learn and lead through an honest, open conversation with the American people that will result in building policy proposals that will yield the best results for our nation's long-term success."
The new group says it will focus on developing Republican ideas on energy, education, health care, national security and the economy. Its first town hall session will be Saturday at a restaurant in Northern Virginia. Cantor, Romney, Bush and other congressional leaders will attend.
"The NCNA will bring together citizens from across the country to begin a dialogue with the American people through a series of forums, town halls, and an online effort that will engage people in a discussion to meet our common challenges and build a stronger country through common-sense ideas," the letter says. "The NCNA will be a dynamic, forward-looking organization that will amplify the common-sense and wisdom of our fellow citizens through a grassroots dialogue with Republican leaders." The letter says the group is not "a Republican-only forum." But GOP sources said House Minority Whip Eric Cantor played a top role in crating it.
The group seems aimed at offering a conservative alternative at time when Democrats are lambasting the Republicans as the "Party of No" that simply attacks President Obama without offering policy ideas of its own. Its leadership does not include any Democrats. "We do this not just to offer an alternative point of view or to be disagreeable," the group's letter says. "Instead, we want to ask the American people what their hopes and dreams are. Since January, the President and the Democratic Majority in Congress have - rightfully so - put forward their plan for the future, now we must listen, learn and lead through an honest, open conversation with the American people that will result in building policy proposals that will yield the best results for our nation's long-term success."
The new group says it will focus on developing Republican ideas on energy, education, health care, national security and the economy. Its first town hall session will be Saturday at a restaurant in Northern Virginia. Cantor, Romney, Bush and other congressional leaders will attend.
What a Genius!! Obama creates 150,000 jobs while over 2 Million Americans lost jobs
During his 100 Day Press Conference Barack Obama bragged that his administration had created or saved 150,000 jobs.
"I especially want to thank Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, all of the members of Congress who worked so quickly and effectively to make this blueprint a reality.
This budget builds on the steps we've taken over the last 100 days to move this economy from recession to recovery and ultimately to prosperity.
We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs and provided a tax cut to 95 percent of all working families."
but here are the facts Mr. President:
The US economy lost 598,000 jobs in January.
The US economy lost 706,000 jobs in February.
The US economy lost 742,000 jobs in March.
So, in other words while Obama's America created or saved 150,000 jobs,America
has lost 2,046,000 jobs .
"I especially want to thank Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, all of the members of Congress who worked so quickly and effectively to make this blueprint a reality.
This budget builds on the steps we've taken over the last 100 days to move this economy from recession to recovery and ultimately to prosperity.
We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs and provided a tax cut to 95 percent of all working families."
but here are the facts Mr. President:
The US economy lost 598,000 jobs in January.
The US economy lost 706,000 jobs in February.
The US economy lost 742,000 jobs in March.
So, in other words while Obama's America created or saved 150,000 jobs,America
has lost 2,046,000 jobs .
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
RNC Directer Francis: The GOP is in a strong position; There is Hope and Obama is Beatable
(From Politico)..." Trevor Francis, the Republican National Committee’s communications director, said he has hopes for the days ahead, as Congress begins voting on the centerpieces of the Obama agenda. “He’s more popular than his policies and so as the focus turns to his policies, his popularity will diminish as well,” Francis said.
Several Republican officials said they expect the public statements from the party to get tougher in days ahead. “The GOP is moving from ‘shocked and awed’ into a realization that this guy makes a lot of mistakes and is beatable,” said one House Republican aide. This is “a presidency that makes major mistakes weekly and minor ones daily.”
“The GOP is in a strong position just months after the 2008 election,” he said. “[I]n less than 100 days, President Obama and congressional Democrats have disappointed all who believed the campaign promises of hope and change.
Several Republican officials said they expect the public statements from the party to get tougher in days ahead. “The GOP is moving from ‘shocked and awed’ into a realization that this guy makes a lot of mistakes and is beatable,” said one House Republican aide. This is “a presidency that makes major mistakes weekly and minor ones daily.”
“The GOP is in a strong position just months after the 2008 election,” he said. “[I]n less than 100 days, President Obama and congressional Democrats have disappointed all who believed the campaign promises of hope and change.
Obama think twice before you grab a candy! - Obama Fails When It Comes to Dentists
Only 30% of dentists approve of the job President Obama is doing, finds a survey by dental website The Wealthy Dentist. Moreover, over half of dentist respondents gave the President a grade of D or F. Dentists’ biggest political concerns are taxes, the economic stimulus plan, and health care.
Dentists tend to be relatively high-income small businesspeople, and previous surveys indicate that dentists as a group tend to be significantly more conservative than the country as a whole. Prior to the primaries, a Wealthy Dentist survey found Mitt Romney to be the favorite candidate of dentists.
Some urged patience before judging Obama’s policies. "It took a lot longer than 100 days to get us into this mess - it will take longer to get us out," said a Florida dentist. Agreed a Michigan dentist, "He has been handed a tough job by President Bush’s mismanagement and lack of relevant focus."
Others are certain the Obama administration will lead the US to disaster. "If we have another terrorist attack (God forbid), it will be Obama’s fault, pure and simple," declared a Florida dental office worker. "He is taking our country down a dark road," agreed another in Texas.
Dentists tend to be relatively high-income small businesspeople, and previous surveys indicate that dentists as a group tend to be significantly more conservative than the country as a whole. Prior to the primaries, a Wealthy Dentist survey found Mitt Romney to be the favorite candidate of dentists.
Some urged patience before judging Obama’s policies. "It took a lot longer than 100 days to get us into this mess - it will take longer to get us out," said a Florida dentist. Agreed a Michigan dentist, "He has been handed a tough job by President Bush’s mismanagement and lack of relevant focus."
Others are certain the Obama administration will lead the US to disaster. "If we have another terrorist attack (God forbid), it will be Obama’s fault, pure and simple," declared a Florida dental office worker. "He is taking our country down a dark road," agreed another in Texas.
Dick Morris:Obama's 100 days were the Seeds of His Own Destruction
(Townhall).When the Obama administration crashes and burns, with approval ratings that fall through the floor, political scientists can trace its demise to its first hundred days.The fact is that this president has moved on issue after issue in precisely the opposite direction of what the people want him to do.
Right now, Obama's ratings must be pleasing to his eye. Voters like him , and approve of his activism in the face of the economic crisis. While polls show big doubts about what he is doing, the overwhelming sense is to let him have his way and pray that it works.
But beneath this superficial support, Obama's specific policies run afoul of very deeply felt feelings by American voters. For example, the most recent Rasmussen Poll asked voters if they wanted an economic system of complete free enterprise or wanted more government involvement in managing the economy. By 77% to 19%, they voted against a government role.
And in the Fox News poll -- the very same survey that gave Obama a 62% approval and reported that 68% of voters are "satisfied" with his first hundred days -- voters supported a smaller government that offered fewer services over a larger government that provided more by 50 percent to 38 percent.
By 42% to 8% found that voters felt Obama had expanded government rather than contracted it,By 62% to 20%, they said government spending, under Obama, was "out of control."
So if voters differ so fundamentally with the president on the very essence of his program, why do they accord him high ratings? They are like the recently married bride who took her vows 100 days ago. It would be a disaster for her if she decides that she really doesn't like her husband. But she keeps noticing things about him that she can't stand. It will be a while before she walks out the door or even comes to terms with her own doubts, but it is probably inevitable that she will.
For Americans to conclude that they disapprove of their president in the midst of an earth-shaking crisis is very difficult. But as Obama's daily line moves from "I inherited this mess" to "there are faint signs of light," the clock starts ticking. If there is no recovery for the next six months -- and I don't think there will be -- Obama will inevitably become part of the problem, not part of the solution
Right now, Obama's ratings must be pleasing to his eye. Voters like him , and approve of his activism in the face of the economic crisis. While polls show big doubts about what he is doing, the overwhelming sense is to let him have his way and pray that it works.
But beneath this superficial support, Obama's specific policies run afoul of very deeply felt feelings by American voters. For example, the most recent Rasmussen Poll asked voters if they wanted an economic system of complete free enterprise or wanted more government involvement in managing the economy. By 77% to 19%, they voted against a government role.
And in the Fox News poll -- the very same survey that gave Obama a 62% approval and reported that 68% of voters are "satisfied" with his first hundred days -- voters supported a smaller government that offered fewer services over a larger government that provided more by 50 percent to 38 percent.
By 42% to 8% found that voters felt Obama had expanded government rather than contracted it,By 62% to 20%, they said government spending, under Obama, was "out of control."
So if voters differ so fundamentally with the president on the very essence of his program, why do they accord him high ratings? They are like the recently married bride who took her vows 100 days ago. It would be a disaster for her if she decides that she really doesn't like her husband. But she keeps noticing things about him that she can't stand. It will be a while before she walks out the door or even comes to terms with her own doubts, but it is probably inevitable that she will.
For Americans to conclude that they disapprove of their president in the midst of an earth-shaking crisis is very difficult. But as Obama's daily line moves from "I inherited this mess" to "there are faint signs of light," the clock starts ticking. If there is no recovery for the next six months -- and I don't think there will be -- Obama will inevitably become part of the problem, not part of the solution
24% African Americans and 72% White voters Dissaproave Obama
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 35% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-one percent (31%) Strongly Disapprove . On the Generic Congressional Ballot, Republicans hold a slight advantage for just the second time in more than five years of tracking.
Seventy-six percent (76%) of African-Americans Strongly Approve along with 28% of white voters and 36% of all other voters. Among men, the President’s reviews are evenly divided—34% Strongly Approve and 34% Strongly Disapprove. Women offer a more positive assessment—36% Strongly Approve and 28% Strongly Disapprove.
More: The black-white divide in Obama's popularity
Seventy-six percent (76%) of African-Americans Strongly Approve along with 28% of white voters and 36% of all other voters. Among men, the President’s reviews are evenly divided—34% Strongly Approve and 34% Strongly Disapprove. Women offer a more positive assessment—36% Strongly Approve and 28% Strongly Disapprove.
More: The black-white divide in Obama's popularity
Fred Thompson: Obama Gets An 'F' on First 100 Days , He Divided our Country as never before
Former Senator, TV star and presidential candidate Fred Thompson gives President Barack Obama a failing grade for his performance in his first 100 days in office.
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, the Tennessee Republican declared: “In the most important areas that affect our country, that is our economy and national security, I’d give him an F in both categories."
“Domestically he is leading us down the road to economic disaster . . . We’re going to be facing trillion-dollar deficits every year for as far as the eye can see. We cannot sustain that. He’s taken a tough situation and made it a whole lot worse.”
On the national security front, Obama “has given signs of weakness in his resolve to defend our country,” Thompson said.
“He takes lectures from foreign dictators. He does things that harm our national security, that harm our CIA, that will divide our country as we’ve never been divided before.”
Summing up, Thompson said: “That’s a very bad record, and unfortunately we’re just seeing the beginning of it.
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, the Tennessee Republican declared: “In the most important areas that affect our country, that is our economy and national security, I’d give him an F in both categories."
“Domestically he is leading us down the road to economic disaster . . . We’re going to be facing trillion-dollar deficits every year for as far as the eye can see. We cannot sustain that. He’s taken a tough situation and made it a whole lot worse.”
On the national security front, Obama “has given signs of weakness in his resolve to defend our country,” Thompson said.
“He takes lectures from foreign dictators. He does things that harm our national security, that harm our CIA, that will divide our country as we’ve never been divided before.”
Summing up, Thompson said: “That’s a very bad record, and unfortunately we’re just seeing the beginning of it.
Schmidt: Romney's the 2012 frontrunner: "He is a far stronger candidate, prospectively".
(gop12).Hugh Hewitt had a fascinating chat yesterday with former McCain strategist, Steve Schmidt, as the two touched base on Sarah Palin, the general election, and who's likely to emerge as the GOP nominee in 2012.
HH: Let me ask you just as a professional, not your hope for, not your wishes and dreams, who would you have to predict right now is going to be the Republican nominee in 2012?
Steve Schmidt: "If I had to bet money on it, if I had to bet money on it today, you’d have to say that the people that I think look very good, very strong right now are Governor Romney, Governor Huntsman. I think Newt Gingrich, should he run, is going to be a very formidable, very formidable candidate..... in that instance, in this instance, it would be Governor Romney. I thought he was a very scary opponent looking from the other side of the table in that he was almost like a learning organism at the end. He just kept getting better week by week by week, and kept becoming stronger.... I think Mitt Romney is a candidate, is a far stronger candidate, prospectively, for the ’12 race because of his experience in ’08 than he was heading into the ’08 race".
Full interview here
HH: Let me ask you just as a professional, not your hope for, not your wishes and dreams, who would you have to predict right now is going to be the Republican nominee in 2012?
Steve Schmidt: "If I had to bet money on it, if I had to bet money on it today, you’d have to say that the people that I think look very good, very strong right now are Governor Romney, Governor Huntsman. I think Newt Gingrich, should he run, is going to be a very formidable, very formidable candidate..... in that instance, in this instance, it would be Governor Romney. I thought he was a very scary opponent looking from the other side of the table in that he was almost like a learning organism at the end. He just kept getting better week by week by week, and kept becoming stronger.... I think Mitt Romney is a candidate, is a far stronger candidate, prospectively, for the ’12 race because of his experience in ’08 than he was heading into the ’08 race".
Full interview here
Obama's Photo New York Flight Cost taxpayers $328,835
(Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama ordered a review of a publicity-photo shoot with one of the planes that serves as Air Force One that cost taxpayers $328,835 and caused a furor in New York City.
Obama said he wasn’t informed in advance of yesterday’s low-altitude flight over New York Harbor, which rattled windows in New York’s financial district and prompted some office workers to flee buildings in fear it was a terrorist attack. “It was a mistake,” Obama said today before a meeting at FBI headquarters in Washington. “It will not happen again.”
The flight by the VC-25, a modified Boeing Co. 747, and two F-16 fighter jets cost $328,835, Air Force spokeswoman Vicki Stein said.
That includes $300,658 for the larger plane, which flew a three-hour mission, and about $28,178 for the F-16 jets, which flew 1.8 hours each, Stein said in an e-mailed statement.
Obama said he wasn’t informed in advance of yesterday’s low-altitude flight over New York Harbor, which rattled windows in New York’s financial district and prompted some office workers to flee buildings in fear it was a terrorist attack. “It was a mistake,” Obama said today before a meeting at FBI headquarters in Washington. “It will not happen again.”
The flight by the VC-25, a modified Boeing Co. 747, and two F-16 fighter jets cost $328,835, Air Force spokeswoman Vicki Stein said.
That includes $300,658 for the larger plane, which flew a three-hour mission, and about $28,178 for the F-16 jets, which flew 1.8 hours each, Stein said in an e-mailed statement.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Snowe: GOP has to welcome moderates; Specter Switch "Devastating"
(Huffingtonpost).Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, one of the moderate Republicans in the Senate, said Tuesday that Arlen Specter's abandonment of the GOP is "devastating," both "personally and I think for the party."
"I've always been deeply concerned about the views of the Republican Party nationally in terms of their exclusionary policies and views towards moderate Republicans," said Snowe, who has been approached, she said, by Democrats in the past about switching parties.
Specter's switch to the Democratic Party "underscores the blunt reality" that the GOP is not a welcome place for moderates, she said.
So far, she said, she's staying put. "I believe in the traditional tenets of the Republican Party: strong national defense, fiscal responsibility, individual opportunity. I haven't abandoned those principles that have been the essence of the Republican Party. I think the Republican Party has abandoned those principles.
She added that being a Republican is simply part of who she is. "It's my ethnic heritage, Spartan side, that continues to fight," she said.
"I've always been deeply concerned about the views of the Republican Party nationally in terms of their exclusionary policies and views towards moderate Republicans," said Snowe, who has been approached, she said, by Democrats in the past about switching parties.
Specter's switch to the Democratic Party "underscores the blunt reality" that the GOP is not a welcome place for moderates, she said.
So far, she said, she's staying put. "I believe in the traditional tenets of the Republican Party: strong national defense, fiscal responsibility, individual opportunity. I haven't abandoned those principles that have been the essence of the Republican Party. I think the Republican Party has abandoned those principles.
She added that being a Republican is simply part of who she is. "It's my ethnic heritage, Spartan side, that continues to fight," she said.
A Oppostion requires a 'Oppostion leader'
As i expressed my concern after our defeat in the general Election that although we lost the Battle and our Leadership was not chosen to represent the Nation and lead this country in the next 4 years, we still have our opinion and our stance and views should still be represented and our voice should still be heard, The absurd in the American politics that the opposition party has a lack of leadership until its primaries is not acceptable.
These are different times and with a President that has all the power and is using it for his favor,and a Party that is ruling in both Houses makes it difficult for us voters to express our concern and halt partisan decisions ,Our Leaders in Congress are doing a great job but that is not enough, in this televised century we have to or elect or agree on 1 Person that will be weighed in as the Opposition leader and his voice will be the party's voice, in order to build up the party as a alternative voice and we have to throw our full support to the leader to build up the reins .
We the Republican voters are not so popular as Rush or Hannity or any other Radio host or public Figure ,and our voice ought and deserves to be heard and represented too.
These are different times and with a President that has all the power and is using it for his favor,and a Party that is ruling in both Houses makes it difficult for us voters to express our concern and halt partisan decisions ,Our Leaders in Congress are doing a great job but that is not enough, in this televised century we have to or elect or agree on 1 Person that will be weighed in as the Opposition leader and his voice will be the party's voice, in order to build up the party as a alternative voice and we have to throw our full support to the leader to build up the reins .
We the Republican voters are not so popular as Rush or Hannity or any other Radio host or public Figure ,and our voice ought and deserves to be heard and represented too.
Republicans Top Democrats on Generic Congressional Ballot, GOP leads by 3
For just the second time in more than five years of daily or weekly tracking, Republicans now lead Democrats in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 41% would vote for their district’s Republican candidate while 38% would choose the Democrat. Thirty-one percent (31%) of conservative Democrats said they would vote for their district’s Republican candidate.
Overall, the GOP gained two points this week, while the Democrats lost a point in support. Still, it’s important to note that the GOP’s improved position comes primarily from falling Democratic support. Democrats are currently at their lowest level of support in the past year while Republicans are at the high water mark.
Over the past year, Democratic support has ranged from a low of 38% to a high of 50%. In that same time period, Republicans have been preferred by 34% to 41% of voters nationwide.
Democrats began the year holding a six- or seven-point lead over the GOP for the first several weeks of 2009. That began to slip in early February and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since then, the results have ranged from dead even to a four point lead for the Democrats.
Men now favor the GOP by a 45% to 34% margin. Women prefer the Democrats by a 42% to 38% margin.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 41% would vote for their district’s Republican candidate while 38% would choose the Democrat. Thirty-one percent (31%) of conservative Democrats said they would vote for their district’s Republican candidate.
Overall, the GOP gained two points this week, while the Democrats lost a point in support. Still, it’s important to note that the GOP’s improved position comes primarily from falling Democratic support. Democrats are currently at their lowest level of support in the past year while Republicans are at the high water mark.
Over the past year, Democratic support has ranged from a low of 38% to a high of 50%. In that same time period, Republicans have been preferred by 34% to 41% of voters nationwide.
Democrats began the year holding a six- or seven-point lead over the GOP for the first several weeks of 2009. That began to slip in early February and the Republicans actually took a two-point lead for a single week in the middle of March. Since then, the results have ranged from dead even to a four point lead for the Democrats.
Men now favor the GOP by a 45% to 34% margin. Women prefer the Democrats by a 42% to 38% margin.
Steele to Specter:"Your mama didn't raise you this way", Optimistic "get ready baby, we're coming after you"!!
CNN) — A heated Michael Steele told CNN Tuesday that it was "not only disrespectful, but downright rude" of Specter to make this decision after the national party made it clear it would stand behind him in a contentious primary fight.
"[National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John] Cornyn went out on the line for this man," he said. "For the senator to flip the bird back to Senator Cornyn and the Republican Senate Leadership, a team that stood by him, who went to the bat for him in 2004, to save his hide is not only disrespectful but down right rude,"
"I'm sure his mama didn't raise him this way," Steele added.
Steele, who said Specter had not given the party leadership a heads up about his decision, also expressed confidence the Pennsylvania senator would either lose a Democratic primary in his home state or the general election to the eventual Republican candidate.
"I seriously doubt he'll have a scot-free ride on the Democratic side no matter what kind of deal the trial lawyers and Democratic Party have made," Steele said. "[Pennsylvania] Gov. Ed Rendell may not run for the U.S. Senate, but a lot of congressmen will look at that seat — this is an open seat for the Democrats."
"If Sen. Specter survives in the fall — get ready to go to the mat, baby, because we're coming after you and taking you out," added Steele.
"[National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John] Cornyn went out on the line for this man," he said. "For the senator to flip the bird back to Senator Cornyn and the Republican Senate Leadership, a team that stood by him, who went to the bat for him in 2004, to save his hide is not only disrespectful but down right rude,"
"I'm sure his mama didn't raise him this way," Steele added.
Steele, who said Specter had not given the party leadership a heads up about his decision, also expressed confidence the Pennsylvania senator would either lose a Democratic primary in his home state or the general election to the eventual Republican candidate.
"I seriously doubt he'll have a scot-free ride on the Democratic side no matter what kind of deal the trial lawyers and Democratic Party have made," Steele said. "[Pennsylvania] Gov. Ed Rendell may not run for the U.S. Senate, but a lot of congressmen will look at that seat — this is an open seat for the Democrats."
"If Sen. Specter survives in the fall — get ready to go to the mat, baby, because we're coming after you and taking you out," added Steele.
Fiasco!! Did DeMint's endorsement of Toomey set off Specter?
(Examiner Columnist).Last Thursday night on the Senate floor, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., told Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, then still a Republican, that DeMint would be supporting Specter’s rival, former Rep. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., in next year’s Senate Republican primary. DeMint says Specter “pretty much cut me off and said, ‘I’ve heard enough.’”
DeMint wouldn’t speculate whether this conversation spurred Specter to switch parties, but the conversation came within hours of the release of a poll showing Toomey leading Specter among primary voters 51 percent to 30 percent. “We knew Pat was going to win the primary,” DeMint said in a Capitol Hill interview Tuesday, minutes after Specter announced his move. “This [party switch] shouldn’t surprise anyone. It was a clever political move.”
DeMint had not yet gone public with his support for Toomey by the time Specter switched.
DeMint said Specter's switch “shows that there were not principles attaching Arlen to the Republican Party, but the Republican Party was the means to get elected.”
DeMint continued: “I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don’t have a set of beliefs.”
Toomey had speculated in an interview with National Review's David Freddoso that Specter might leave the party before the primary, because Pennsylvania has a “sore loser law” that prevents primary losers from running for the same office on a different party line.
DeMint wouldn’t speculate whether this conversation spurred Specter to switch parties, but the conversation came within hours of the release of a poll showing Toomey leading Specter among primary voters 51 percent to 30 percent. “We knew Pat was going to win the primary,” DeMint said in a Capitol Hill interview Tuesday, minutes after Specter announced his move. “This [party switch] shouldn’t surprise anyone. It was a clever political move.”
DeMint had not yet gone public with his support for Toomey by the time Specter switched.
DeMint said Specter's switch “shows that there were not principles attaching Arlen to the Republican Party, but the Republican Party was the means to get elected.”
DeMint continued: “I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don’t have a set of beliefs.”
Toomey had speculated in an interview with National Review's David Freddoso that Specter might leave the party before the primary, because Pennsylvania has a “sore loser law” that prevents primary losers from running for the same office on a different party line.
Senator Arlen Specter’s (R-PA) decision - a short-term disappointment
NRSC Press Office – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), issued the following statement today regarding U.S. Senator Arlen Specter’s (R-PA) decision to switch political parties in the face of a seemingly insurmountable bid for re-election next year:
“Senator Specter’s decision today represents the height of political self-preservation. While this presents a short-term disappointment, voters next year will have a clear choice to cast their ballots for a potentially unbridled Democrat super-majority versus the system of checks-and-balances that Americans deserv
“Senator Specter’s decision today represents the height of political self-preservation. While this presents a short-term disappointment, voters next year will have a clear choice to cast their ballots for a potentially unbridled Democrat super-majority versus the system of checks-and-balances that Americans deserv
GOP unburdens of responsibility to Obama's Spending
(CNN) – Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter intends to switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party Tuesday.
A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.
Specter, a five-term Senate veteran, was expected to face a very tough primary challenge in 2010 from former Rep. Pat Toomey, who nearly defeated Specter in the Pennsylvania GOP Senate primary in 2004.
Numerous Republicans are very angry with Specter over his recent vote in support of President Barack Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
Specter was one of only three GOP senators who voted for the measure.
OFA Note: Now as we stand Strong ,United and Fight for our beliefs and express the voice of the American People , we will Emerge bigger and stronger in '10 and '12 !
A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.
Specter, a five-term Senate veteran, was expected to face a very tough primary challenge in 2010 from former Rep. Pat Toomey, who nearly defeated Specter in the Pennsylvania GOP Senate primary in 2004.
Numerous Republicans are very angry with Specter over his recent vote in support of President Barack Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan.
Specter was one of only three GOP senators who voted for the measure.
OFA Note: Now as we stand Strong ,United and Fight for our beliefs and express the voice of the American People , we will Emerge bigger and stronger in '10 and '12 !
MITT HAS IT! Romney's speaking abilities (without a teleprompter) will inflame his presidential bid
(Ryan Cooper-news-leader).The pandemonium of the thousands of young people on their feet, cheering their country, could be felt through the television. I couldn't flip the channel off of C-SPAN until the end of the speech.
President Barack Obama is a good speaker, but he's got nothing on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who hit a grand slam at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference. His passionate delivery has sparked interest in a possible 2012 run at the White House.
Speaking skills can make or break a candidate. Obama went from an unknown Illinois state senator to a presidential contender after delivering a powerful keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
The anticipation of actor and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson proved to be much bigger than the candidate, who quickly lost support after a series of lackluster speeches. Even Romney's speeches in 2008 were wonkish and too bogged down with details.
Romney and Thompson lost votes to their major rival on the right, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. The former Baptist preacher could whip a crowd into an Evangelical fervor of "amens," launching his dark horse campaign into the top-tier of candidates.
With a better delivery, Romney will be a better candidate in 2012 than in 2008. It also doesn't hurt that he finished second in the previous Republican primary races.
Voters are more willing to give second-place primary winners a second chance over losing vice presidential candidates. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and John McCain each lost their first time before becoming the Republican nominee.
The biggest reason why Republicans will pick Romney over Huckabee or Palin is electability. Romney can win blue states without alienating red-state voter.
President Barack Obama is a good speaker, but he's got nothing on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who hit a grand slam at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference. His passionate delivery has sparked interest in a possible 2012 run at the White House.
Speaking skills can make or break a candidate. Obama went from an unknown Illinois state senator to a presidential contender after delivering a powerful keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
The anticipation of actor and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson proved to be much bigger than the candidate, who quickly lost support after a series of lackluster speeches. Even Romney's speeches in 2008 were wonkish and too bogged down with details.
Romney and Thompson lost votes to their major rival on the right, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. The former Baptist preacher could whip a crowd into an Evangelical fervor of "amens," launching his dark horse campaign into the top-tier of candidates.
With a better delivery, Romney will be a better candidate in 2012 than in 2008. It also doesn't hurt that he finished second in the previous Republican primary races.
Voters are more willing to give second-place primary winners a second chance over losing vice presidential candidates. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and John McCain each lost their first time before becoming the Republican nominee.
The biggest reason why Republicans will pick Romney over Huckabee or Palin is electability. Romney can win blue states without alienating red-state voter.
Glimpses of Unity -- as GOP Fills New Role as Opposition
(Parts from ABC).If the first 100 days are a test of a new president, they're a major exam for an opposition party -- particularly one that's coming off eight years in control of the White House.
Here are 11 key moments from the first 100 days of Republicans as opposition party against the White House
I will bring out just a few significant points:
No. 1: United Vote - It was only Day 9 of the Obama presidency, but it would mark the defining moment for the Republican opposition of the first 100 days, Every single Republican in the House voted against the $789 billion economic stimulus plan, despite an intense lobbying push by the Obama White House to achieve a bipartisan victory on his first major legislative priority,The remarkable display of unity was a significant victory for House Republican Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va. -- one of the party's new young faces.
It was also an embarrassment to a president who seemed to try everything to get the support of at a least a few moderate Republicans.
No. 2: Tea Time - Technically, the massive anti-tax, anti-spending Tax Day protests had nothing to do with the Republican Party.
But the grassroots fervor behind by the "tea party" protests showed the potential of conservative online organizing, with anger at President Obama and Democrats in Congress bubbling over at sites nationwide.
It's not yet clear whether the outrage can be channeled in something more than protests, or even whether the turnout can be replicated. And it's a force that Republicans are eyeing warily, with its anti-incumbent tones potentially dangerous to members of both parties.
Still, for a party that would love to have an answer to the left's MoveOn.org, the protests were heartening.
No. 3: Pelosi's Proclamation - Just three days into the new presidency, a Democrat did more for Republican unity than any GOP leader.
With Capitol Hill consumed by the president's call for a massive stimulus bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced that House Democrats had gone forward and crafted a measure without Republican input.
"Yes, we wrote the bill," Pelosi declared. "Yes, we won the election.",With those words, the seeds of Republican opposition were planted.
Here are 11 key moments from the first 100 days of Republicans as opposition party against the White House
I will bring out just a few significant points:
No. 1: United Vote - It was only Day 9 of the Obama presidency, but it would mark the defining moment for the Republican opposition of the first 100 days, Every single Republican in the House voted against the $789 billion economic stimulus plan, despite an intense lobbying push by the Obama White House to achieve a bipartisan victory on his first major legislative priority,The remarkable display of unity was a significant victory for House Republican Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va. -- one of the party's new young faces.
It was also an embarrassment to a president who seemed to try everything to get the support of at a least a few moderate Republicans.
No. 2: Tea Time - Technically, the massive anti-tax, anti-spending Tax Day protests had nothing to do with the Republican Party.
But the grassroots fervor behind by the "tea party" protests showed the potential of conservative online organizing, with anger at President Obama and Democrats in Congress bubbling over at sites nationwide.
It's not yet clear whether the outrage can be channeled in something more than protests, or even whether the turnout can be replicated. And it's a force that Republicans are eyeing warily, with its anti-incumbent tones potentially dangerous to members of both parties.
Still, for a party that would love to have an answer to the left's MoveOn.org, the protests were heartening.
No. 3: Pelosi's Proclamation - Just three days into the new presidency, a Democrat did more for Republican unity than any GOP leader.
With Capitol Hill consumed by the president's call for a massive stimulus bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced that House Democrats had gone forward and crafted a measure without Republican input.
"Yes, we wrote the bill," Pelosi declared. "Yes, we won the election.",With those words, the seeds of Republican opposition were planted.
Gov. Mitt Romney at a Chicago Club Reception:The American People are not as Dumb as Obama thinks
Our message is:"We Believe in the Individual"
FOX Won't Air Obama's 100 Day Press Conference-- Will Show "Lie to Me" Instead, Other networks to air Obama's "Lie to YOU"
The AP reports that Fox has decided to stick with its regular line-up on Wednesday, meaning it won't air President Obama's prime-time news conference marking his 100th day in office. Instead, viewers will see an episode of "Lie to Me." ABC, CBS, and NBC will be airing the press conference.
Gov. Rick Perry and radio hosts take critical look at Obama
GARLAND — Gov. Rick Perry joined three conservative talk-radio hosts Monday for a critical assessment of President Barack Obama's first 100 days in office.
With about 1,500 people in a small indoor sports arena, Perry promised an objective discussion of the new presidency. But he soon said that Washington was "carving away" liberties, expanding government "regardless of what we may think about it" and intruding on free enterprise "like never before."
Monday, April 27, 2009
BORN AGAIN AMERICAN - A harvest of the spirit has begun
Born Again American is committed to the rebirth and re-expression of citizenship through informed and thoughtful activism. It is an initiative of Declare Yourself, a national non-partisan, non-profit (501(c)3) organization dedicated to increasing young voter participation and civic involvement. Declare Yourself’s on-line voter registration tool has been used by almost four million people since 2004. Declare Yourself grew out of the 2003’s Declaration of Independence Road Trip that toured an original 1776 copy of the Declaration to schools, town halls, and other locations all over the country.
Sign the pledge here
28% of Republicans still approave Obama's job handling
(CNN) — A new national poll suggests that President Barack Obama is personally more popular than his policies.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, released Monday, also indicates that 63 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is handling his duties as president. One in three questioned in the poll disapprove.
Democrats overwhelming approve of how Obama is handling his job as president; 61 percent of independents agree. Only 28 percent of Republicans say the president is doing a good job in office.
"Americans have two different assessments of President Obama. One, personal. The other, policy," says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider. "What does the public find most controversial about President Obama? His policies, much more than his personal qualities."
OFA Note:The GOP leadership has still a lot of work to do to convince its voters to oppose Obama's policies as he is trying to bond them with his personality.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, released Monday, also indicates that 63 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is handling his duties as president. One in three questioned in the poll disapprove.
Democrats overwhelming approve of how Obama is handling his job as president; 61 percent of independents agree. Only 28 percent of Republicans say the president is doing a good job in office.
"Americans have two different assessments of President Obama. One, personal. The other, policy," says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider. "What does the public find most controversial about President Obama? His policies, much more than his personal qualities."
OFA Note:The GOP leadership has still a lot of work to do to convince its voters to oppose Obama's policies as he is trying to bond them with his personality.
It's the Media , Stupid!
(Howard Kurtz-WAPO).The networks have given President Obama more coverage than George W. Bush and Bill Clinton combined in their first months — and more positive assessments to boot.
In a study to be released today, the Center for Media and Public Affairs and Chapman University found the nightly newscasts devoting nearly 28 hours to Obama’s presidency in the first 50 days. (Bush, by contrast, got nearly eight hours.) Fifty-eight percent of the evaluations of Obama were positive on the ABC, CBS and NBC broadcasts, compared with 33 percent positive in the comparable period of Bush’s tenure and 44 percent positive for Clinton.
On Fox News, by contrast, only 13 percent of the assessments of Obama were positive on the first half of Bret Baier’s “Special Report,” which most resembles a newscast. The president got far better treatment in the New York Times, where 73 percent of the assessments in front-page pieces were positive.
Footnote: Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, for his part, gives White House reporters "a strong A," telling CNN's Wolf Blitzer that they ask "tough questions each and every day." (LOL)
In a study to be released today, the Center for Media and Public Affairs and Chapman University found the nightly newscasts devoting nearly 28 hours to Obama’s presidency in the first 50 days. (Bush, by contrast, got nearly eight hours.) Fifty-eight percent of the evaluations of Obama were positive on the ABC, CBS and NBC broadcasts, compared with 33 percent positive in the comparable period of Bush’s tenure and 44 percent positive for Clinton.
On Fox News, by contrast, only 13 percent of the assessments of Obama were positive on the first half of Bret Baier’s “Special Report,” which most resembles a newscast. The president got far better treatment in the New York Times, where 73 percent of the assessments in front-page pieces were positive.
Footnote: Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, for his part, gives White House reporters "a strong A," telling CNN's Wolf Blitzer that they ask "tough questions each and every day." (LOL)
NY Rep. Anthony Weiner Criticizes Obama for 'Bow' to Saudi Leader
(politickerny).New York Rep. Anthony Weiner reportedly criticized President Obama's apparent bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, which the White House denied was meant as a bow.
Weiner told a conservative, pro-Israel group that "until Saudi Arabia changed its behavior, it shouldn't be hand-held by president Bush or ‘bowed to by President Obama,'" former New York Sun editor Ira Stoll reports.
"They are not our friends," Weiner said.
Weiner told a conservative, pro-Israel group that "until Saudi Arabia changed its behavior, it shouldn't be hand-held by president Bush or ‘bowed to by President Obama,'" former New York Sun editor Ira Stoll reports.
"They are not our friends," Weiner said.
Who Bought him the Teleprompter ? - Reid says Obama told him, 'I have a gift'
(AP).Everyone knows President Barack Obama can deliver a great speech, including the president himself, according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
The paperback version of Reid's book, "The Good Fight," is coming out May 5 with an epilogue called "The Obama Era." Reid said he was impressed when Obama, then a freshman senator from Illinois, delivered a speech about President George W. Bush's war policy.
Reid, D-Nev., writes: "'That speech was phenomenal, Barack,' I told him. And I will never forget his response. Without the barest hint of braggadocio or conceit, and with what I would describe as deep humility, he said quietly: 'I have a gift, Harry.'"
The paperback version of Reid's book, "The Good Fight," is coming out May 5 with an epilogue called "The Obama Era." Reid said he was impressed when Obama, then a freshman senator from Illinois, delivered a speech about President George W. Bush's war policy.
Reid, D-Nev., writes: "'That speech was phenomenal, Barack,' I told him. And I will never forget his response. Without the barest hint of braggadocio or conceit, and with what I would describe as deep humility, he said quietly: 'I have a gift, Harry.'"
Fred Thompson calls Obama "NAIVE,ARROGANT,INEPT"
Former Senator, TV star and presidential candidate Fred Thompson tells Newsmax that President Barack Obama is revealing his “naivete, ineptitude and arrogance” as he deals with matters of national security.
The Tennessee Republican said the “dogs of war have been loosed” over left-wing attempts to single out Bush-era officials for prosecution relating to the treatment of detainees.
“This was set in motion when the president first decided to release” CIA memos on interrogation techniques used on terrorist suspects, Thompson told Newsmax.
“There was no purpose in doing that except to make him look good internationally and to the left wing here at home,” he said. “It did a lot of damage.
“In one stroke of a pen he declassified top-secret documents that people would otherwise go to jail for releasing. It gave al-Qaida and the Taliban a blueprint as to the outer limits of our interrogation techniques.
“We have to remember that [the techniques were used] in the aftermath of 9/11. Congress was briefed on these techniques. Some of them asked if they were really going far enough to get what they needed to get, and it was approved at high levels in the administration.
“They carefully crafted them as best they could to not go too far, and to provide safeguards when they were carrying out these admittedly rough techniques on these people who had this vital information.
“So now we’re really talking about a war crimes tribunal, which this country has never done. We’ve never brought to criminal court prior administrations in this country.
“Harry Truman could have been accused of war crimes, I suppose, for dropping the bombs. President Obama authorized the killing of those three [pirates] in the Indian Ocean not too long ago. Prosecuting these people under these circumstances is something you hear about in banana republics and third-world countries, not the United States of America.
“The president’s opened up a terrible Pandora’s Box and there’s going to be a price to pay before this thing is ended.”
“We elected someone who didn’t have two minutes’ worth of experience with regard to matters concerning national security. Now he’s cast in this position and he’s making decisions that are going to have far-reaching ramifications not only abroad, and not only with our enemies, but in dividing our country even further here at home in ways I don’t think we’ve ever been divided before".
The Tennessee Republican said the “dogs of war have been loosed” over left-wing attempts to single out Bush-era officials for prosecution relating to the treatment of detainees.
“This was set in motion when the president first decided to release” CIA memos on interrogation techniques used on terrorist suspects, Thompson told Newsmax.
“There was no purpose in doing that except to make him look good internationally and to the left wing here at home,” he said. “It did a lot of damage.
“In one stroke of a pen he declassified top-secret documents that people would otherwise go to jail for releasing. It gave al-Qaida and the Taliban a blueprint as to the outer limits of our interrogation techniques.
“We have to remember that [the techniques were used] in the aftermath of 9/11. Congress was briefed on these techniques. Some of them asked if they were really going far enough to get what they needed to get, and it was approved at high levels in the administration.
“They carefully crafted them as best they could to not go too far, and to provide safeguards when they were carrying out these admittedly rough techniques on these people who had this vital information.
“So now we’re really talking about a war crimes tribunal, which this country has never done. We’ve never brought to criminal court prior administrations in this country.
“Harry Truman could have been accused of war crimes, I suppose, for dropping the bombs. President Obama authorized the killing of those three [pirates] in the Indian Ocean not too long ago. Prosecuting these people under these circumstances is something you hear about in banana republics and third-world countries, not the United States of America.
“The president’s opened up a terrible Pandora’s Box and there’s going to be a price to pay before this thing is ended.”
“We elected someone who didn’t have two minutes’ worth of experience with regard to matters concerning national security. Now he’s cast in this position and he’s making decisions that are going to have far-reaching ramifications not only abroad, and not only with our enemies, but in dividing our country even further here at home in ways I don’t think we’ve ever been divided before".
Mr. President, we offered you ideas on the stimulus plan directly, and they were ignored completely
At the White House meeting — Cantor was the last of the Republican leaders to arrive — Obama brought up the letter and noted that not a single House Republican had backed his economic stimulus bill. According to a firsthand account of the meeting, Cantor took exception: “With all due respect, Mr. President, we offered you ideas on the stimulus plan directly, and they were ignored completely.”
Cantor suggested that if he were to view the stimulus negotiations through a partisan lens, he would argue Democrats started the “party of no” name-calling about the same time that Obama was meeting with House Republicans to discuss the stimulus plan.
In response, the president reminded Cantor that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had urged House Republicans to unite in opposition to his stimulus plans even before they had met with him to discuss it.
Obama ultimately reiterated his commitment to reach across the aisle, a participant in the meeting said. At that, Cantor brought up Obama’s request that his Cabinet secretaries find $100 million in cost savings. That was a “good start,” Cantor told the president, but he added, “We could do more.”
Obama asked Cantor to present him with a list of places where the federal government could save more money. The self-described conservative eagerly agreed.
“You can expect us to have something very soon,” Cantor said, explaining that he’s “looking for wherever there is waste or duplicative spending.”
Obama pointedly reminded Cantor that he was the president — and that he reserves the right to disagree with whatever cuts the Republican whip recommends...
There’s room for compromise. During the meeting, Cantor told Obama and the assembled congressional leaders that Americans are growing increasingly frustrated by the government’s size, scope and management decisions. Obama acknowledged that, in recent weeks, he has received tea bags from Americans upset by the government’s decision to spend trillions of dollars shoring up the economy.
Cantor suggested that if he were to view the stimulus negotiations through a partisan lens, he would argue Democrats started the “party of no” name-calling about the same time that Obama was meeting with House Republicans to discuss the stimulus plan.
In response, the president reminded Cantor that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had urged House Republicans to unite in opposition to his stimulus plans even before they had met with him to discuss it.
Obama ultimately reiterated his commitment to reach across the aisle, a participant in the meeting said. At that, Cantor brought up Obama’s request that his Cabinet secretaries find $100 million in cost savings. That was a “good start,” Cantor told the president, but he added, “We could do more.”
Obama asked Cantor to present him with a list of places where the federal government could save more money. The self-described conservative eagerly agreed.
“You can expect us to have something very soon,” Cantor said, explaining that he’s “looking for wherever there is waste or duplicative spending.”
Obama pointedly reminded Cantor that he was the president — and that he reserves the right to disagree with whatever cuts the Republican whip recommends...
There’s room for compromise. During the meeting, Cantor told Obama and the assembled congressional leaders that Americans are growing increasingly frustrated by the government’s size, scope and management decisions. Obama acknowledged that, in recent weeks, he has received tea bags from Americans upset by the government’s decision to spend trillions of dollars shoring up the economy.
Obama Talks to TelePrompter: "Speed Up"
(Politico).President Obama’s speech at the National Academy of Sciences Monday morning hit a brief snag when Obama got ahead of his script.
Laying his plan for a President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Obama began to name the members of PCAST listed in his prepared remarks – before realizing he’d already introduced them, earlier in his speech.
“In addition to John – sorry, the – I just noticed I jumped the gun here,” Obama said, pausing for several seconds as he looked at the prompter. “Go ahead. Move it up. I had already introduced all you guys.”
The audience, which gave the president a warm reception, responded with a quiet laugh.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
George Will: Obama's first 100 days push Romney to the Top on '12
George Will, Sunday on This Week with George Stephanopoulos:
“Four years from today we are battering on about the first 100 days of [Obama’s] Republican successor, President Romney…”
“Four years from today we are battering on about the first 100 days of [Obama’s] Republican successor, President Romney…”
Mccain on 'Face the Nation':Its time to move forward
"First of all, let me repeat I have opposed torture. It’s a violation of the Geneva Conventions. I worry about treatment of Americans in future conflicts.
But a very brief story. Senator Lindsey Graham and I were at Camp Bucca. 20,000 Iraqis were held prisoner there. We met with a former high- ranking member of Al Qaida. I said to him, I said, how did you succeed? What was the recipe for your success? He said, two things. One, the chaos that existed after the initial invasion. There was no order whatsoever. He said second, Abu Ghraib. He said, we were able to recruit thousands of young men into our cause because of Abu Ghraib. So have no doubt about my feeling about that. And we did pass the Detainee Treatment Act, which prohibits cruel and inhumane and degrading treatment.
So we are where we are. There has been an investigation by the Senate Armed Services Committee. There is -- it is well known what happened. There is going to be pictures that are going to be coming out, which will again authenticate that wrong things were done.
But are you going to prosecute people for giving bad legal advice? Are you going to keep on down this road in order, frankly, to -- maybe there’s an element of settling old political scores here.
We need to put this behind us. We need to move forward".
My Buddy on NYforMitt pointed out in email:
"... Pat Buchanan had a good point to put it all in perspective. To end World War II, we dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, killing many innocent men, women and children. (Tho we also know we took out weapons facilities, including the one where they manufactured the bombs for Pearl Harbor, etc) By dropping those bombs, we also saved many more lives and ended a World War. Compare what President Truman did to what we have done post 9/11 ... (so-called torture of detainees) Hardly rises to the same level, and in my opinion, both necessary. We didn't prosecute President Truman, nor should we have -- ditto President Bush and his Administration. It's certainly political what is going on, and nothing will unite the GOP faster than if Obama tries to prosecute people.."
But a very brief story. Senator Lindsey Graham and I were at Camp Bucca. 20,000 Iraqis were held prisoner there. We met with a former high- ranking member of Al Qaida. I said to him, I said, how did you succeed? What was the recipe for your success? He said, two things. One, the chaos that existed after the initial invasion. There was no order whatsoever. He said second, Abu Ghraib. He said, we were able to recruit thousands of young men into our cause because of Abu Ghraib. So have no doubt about my feeling about that. And we did pass the Detainee Treatment Act, which prohibits cruel and inhumane and degrading treatment.
So we are where we are. There has been an investigation by the Senate Armed Services Committee. There is -- it is well known what happened. There is going to be pictures that are going to be coming out, which will again authenticate that wrong things were done.
But are you going to prosecute people for giving bad legal advice? Are you going to keep on down this road in order, frankly, to -- maybe there’s an element of settling old political scores here.
We need to put this behind us. We need to move forward".
My Buddy on NYforMitt pointed out in email:
"... Pat Buchanan had a good point to put it all in perspective. To end World War II, we dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, killing many innocent men, women and children. (Tho we also know we took out weapons facilities, including the one where they manufactured the bombs for Pearl Harbor, etc) By dropping those bombs, we also saved many more lives and ended a World War. Compare what President Truman did to what we have done post 9/11 ... (so-called torture of detainees) Hardly rises to the same level, and in my opinion, both necessary. We didn't prosecute President Truman, nor should we have -- ditto President Bush and his Administration. It's certainly political what is going on, and nothing will unite the GOP faster than if Obama tries to prosecute people.."
Obama supporters go From 'Fired Up' to 'Tired Out'
(Washington Post).Greenwood, South Carolina's city council woman, Edith Childs, known for firing up a crowd during an Obama event in 2008 with "We're Fired Up! And Ready to Go!" is trying to keep morale and spirit up in a town hit hard by the economic downturn.
.....They met at a rally attended by 37 supporters on a rainy day in 2007, when Childs responded to Obama's sluggishness on stage with an impromptu chant: "Fired up! Ready to go!" She repeated it, shouting louder each time, until Obama laughed and dipped his shoulders to the rhythm. The chant caught on. "Fired up!" people began saying at rallies. "Ready to go," Obama chanted back. He told audiences about Childs, "a spirited little lady," and invited her onstage at campaign appearances. By the day of his inauguration, when Childs led a busload of strangers bound for the Mall in her now-iconic chant, her transformation was complete. She was Edith Childs, fired up and ready to go.
But now, as Obama nears the 100-day milestone of his presidency, Childs suffers from constant exhaustion. In a conservative Southern state that bolstered Obama's candidacy by supporting him early in the Democratic primaries, she awakens at 2:30 a.m. with stress headaches and remains awake mulling all that's befallen Greenwood since Obama's swearing-in.
On Day 4 of his presidency, the Solutia textile plant laid off 101 workers. On Day 23, the food bank set a record for meals served. On Day 50, the hospital fired 200 employees and warned of further job cuts. On Day 71, the school superintendent called a staff meeting and told his principals: "We're losing 10 percent of our budget. That means some of us won't have jobs next year, and the rest should expect job changes and pay cuts." On Day 78, the town's newly elected Democratic mayor, whose campaign was inspired partly by his admiration for Obama, summarized Greenwood's accelerating fragility. "This is crippling us, and there's no sign of it turning around," Welborn Adams said.
On Day 88, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that South Carolina had set a record for its highest unemployment rate in state history, at 11.4 percent. Greenwood's unemployment is 13 percent -- more than twice what it was when Childs first started chanting.
"We have a lot of people who live in cold houses, with no jobs and no food," Childs says.
"I never used to get tired, but I'm running out of energy," she says. "It's stressful. Maybe one problem gets fixed, but it's not fixed for long, and while you've been doing that, four other people have called asking for help."
Read more here
.....They met at a rally attended by 37 supporters on a rainy day in 2007, when Childs responded to Obama's sluggishness on stage with an impromptu chant: "Fired up! Ready to go!" She repeated it, shouting louder each time, until Obama laughed and dipped his shoulders to the rhythm. The chant caught on. "Fired up!" people began saying at rallies. "Ready to go," Obama chanted back. He told audiences about Childs, "a spirited little lady," and invited her onstage at campaign appearances. By the day of his inauguration, when Childs led a busload of strangers bound for the Mall in her now-iconic chant, her transformation was complete. She was Edith Childs, fired up and ready to go.
But now, as Obama nears the 100-day milestone of his presidency, Childs suffers from constant exhaustion. In a conservative Southern state that bolstered Obama's candidacy by supporting him early in the Democratic primaries, she awakens at 2:30 a.m. with stress headaches and remains awake mulling all that's befallen Greenwood since Obama's swearing-in.
On Day 4 of his presidency, the Solutia textile plant laid off 101 workers. On Day 23, the food bank set a record for meals served. On Day 50, the hospital fired 200 employees and warned of further job cuts. On Day 71, the school superintendent called a staff meeting and told his principals: "We're losing 10 percent of our budget. That means some of us won't have jobs next year, and the rest should expect job changes and pay cuts." On Day 78, the town's newly elected Democratic mayor, whose campaign was inspired partly by his admiration for Obama, summarized Greenwood's accelerating fragility. "This is crippling us, and there's no sign of it turning around," Welborn Adams said.
On Day 88, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that South Carolina had set a record for its highest unemployment rate in state history, at 11.4 percent. Greenwood's unemployment is 13 percent -- more than twice what it was when Childs first started chanting.
"We have a lot of people who live in cold houses, with no jobs and no food," Childs says.
"I never used to get tired, but I'm running out of energy," she says. "It's stressful. Maybe one problem gets fixed, but it's not fixed for long, and while you've been doing that, four other people have called asking for help."
Read more here
The campaign's over, Obama; it's time to lead
(John Kass-Chicagotribune).In Europe, he chastised America for what he called our "arrogance." In the Caribbean, he gave the dictator of Venezuela a warm smile and a handshake, and called him "amigo." Before the Saudi king, he bowed low and long.
And just the other day, in a cynical nod to Turkish generals, the American president who campaigned for human rights quietly avoided the word "genocide" in a resolution marking the anniversary of the 1915 Ottoman Turkish slaughter of more than a million Armenian Orthodox Christians.
Still, President Barack Obama offers himself up to an adoring world -- and the enraptured, Hopium-smoking American media that helped elect him -- as a leader more flexible than his hopelessly rigid predecessor, George W. Bush. And he's proved it, charming nations and their leaders, remaining in campaign mode, where he's most comfortable
And he's proved it, charming nations and their leaders, remaining in campaign mode, where he's most comfortable.
But last week, he bowed to his base in the hard political left by reversing himself, opening the door for the prosecution of Bush Justice Department officials who helped develop harsh interrogation policies for suspected terrorists.
Some call it torture and legitimately oppose it. Others say harsh interrogation -- such as waterboarding -- was necessary after the Sept. 11 attacks.
But what Obama accomplished by opening the possibility of political witch hunts was to offer up one of his own eyes to his political supporters. He needs both eyes to see a dangerous world.
Obama is the president of a nation targeted by terrorists and constantly probed for weakness, even by our allies.
His intelligence gatherers -- and others who give them the tools and the go-ahead -- can't spend their time wondering if he has their backs.
His statements surely sent spasms through bureaucracies that are vital to his own success and America's safety. All because he wanted to campaign, rather than lead.
And just the other day, in a cynical nod to Turkish generals, the American president who campaigned for human rights quietly avoided the word "genocide" in a resolution marking the anniversary of the 1915 Ottoman Turkish slaughter of more than a million Armenian Orthodox Christians.
Still, President Barack Obama offers himself up to an adoring world -- and the enraptured, Hopium-smoking American media that helped elect him -- as a leader more flexible than his hopelessly rigid predecessor, George W. Bush. And he's proved it, charming nations and their leaders, remaining in campaign mode, where he's most comfortable
And he's proved it, charming nations and their leaders, remaining in campaign mode, where he's most comfortable.
But last week, he bowed to his base in the hard political left by reversing himself, opening the door for the prosecution of Bush Justice Department officials who helped develop harsh interrogation policies for suspected terrorists.
Some call it torture and legitimately oppose it. Others say harsh interrogation -- such as waterboarding -- was necessary after the Sept. 11 attacks.
But what Obama accomplished by opening the possibility of political witch hunts was to offer up one of his own eyes to his political supporters. He needs both eyes to see a dangerous world.
Obama is the president of a nation targeted by terrorists and constantly probed for weakness, even by our allies.
His intelligence gatherers -- and others who give them the tools and the go-ahead -- can't spend their time wondering if he has their backs.
His statements surely sent spasms through bureaucracies that are vital to his own success and America's safety. All because he wanted to campaign, rather than lead.
Obama’s First 100 Days: Can America Survive Another 100?
(John Lillpop-CFP). State of the Union after Barack Obama’s first 100 Days:
Taliban forces are raising hell in Pakistan and, if they are successful, that nation’s nuclear arsenal will be turned over to Osama bin Laden. Iran continues it’s relentless drive toward membership in the nuclear club while denouncing Israel. North Korea fires missiles and rockets at will.
Recent events in Iraq suggest a surge in the insurgency there. The left’s pet project in Afghanistan is going badly and according to some military types, the war there may be lost.
Mexico appears to be the source of a new and deadly swine flu that could become a global pandemic, while violence and murder from civil war spills over into the U.S.
America’s economy continues to deteriorate with scant evidence of the millions of new jobs that the stimulus lark was supposed to produce.
Losing “only” $1.4 billion dollars in the first quarter causes Ford Motor stock to rise, while executives at Chrysler and GM spend their hours trying to finagle additional billions from the U.S. treasury before filing bankruptcy.
Homeland Security boss Janet Napolitano has trained her sights on vets and other right-wing extremists while offering her blessings to illegal aliens.
Meanwhile, President Obama spends his time bowing to foreign kings, playing Human Resources manager for the auto industry, cavorting with Latin American dictators, bad-mouthing America to anyone who will listen, and banning “harsh interrogation” techniques that proved effective in saving Los Angeles.
THIS is change we need?
Taliban forces are raising hell in Pakistan and, if they are successful, that nation’s nuclear arsenal will be turned over to Osama bin Laden. Iran continues it’s relentless drive toward membership in the nuclear club while denouncing Israel. North Korea fires missiles and rockets at will.
Recent events in Iraq suggest a surge in the insurgency there. The left’s pet project in Afghanistan is going badly and according to some military types, the war there may be lost.
Mexico appears to be the source of a new and deadly swine flu that could become a global pandemic, while violence and murder from civil war spills over into the U.S.
America’s economy continues to deteriorate with scant evidence of the millions of new jobs that the stimulus lark was supposed to produce.
Losing “only” $1.4 billion dollars in the first quarter causes Ford Motor stock to rise, while executives at Chrysler and GM spend their hours trying to finagle additional billions from the U.S. treasury before filing bankruptcy.
Homeland Security boss Janet Napolitano has trained her sights on vets and other right-wing extremists while offering her blessings to illegal aliens.
Meanwhile, President Obama spends his time bowing to foreign kings, playing Human Resources manager for the auto industry, cavorting with Latin American dictators, bad-mouthing America to anyone who will listen, and banning “harsh interrogation” techniques that proved effective in saving Los Angeles.
THIS is change we need?
IS OBAMA SO POPULER? Obama's 100 day Poll Numbers Trail Those of Bush
(powerlineblog).Gallup reports that 56% of the public believes that Obama is doing an excellent/good job. Gallup reported 62% approved of George W. Bush's job performance after the first 100 days. MSM tells us how popular Barack Obama is but the numbers tell a different story especially when used comparatively. Comparing the Gallup poll taken following the first 100 day of George W. Bush and Barack Obama is rather informative especially given the highly contentious nature of the 2000 election.
At the same point in their first term, George W. Bush scored 62 percent (despite Florida!); Jimmy Carter 63 percent; and Ronald Reagan 67 percent in the Gallup poll. Among recent Presidents, the lowest-rated at this stage was Bill Clinton at 55 percent.
We can contrast Gallup's numbers with Scott Rasmussen's. The big difference between Rasmussen's survey and Gallup's is that Rasmussen's is a "likely voter" poll. Rasmussen also seems to control for party affiliation in a way that makes his numbers less volatile and, I think, more realistic. In Rasmussen's survey, Obama's approval rating has been between 54 percent and 56 percent for some time now, and "strong approvals" outnumber "strong disapprovals" by only a few percentage points.
The bottom line, I think, is that most Americans haven't given up on Obama. Nor should they--after all, they elected him just a few months ago. At the same time, his overall approval, especially with those who pay a minimal amount of attention and vote, is nothing extraordinary. What is really significant, I think, is that Obama's popularity is muted even though the ill effects of his policies have yet to be felt. Taxes haven't gone up yet; inflation hasn't hit; deficits have not yet proved (as they undoubtedly will) to greatly exceed Obama's estimates; years of slow growth and elevated unemployment due to statist policies are still in the future; and foreign policy setbacks are yet to come.
At the same point in their first term, George W. Bush scored 62 percent (despite Florida!); Jimmy Carter 63 percent; and Ronald Reagan 67 percent in the Gallup poll. Among recent Presidents, the lowest-rated at this stage was Bill Clinton at 55 percent.
We can contrast Gallup's numbers with Scott Rasmussen's. The big difference between Rasmussen's survey and Gallup's is that Rasmussen's is a "likely voter" poll. Rasmussen also seems to control for party affiliation in a way that makes his numbers less volatile and, I think, more realistic. In Rasmussen's survey, Obama's approval rating has been between 54 percent and 56 percent for some time now, and "strong approvals" outnumber "strong disapprovals" by only a few percentage points.
The bottom line, I think, is that most Americans haven't given up on Obama. Nor should they--after all, they elected him just a few months ago. At the same time, his overall approval, especially with those who pay a minimal amount of attention and vote, is nothing extraordinary. What is really significant, I think, is that Obama's popularity is muted even though the ill effects of his policies have yet to be felt. Taxes haven't gone up yet; inflation hasn't hit; deficits have not yet proved (as they undoubtedly will) to greatly exceed Obama's estimates; years of slow growth and elevated unemployment due to statist policies are still in the future; and foreign policy setbacks are yet to come.
Another manipulated ABC poll: Obama a partisan President - enjoys his party's support
ABC poll sample: 35% Dems,35% Ind and 21% Republicans as it quotes:"just 21% of America identify themselves as Republicans"
(ABCnews)."Barack Obama approaches the 100-day mark with rising economic hopes, the best job approval rating at this point in 20 years, the broadest personal popularity since Ronald Reagan and half of Americans now saying the country's headed in the right direction.
His problem: The other half don't.
Barack Obama, approaches the 100-day mark with rising economic hopes, the best job approval rating at this point in 20 years, the broadest personal popularity since Ronald Reagan and half of Americans now saying the country is headed in the right direction. Yet he is plagued with only a 36 percent approval from Republicans.
For all he and his supporters have to celebrate, overcoming political divisions -- an Obama pledge -- is not among them. His 69 percent job approval rating in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll is almost exactly the average for an elected president at 100 days in polls back to Dwight Eisenhower. But it belies a more modern partisan gap: Ninety-three percent of Democrats approve. Only 36 percent of Republicans agree.
There's a similar split in the sense that the nation's heading in the right direction. It's soared from 19 percent just before Obama's inauguration to 50 percent today -- a stunning advance to its highest in six years. But while right-track ratings have gained 50 points since January among Democrats, they're up by a far milder 9 points among Republicans".
(ABCnews)."Barack Obama approaches the 100-day mark with rising economic hopes, the best job approval rating at this point in 20 years, the broadest personal popularity since Ronald Reagan and half of Americans now saying the country's headed in the right direction.
His problem: The other half don't.
Barack Obama, approaches the 100-day mark with rising economic hopes, the best job approval rating at this point in 20 years, the broadest personal popularity since Ronald Reagan and half of Americans now saying the country is headed in the right direction. Yet he is plagued with only a 36 percent approval from Republicans.
For all he and his supporters have to celebrate, overcoming political divisions -- an Obama pledge -- is not among them. His 69 percent job approval rating in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll is almost exactly the average for an elected president at 100 days in polls back to Dwight Eisenhower. But it belies a more modern partisan gap: Ninety-three percent of Democrats approve. Only 36 percent of Republicans agree.
There's a similar split in the sense that the nation's heading in the right direction. It's soared from 19 percent just before Obama's inauguration to 50 percent today -- a stunning advance to its highest in six years. But while right-track ratings have gained 50 points since January among Democrats, they're up by a far milder 9 points among Republicans".
Saturday, April 25, 2009
AP poll: America is moving on the wrong Direction
AP poll showing Majority believe America is moving on the right track, samples only 18% Republicans
Associated Press-GfK poll shows that 48 percent of Americans believe the United States is headed in the right direction — compared with 44 percent who disagree.
here is the answer via Gateawaypundit:
At first read you might ask yourself, how the heck is this possible?
Well it's easy is you totally jack the sample. This poll includes only 18% REPUBLICANS! 18%!
I guess that's what they had to get to to reach their majority saying America is headed in the right direction.
Associated Press-GfK poll shows that 48 percent of Americans believe the United States is headed in the right direction — compared with 44 percent who disagree.
here is the answer via Gateawaypundit:
At first read you might ask yourself, how the heck is this possible?
Well it's easy is you totally jack the sample. This poll includes only 18% REPUBLICANS! 18%!
I guess that's what they had to get to to reach their majority saying America is headed in the right direction.
Barack Obama and the CIA: why does the President hate America so badly?
(Gerald Warner - The telegraph).If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter.
Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.
That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.
"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.
So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers...
President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?
Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.
That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.
"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.
So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers...
President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?
100 DAYS, 100 MISTAKES
The NYpost lists out 100 mistakes Obama managed to achieve in his first 100 days in office
Friday, April 24, 2009
Mitt Romney rocks the GOP
Mitt Romney has the edge over former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of the GOP's most formidable strategists. Eighty-two percent (82%) of Republican voters have a favorable view of Romney, including 43% whose opinion of him is Very Favorable. Only 12% of GOP voters have an unfavorable opinion of the former Massachusetts governor, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
As for Gingrich, 75% of Republicans have a favorable opinion of him, with 43% Very Favorable. Nineteen percent (19%) view him unfavorably. Romney also has the edge among all voters nationwide. Romney is seen favorably by 55% and unfavorably by 36%. Gingrich's favorables are 45% while his unfavorables are 48%.
Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democratic voters view Gingrich unfavorably versus 55% who feel that way about Romney. Voters not affiliated with either party are evenly divided over Gingrich, while Romney has a 20-point edge in favorables over unfavorables
Women view Romney more favorably than Gingrich. Romney leads in all age groups and all income groups, except for voters who earn between $40,000 and $75,000 per year.
As for Gingrich, 75% of Republicans have a favorable opinion of him, with 43% Very Favorable. Nineteen percent (19%) view him unfavorably. Romney also has the edge among all voters nationwide. Romney is seen favorably by 55% and unfavorably by 36%. Gingrich's favorables are 45% while his unfavorables are 48%.
Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democratic voters view Gingrich unfavorably versus 55% who feel that way about Romney. Voters not affiliated with either party are evenly divided over Gingrich, while Romney has a 20-point edge in favorables over unfavorables
Women view Romney more favorably than Gingrich. Romney leads in all age groups and all income groups, except for voters who earn between $40,000 and $75,000 per year.
EXCHANGE 2012!! 53% Say Next President Likely To Be A Republican
(Rasmussen).For the first time since Barack Obama was elected president last November, more than half of U.S. voters (53%) say it is at least somewhat likely that the next occupant of the White House will be a Republican. Thirty-one percent (31%) say it is Very Likely.
Thirty-five percent (35%) say it is not very or not at all likely, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure.
This is not an expectation related to the 2012 election. It is a question about the President following Obama which could happen in either 2012 or 2016.
Naturally, there is a partisan divide--77% of Republican voters say it’s likely the next president will be from their party. Just 39% of Democrats agree.
Still, that’s an increase among both parties from previous surveys. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, 47% now say a GOP president is likely, while 33% think not.
Thirty-five percent (35%) say it is not very or not at all likely, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure.
This is not an expectation related to the 2012 election. It is a question about the President following Obama which could happen in either 2012 or 2016.
Naturally, there is a partisan divide--77% of Republican voters say it’s likely the next president will be from their party. Just 39% of Democrats agree.
Still, that’s an increase among both parties from previous surveys. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, 47% now say a GOP president is likely, while 33% think not.
Intrade puts Romney as 2012 Frontrunner
Mitt Romney is still predicted
to be the nominee via Intrade at 24.2%
to be the nominee via Intrade at 24.2%
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Boehner Gives Low Grade To Obama's 100 Days
(CBS).Boehner held a press conference today prior to a White House meeting with the president and Democratic and Republican leaders from the House and Senate. Boehner's bleak assessment of Mr. Obama's performance comes on the cusp of the president's 100th day.
Boehner also made a point of emphasizing the upcoming "Debt Day" -- the moment when all of the revenue that the federal government generated for this fiscal year will be used up.
"Every new program, everything that happens after Sunday, through September 30th, the balance of this fiscal year, is going to have to be borrowed from our kids and grandkids," said Boehner. "This is the earliest Debt Day in history."
Boehner told reporters that when he looks back at the Obama administration's initial days in office, he sees an unprecedented level of government intervention and profligate spending.
"I think if you look at the first 100 days you can sum it up pretty simply: spending, taxing, borrowing, and ducking the hard choices," said Boehner. "The Democrat policies, you know, like raising taxes on everyone in the middle of a recession, is going to hurt our economy and hurt jobs in America."
He said that last week's tea parties, protests against government spending and taxes, demonstrated the anger that Americans felt over the administration's policies.
Boehner also made a point of emphasizing the upcoming "Debt Day" -- the moment when all of the revenue that the federal government generated for this fiscal year will be used up.
"Every new program, everything that happens after Sunday, through September 30th, the balance of this fiscal year, is going to have to be borrowed from our kids and grandkids," said Boehner. "This is the earliest Debt Day in history."
Boehner told reporters that when he looks back at the Obama administration's initial days in office, he sees an unprecedented level of government intervention and profligate spending.
"I think if you look at the first 100 days you can sum it up pretty simply: spending, taxing, borrowing, and ducking the hard choices," said Boehner. "The Democrat policies, you know, like raising taxes on everyone in the middle of a recession, is going to hurt our economy and hurt jobs in America."
He said that last week's tea parties, protests against government spending and taxes, demonstrated the anger that Americans felt over the administration's policies.
JUST 100 DAYS IN OFFICE AND 2012 SEEMS TO BE INTERESTING, GOOD START FOR ROMNEY AND HUCKABEE
PPP (D) 2012 Presidential Survey
* Barack Obama 49%
* Mike Huckabee 42%
* Barack Obama 50%
* Mitt Romney 39%
* Barack Obama 53%
* Sarah Palin 41%
* Barack Obama 52%
* Newt Gingrich 39%
Obama Job Approval
* Approve 53%
* Disapprove 41%
Favorable / Unfavorable (Net)
* Mike Huckabee 42% / 34% (+8%)
* Mitt Romney 40% / 35% (+5%)
* Sarah Palin 42% / 49% (-7%)
* Newt Gingrich 36% / 44% (-8%)
Some notes:
*Romney is viewed favorably by the largest numbers of Democrats for any of the Republican candidates in the survey, at 27%,(60% favorability rating among GOP voters), trails Obama among 18-29 yr old only by 10 point 51-41 and among 30-45 yr old by 5 points 46-41.
*Sarah Palin has the best favorability among Republicans voters, with 76% saying they have a positive opinion of her,But she also has the largest percentage of GOP voters- 21%- who say they would vote for Obama if she ended up being the party nominee.
*Huckabee seems to be the easiest of the top Republican contenders at this point in time - he is only trailing Obama 49-42. That margin is basically the same as what Obama won by against John McCain in November. Huckabee also has the best favorability numbers of the Republican quartet at 42/34.
*Romney and Huckabee are favored by 30% of African Americans.
(Survey of 686 voters was conducted April 17-19. The margin of error is +/-3.7 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 40% (D), 33% (R), 27% (I)).
* Barack Obama 49%
* Mike Huckabee 42%
* Barack Obama 50%
* Mitt Romney 39%
* Barack Obama 53%
* Sarah Palin 41%
* Barack Obama 52%
* Newt Gingrich 39%
Obama Job Approval
* Approve 53%
* Disapprove 41%
Favorable / Unfavorable (Net)
* Mike Huckabee 42% / 34% (+8%)
* Mitt Romney 40% / 35% (+5%)
* Sarah Palin 42% / 49% (-7%)
* Newt Gingrich 36% / 44% (-8%)
Some notes:
*Romney is viewed favorably by the largest numbers of Democrats for any of the Republican candidates in the survey, at 27%,(60% favorability rating among GOP voters), trails Obama among 18-29 yr old only by 10 point 51-41 and among 30-45 yr old by 5 points 46-41.
*Sarah Palin has the best favorability among Republicans voters, with 76% saying they have a positive opinion of her,But she also has the largest percentage of GOP voters- 21%- who say they would vote for Obama if she ended up being the party nominee.
*Huckabee seems to be the easiest of the top Republican contenders at this point in time - he is only trailing Obama 49-42. That margin is basically the same as what Obama won by against John McCain in November. Huckabee also has the best favorability numbers of the Republican quartet at 42/34.
*Romney and Huckabee are favored by 30% of African Americans.
(Survey of 686 voters was conducted April 17-19. The margin of error is +/-3.7 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 40% (D), 33% (R), 27% (I)).
President's financial adviser falls asleep while Obama talks!
Lawrence Summers, Director of the White House's National Economic Council, was caught dozing off during a meeting with credit card officials.
MSNBC Poll: 40% Give Obama a "F" grade
If you were grading Barack Obama on his performance as president, what would he get? (* 2763988 responses)
35% He gets an A
6.8% He gets a B
5.1% He gets a C
13% He gets a D
40% He gets an F (Fail)
Go to Live Vote
Joe sixpack is less popular than Dick Cheney.
(Realclearpolitics).A slim 51 percent of Americans have a favorable view of Vice President Biden. Cheney was at 58 percent in July 2001. Al Gore, 55 percent in April 1993.
Majority of the Nation favor Mitt Romney - His approach makes him a likeable person
Rasmussen Favorability Survey
Mitt Romney… (overall 55% view Romney as Favorable):
22% Very favorable
33% Somewhat favorable
23% Somewhat unfavorable
13% Very unfavorable
Mitt Romney… (overall 55% view Romney as Favorable):
22% Very favorable
33% Somewhat favorable
23% Somewhat unfavorable
13% Very unfavorable
Cantor To Obama: We Can Do Better
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor appears on "Morning Joe" to preview his upcoming session with the president, explaining "we're ready to do work."
Israeli intel warns Netanyahu on Obama policy: 'We have become an obstacle'
(Worldtribune).— A classified assessment relayed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Obama and his senior advisers would incrementally diminish U.S. strategic cooperation with Israel developed over the last 20 years.
"Obama wants to make friends with our worst enemies and until now the worst enemies of the United States," an Israeli source familiar with the intelligence assessment said.
"Under this policy, we are more than irrelevant. We have become an obstacle."
[On April 21, Obama said he would meet Netanyahu in Washington as part of revived U.S.-led peace efforts in the Middle East, Middle East Newsline reported. The president said the summit would take place over the next few weeks.
Israeli sources said the administration would reject Israel intelligence on such threats as Iran and Syria while advancing the Obama agenda to reconcile with the two states, both listed as state sponsor of terrorism by the U.S. State Dept.
On April 20, Israeli military intelligence commander Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin warned the Cabinet that Obama was prepared to allow Iran to retain its capability to assemble nuclear weapons and support Hamas and Hizbullah.
"Obama wants to advance the peace process in the direction of realistic discussions with extremist elements," Yadlin said.
The Israeli intelligence assessment envisioned that Obama would maintain his reconciliation policy with Iran and Syria through at least 2010. The sources said the assessment determined that Obama was convinced that such a policy would enable a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Obama will want to show Iran, Syria and radical Muslims that the United States could pressure Israel on a strategic level," the source said. "The pressure has already begun and will intensify throughout the next year or two."
The military intelligence chief said Obama was also courting the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Yadlin said both Damascus and Teheran have not significantly reduced their support for insurgency groups throughout the region.
"President Bashar Assad hopes to turn over a new leaf with U.S. President Barack Obama," Yadlin said. "However, while Western powers are being hosted at the palace in Damascus, Syria is continuing to be used as the back yard of the axis of evil. Assad is letting Hizbullah and Iranian forces freely conduct their affairs in Syria and use its territory for Hizbullah deployment."
Yadlin said Obama's policies have generated dismay among Arab allies of the United States. He said Arab countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia were concerned that U.S. reconciliation efforts would merely encourage Teheran and its proxies to intensify destabilization efforts. In April 2009, Egypt reported a Hizbullah network that operated in Cairo and the Sinai Peninsula.
"The Arab world is starting to understand that Iranian proxies are a threat to the region," Yadlin said. "The Hizbullah activity in Egypt is not an isolated incident. Iran has infrastructures across the world seeking to perpetrate terror attacks against Israel."
At the same time, the Obama administration was expected to restrict U.S. arms exports to Israel in an effort to deny systems that could be used in any attack against Iran or Syria. The intelligence sources said this policy was implemented during the last year of the Bush administration and would intensify under Obama.
"Obama wants to make friends with our worst enemies and until now the worst enemies of the United States," an Israeli source familiar with the intelligence assessment said.
"Under this policy, we are more than irrelevant. We have become an obstacle."
[On April 21, Obama said he would meet Netanyahu in Washington as part of revived U.S.-led peace efforts in the Middle East, Middle East Newsline reported. The president said the summit would take place over the next few weeks.
Israeli sources said the administration would reject Israel intelligence on such threats as Iran and Syria while advancing the Obama agenda to reconcile with the two states, both listed as state sponsor of terrorism by the U.S. State Dept.
On April 20, Israeli military intelligence commander Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin warned the Cabinet that Obama was prepared to allow Iran to retain its capability to assemble nuclear weapons and support Hamas and Hizbullah.
"Obama wants to advance the peace process in the direction of realistic discussions with extremist elements," Yadlin said.
The Israeli intelligence assessment envisioned that Obama would maintain his reconciliation policy with Iran and Syria through at least 2010. The sources said the assessment determined that Obama was convinced that such a policy would enable a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Obama will want to show Iran, Syria and radical Muslims that the United States could pressure Israel on a strategic level," the source said. "The pressure has already begun and will intensify throughout the next year or two."
The military intelligence chief said Obama was also courting the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Yadlin said both Damascus and Teheran have not significantly reduced their support for insurgency groups throughout the region.
"President Bashar Assad hopes to turn over a new leaf with U.S. President Barack Obama," Yadlin said. "However, while Western powers are being hosted at the palace in Damascus, Syria is continuing to be used as the back yard of the axis of evil. Assad is letting Hizbullah and Iranian forces freely conduct their affairs in Syria and use its territory for Hizbullah deployment."
Yadlin said Obama's policies have generated dismay among Arab allies of the United States. He said Arab countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia were concerned that U.S. reconciliation efforts would merely encourage Teheran and its proxies to intensify destabilization efforts. In April 2009, Egypt reported a Hizbullah network that operated in Cairo and the Sinai Peninsula.
"The Arab world is starting to understand that Iranian proxies are a threat to the region," Yadlin said. "The Hizbullah activity in Egypt is not an isolated incident. Iran has infrastructures across the world seeking to perpetrate terror attacks against Israel."
At the same time, the Obama administration was expected to restrict U.S. arms exports to Israel in an effort to deny systems that could be used in any attack against Iran or Syria. The intelligence sources said this policy was implemented during the last year of the Bush administration and would intensify under Obama.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Mitt Romney has 3 year to image himself as the Man Of The People?
(Kristofer Lorelli-race42012).History has proven that Republicans win the White House when their candidates are perceived as the ‘common man’, who voters can picture themselves having a beer with. When Republican candidates are perceived as aristocratic or possessing an overweening manner, the Democrats win the White House.
Nixon, Reagan and Bush (W) were viewed as honest and neighborly by swing voters and all three won consecutive Presidential elections. Irish Catholics in South Boston, Kensington PA and west side Chicago, considered Reagan to be a member of the extended working class, Irish Catholic family (even though he was Protestant and a Hollywood actor). Nixon was acclaimed as the man of the people through his focus on crime prevention, the creation of the DEA and his appeal to small town America. President W. Bush campaigned on a platform of compassionate conservatism and sold voters on an image of a western rancher and a likable, down to earth, plain spoken dude.
Over the course of the last six months, Governor Romney has improved his conservative message on economic and foreign policy. He has not wavered or changed policy positions based on public opinion polling, sticking to the core talking points of pro-growth capitalism and liberal internationalism. Governor Romney is an improved candidate from 2007-2008, but he still has one major obstacle to overcome.
How can he alter his image, from a beneficiary of the ruling business and political class, to a typical suburban ‘Joe’? How can Governor Romney relate to middle class swing voters, without allowing his hair style, his number of mansions or Aspen ski wear to be branded into the minds of voters by the liberal press and Democratic political machine?
Most Romney detractors will scoff at the idea of Mitt wearing earth-tone colors, cowboy boots and hair spray rather then hair gel, but it can work and it is a first step. Governor Romney must become the western, Utah Mitt, in place of the northeastern, German car driving, Ivy league Mitt. This re-modelling worked for George W. Bush, as his image as a belt buck wearing, southern talking, BBQ hosting, fly-over city living, father of two was embraced by enough voters to win him two Presidential elections.
Nixon, Reagan and Bush (W) were viewed as honest and neighborly by swing voters and all three won consecutive Presidential elections. Irish Catholics in South Boston, Kensington PA and west side Chicago, considered Reagan to be a member of the extended working class, Irish Catholic family (even though he was Protestant and a Hollywood actor). Nixon was acclaimed as the man of the people through his focus on crime prevention, the creation of the DEA and his appeal to small town America. President W. Bush campaigned on a platform of compassionate conservatism and sold voters on an image of a western rancher and a likable, down to earth, plain spoken dude.
Over the course of the last six months, Governor Romney has improved his conservative message on economic and foreign policy. He has not wavered or changed policy positions based on public opinion polling, sticking to the core talking points of pro-growth capitalism and liberal internationalism. Governor Romney is an improved candidate from 2007-2008, but he still has one major obstacle to overcome.
How can he alter his image, from a beneficiary of the ruling business and political class, to a typical suburban ‘Joe’? How can Governor Romney relate to middle class swing voters, without allowing his hair style, his number of mansions or Aspen ski wear to be branded into the minds of voters by the liberal press and Democratic political machine?
Most Romney detractors will scoff at the idea of Mitt wearing earth-tone colors, cowboy boots and hair spray rather then hair gel, but it can work and it is a first step. Governor Romney must become the western, Utah Mitt, in place of the northeastern, German car driving, Ivy league Mitt. This re-modelling worked for George W. Bush, as his image as a belt buck wearing, southern talking, BBQ hosting, fly-over city living, father of two was embraced by enough voters to win him two Presidential elections.
Obama, McCain Web Campaign Chiefs Face Off
(Newsmax) — The directors of the online campaigns for Barack Obama and John McCain refought the November presidential election battle in a testy appearance before a packed Washington ballroom.
Joe Rospars, Obama's "New Media" director, and Michael Palmer, McCain's "eCampaign" chief, sparred head-to-head at a conference hosted by George Washington University's Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet.
The unusual joint appearance by the Web strategists behind the Democratic and Republican presidential bids drew a crowd of several hundred journalists, academics, political consultants and congressional staffers.
Palmer, clearly still smarting from McCain's election defeat, threw out the first punch, deriding Obama as a "celebrity candidate."
"At the end of the day -- and I'm not trying to be rude here to the president -- but they had a celebrity candidate, he was a novelty," the Republican strategist said.
"That got you a lot of enthusiasm," he told his Democratic opponent. "It got you a lot of support from sectors of the population that wouldn't have normally supported any candidate and that really added to what you were trying to do."
Palmer, who worked on former president George W. Bush's successful 2004 reelection campaign, also pointed repeatedly to a significant difference in resources between the McCain and Obama campaigns.
"I won't cop out on the resources thing even though he had 10 times the staff we had and outspent us five to one online, three to one everywhere else," Palmer said.
"We basically had 1.5 guys full-time on graphics and not just for the Web," the Republican continued. "It was very difficult with such a limited staff.
"I'd like to know how many people you had in that part of your outfit?" he asked his Democratic rival.
Palmer also asked Rospars: "Would Barack Obama have won without you?"
"I think that given the alternative, yes," Rospars shot back in a reference to McCain, before adding that the other leading Democratic contender, Hillary Clinton, "would have beat him too."
Rospars, who now works for Blue State Digital, said Obama's background as a community organizer helped fuel his successful Web campaign.
"That's part of his political DNA," Rospars said. "That helped shape our technology stratgegy, it helped shape our fundraising strategy, it helped shape our organizing field structure."
Palmer said he believed another reason for Obama's victory was that the Democrat received better treatment from the traditional media than McCain.
"John McCain had a very healthy and respectful relationship with the press and then they screwed him," he said.
The Republican and Democrat found common ground on one point.
"The Internet and the tools of the political Web world are merely that -- they are tools in a toolbox," said Palmer. "Social networking, online activism, emails, fundraising are just tools in a toolbox."
"At the end of the day it's money, people and votes on election day," said Rospars.
Looking to the future, Palmer said "going forward, obviously tools and widgets and tweeting aren't going to get us there.
"We need a candidate and we need a message," he said.
Joe Rospars, Obama's "New Media" director, and Michael Palmer, McCain's "eCampaign" chief, sparred head-to-head at a conference hosted by George Washington University's Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet.
The unusual joint appearance by the Web strategists behind the Democratic and Republican presidential bids drew a crowd of several hundred journalists, academics, political consultants and congressional staffers.
Palmer, clearly still smarting from McCain's election defeat, threw out the first punch, deriding Obama as a "celebrity candidate."
"At the end of the day -- and I'm not trying to be rude here to the president -- but they had a celebrity candidate, he was a novelty," the Republican strategist said.
"That got you a lot of enthusiasm," he told his Democratic opponent. "It got you a lot of support from sectors of the population that wouldn't have normally supported any candidate and that really added to what you were trying to do."
Palmer, who worked on former president George W. Bush's successful 2004 reelection campaign, also pointed repeatedly to a significant difference in resources between the McCain and Obama campaigns.
"I won't cop out on the resources thing even though he had 10 times the staff we had and outspent us five to one online, three to one everywhere else," Palmer said.
"We basically had 1.5 guys full-time on graphics and not just for the Web," the Republican continued. "It was very difficult with such a limited staff.
"I'd like to know how many people you had in that part of your outfit?" he asked his Democratic rival.
Palmer also asked Rospars: "Would Barack Obama have won without you?"
"I think that given the alternative, yes," Rospars shot back in a reference to McCain, before adding that the other leading Democratic contender, Hillary Clinton, "would have beat him too."
Rospars, who now works for Blue State Digital, said Obama's background as a community organizer helped fuel his successful Web campaign.
"That's part of his political DNA," Rospars said. "That helped shape our technology stratgegy, it helped shape our fundraising strategy, it helped shape our organizing field structure."
Palmer said he believed another reason for Obama's victory was that the Democrat received better treatment from the traditional media than McCain.
"John McCain had a very healthy and respectful relationship with the press and then they screwed him," he said.
The Republican and Democrat found common ground on one point.
"The Internet and the tools of the political Web world are merely that -- they are tools in a toolbox," said Palmer. "Social networking, online activism, emails, fundraising are just tools in a toolbox."
"At the end of the day it's money, people and votes on election day," said Rospars.
Looking to the future, Palmer said "going forward, obviously tools and widgets and tweeting aren't going to get us there.
"We need a candidate and we need a message," he said.
Eye on the Ball Conservatives: Free Speech
(Brian Jennings-bighollywood.breitbart).Because I am a conservative, I am obviously a racist. Because I am a conservative, I am a homophobe. Because I am a conservative, I am Islamaphobic. Because I am a conservative, I am hateful. And, Homeland Security says I’m a right wing extremist. B.S. If conservatives were endangered by global warming, the left would abandon their hysteria about it. The last few weeks have been incredible in terms of the left exerting their new found power. They are punch drunk with sinister goals.
Hillary Clinton laughs during an interview about Somali pirates. Obama wants to consider prosecution of those who used torture tactics that Karl Rove says saved Los Angeles from a World Trade Center type attack. Nancy Pelosi says those of us who spoke and participated in the Tea Bag parties were astro-turfers. Harry Reid told KKOH radio in Reno that only 250 people showed up in Carson City for a rally when there were thousands. Janeane Garofalo says anyone who showed up to the Tea Parties was a racist. Miss California is a homophobe. She put her convictions above winning. David Letterman and Jon Stewart insult us on TV. Where does it stop?
It won’t stop. In fact, it’s only beginning. Much of the media, as Rush Limbaugh says, has become “butt boys” with the administration. The fact of the matter is, there is no journalism in America. There is only conservative talk radio and Fox News to oppose the administration. They, in turn, call us ”tea-baggers.” I didn’t know that was something conservatives spent much time contemplating.
Much of this politically-correct hysteria is being driven by groups like Media Matters for America. Headed by David Brock, this group has become America’s Speech Police. At every opportunity, they attack conservative media personalities. According to many of these conservative media personalities, Media Matters takes comments out of context to further their cause of accusing conservatives of being hateful. I agree. They are trying to destroy conservative values in America. The way to do that is to destroy conservative media.
As a long-time talk radio programmer, I can tell you this attack is not only real, it is the biggest danger we face in America. We can talk about how the “porkulus bill” creates debt for generations to come. We can point out the waste in the omnibus bill. We can assert that Obama is endangering our nation to more terrorism. But these leftists have a more important goal. If they control speech and thought, they control all our rights as Americans. All other rights hinge on our free speech rights. No other rights matter if free speech rights are compromised.
They want to kill conservatism. And, they are doing it - unless you speak up. At a Tea Party rally, I saw some hope and optimism that Americans who have traditional core values are still hopeful. Despite negative press by the mainstream “butt boys”, they are still optimistic that they can have an impact on the future of our great country. I am also optimistic.
Hillary Clinton laughs during an interview about Somali pirates. Obama wants to consider prosecution of those who used torture tactics that Karl Rove says saved Los Angeles from a World Trade Center type attack. Nancy Pelosi says those of us who spoke and participated in the Tea Bag parties were astro-turfers. Harry Reid told KKOH radio in Reno that only 250 people showed up in Carson City for a rally when there were thousands. Janeane Garofalo says anyone who showed up to the Tea Parties was a racist. Miss California is a homophobe. She put her convictions above winning. David Letterman and Jon Stewart insult us on TV. Where does it stop?
It won’t stop. In fact, it’s only beginning. Much of the media, as Rush Limbaugh says, has become “butt boys” with the administration. The fact of the matter is, there is no journalism in America. There is only conservative talk radio and Fox News to oppose the administration. They, in turn, call us ”tea-baggers.” I didn’t know that was something conservatives spent much time contemplating.
Much of this politically-correct hysteria is being driven by groups like Media Matters for America. Headed by David Brock, this group has become America’s Speech Police. At every opportunity, they attack conservative media personalities. According to many of these conservative media personalities, Media Matters takes comments out of context to further their cause of accusing conservatives of being hateful. I agree. They are trying to destroy conservative values in America. The way to do that is to destroy conservative media.
As a long-time talk radio programmer, I can tell you this attack is not only real, it is the biggest danger we face in America. We can talk about how the “porkulus bill” creates debt for generations to come. We can point out the waste in the omnibus bill. We can assert that Obama is endangering our nation to more terrorism. But these leftists have a more important goal. If they control speech and thought, they control all our rights as Americans. All other rights hinge on our free speech rights. No other rights matter if free speech rights are compromised.
They want to kill conservatism. And, they are doing it - unless you speak up. At a Tea Party rally, I saw some hope and optimism that Americans who have traditional core values are still hopeful. Despite negative press by the mainstream “butt boys”, they are still optimistic that they can have an impact on the future of our great country. I am also optimistic.
Rasmussen daily: Obama's dissaproval numbers go up,Generic Ballot- tied
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +2 . On the Generic Congressional Ballot, it’s all tied—39% for the Democrats, 39% for the Republicans.
Most voters continue to believe that the financial and auto bailouts were a bad idea, Sixty percent (60%) now believe the federal government has too much power and too much money.
Overall, 54% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. Forty-six percent (46%) disapprove.
Most voters continue to believe that the financial and auto bailouts were a bad idea, Sixty percent (60%) now believe the federal government has too much power and too much money.
Overall, 54% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. Forty-six percent (46%) disapprove.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
It’s A Romney Smackdown - coming across as a reasonably intelligent dissenter
(political buzz).Mitt Romney, that tragic figure of the 2008 Republican presidential primary, has just managed to raise his 2012 profile even higher than it has been among antsy conservatives with a written diatribe aimed at President Obama and his failure in his first foreign policy “tests” as commander in chief.
It’s a sharp departure from the more staid and sober anti-Obama commentary Romney had been delivering seemingly every week on the cable shows or in some media interviews aimed squarely at getting in position for 2012. In contrast to the screaming partisanship represented in much of the GOP opposition to anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth, Romney had come across as a reasonably intelligent dissenter that could easily use ongoing economic woe to win over moderates with his fiscal conservatism and promises to run Washington as a business (although that argument may not be so popular at this stage. The White House just can’t file for bankruptcy…).
The restrained Romney vanishes in the words of a scathing op-ed on the right wing National Review Online. The governor takes President Obama to task for the emerging controversies over his reception of anti-American leaders from Latin America at the Trinidad conference and what conservatives feel was a weak effort to defend the United States against the verbal assaults from the same crowd.
This is pure red meat from a top conservative clearly vying to be the “de facto leader” of the GOP and push Limbaugh back to the sidelines.
Romney has challenged Obama in the same caustic vein as Dick Cheney and the talk radio king. Mitt and his followers can only hope that he receives a similar tongue-lashing from Robert Gibbs. Imagine what fundraising gold that would be…
It’s a sharp departure from the more staid and sober anti-Obama commentary Romney had been delivering seemingly every week on the cable shows or in some media interviews aimed squarely at getting in position for 2012. In contrast to the screaming partisanship represented in much of the GOP opposition to anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth, Romney had come across as a reasonably intelligent dissenter that could easily use ongoing economic woe to win over moderates with his fiscal conservatism and promises to run Washington as a business (although that argument may not be so popular at this stage. The White House just can’t file for bankruptcy…).
The restrained Romney vanishes in the words of a scathing op-ed on the right wing National Review Online. The governor takes President Obama to task for the emerging controversies over his reception of anti-American leaders from Latin America at the Trinidad conference and what conservatives feel was a weak effort to defend the United States against the verbal assaults from the same crowd.
This is pure red meat from a top conservative clearly vying to be the “de facto leader” of the GOP and push Limbaugh back to the sidelines.
Romney has challenged Obama in the same caustic vein as Dick Cheney and the talk radio king. Mitt and his followers can only hope that he receives a similar tongue-lashing from Robert Gibbs. Imagine what fundraising gold that would be…
Romney: military options should be on table for Iran, N. Korea
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) criticized President Obama's foreign policy today, arguing the President should make clear that military options are on the table to deal with North Korea and Iran. North Korea's recent missile test and Iran's announcement that it has mastered all stages of the uranium enrichment process are "game changing events," Romney said on CNN's "Situation Room."
"Obama not only hasn't taken bold action in this regard, he's indicated he's not going to," the former Republican presidential candidate contended. "I would make it very clear we're not taking military options off the table." Romney said the U.N. Security Council's resolution condemning the test and warning of sanctions was insufficient. "We have so many warnings from the United Nations about things North Korea's not supposed to do that it immediately flaunts," he said.
Romney also also criticized Obama's conduct during his overseas trips. Citing Obama's speeches at the G20 summit and the Summit of the Americas, Romney called on the President to "defend America" more forcefully. "In each case he has not risen to defend America or defend freedom," Romney said.
"Obama not only hasn't taken bold action in this regard, he's indicated he's not going to," the former Republican presidential candidate contended. "I would make it very clear we're not taking military options off the table." Romney said the U.N. Security Council's resolution condemning the test and warning of sanctions was insufficient. "We have so many warnings from the United Nations about things North Korea's not supposed to do that it immediately flaunts," he said.
Romney also also criticized Obama's conduct during his overseas trips. Citing Obama's speeches at the G20 summit and the Summit of the Americas, Romney called on the President to "defend America" more forcefully. "In each case he has not risen to defend America or defend freedom," Romney said.
MA voters! in a few years you may get Romney as President
Gov. Deval Patrick's standing with [Massachusetts] voters has slipped so badly that voters now are actually yearning for Mitt Romney again!
Patrick's approval rating has dropped 14 points since February and just 34 percent of voters approve of his job performance, according to the Fox 25/Rasmussen Reports survey....an ominous sign for his reelection chances...The most stunning news in the poll is that voters are saying they would rather have Mitt Romney back. Forty-nine percent say Romney did a better job as governor, while just 32 percent say Patrick is doing a better job.
Who Did a Better Job as Governor?Deval Patrick 32%Mitt Romney 49%
Patrick's approval rating has dropped 14 points since February and just 34 percent of voters approve of his job performance, according to the Fox 25/Rasmussen Reports survey....an ominous sign for his reelection chances...The most stunning news in the poll is that voters are saying they would rather have Mitt Romney back. Forty-nine percent say Romney did a better job as governor, while just 32 percent say Patrick is doing a better job.
Who Did a Better Job as Governor?Deval Patrick 32%Mitt Romney 49%
The Hill 2012 watch on Romney slaming Obama's foreign Policy
"Romney has seen his stock rise among the field of potential 2012 potentials since the election. Since he is out of office, he has been able to adroitly pick his spots to step into the national conversation. It's interesting that Romney would choose foreign policy, which, compared to economic issues, wasn't considered his strongest arena during the campaign. This op-ed suggests that he may be attempting to bolster his foreign policy credentials".
Blogger Perez Hilton does Miss USA has to present the views of ALL Americans but the President of the USA not
Miss California: I wasn’t politically correct, I was Biblically correct
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Senator Demint first U.S. official to meet with Netanyahu - The shared principles and values that unite Israel and the US are at risk
Below is a copy of Sen. Jim Demint (R-SC)‘s blog about his recent trip to Israel to meet with Benjamin Netanyahu after he was sworn back into office as Israel’s Prime Minister…
Two weeks ago I took a trip to Europe and the Middle East. It was an honor to be the first member of the United States government to welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu back to office. After meeting with him and many other leaders in Jerusalem during my visit, it is clear to me that Israel remains committed to a strong, special friendship with the United States.
However, during my trip it became evident that the U.S. policies in the Middle East are changing in a way that could undermine efforts to ensure peace and security in the region. The shared principles and values that unite Israel and the United States are at risk, and at the heart of the problem lies Iran.
Whether it is their exportation of terrorism, their funding and arming of Hamas and Hezbollah, or their single-minded pursuit of nuclear weapons, the Iranian regime’s behavior poses a clear and present danger to Israel. And no ally of the United States should have to live in fear of state-sponsored terror.
No evidence exists suggesting a diminishment of Iran’s penchant for violence and international mischief. Just last week, Iran announced it had enough centrifuges to produce enough uranium for a nuclear bomb. It is only a matter of time until Tehran, an unrepentant nexus of nuclear weapons and organized terrorism, represents the world’s biggest threat to the security of the United States, Israel, and the rest of the Middle East. Therefore, I believe it is time the United States confronts Iranian influence in the Middle East and takes the necessary steps toward improving the peace and prosperity of the region.
The United States should impose serious and targeted sanctions on Iran, including limits on their supply of refined gasoline. Unfortunately, the Obama administration would rather talk to Iran in the vain hope that its apocalyptic tyrants don’t actually want to produce a nuclear weapon. Such naiveté not only further erodes Israel’s security and destabilizes the entire Middle East, but it also subtly encourages Iran’s continued and unpunished mischief.
The Obama administration needs to stand by our allies, not force a false peace upon them. Though it is clear to me that Israel remains committed to working with the United States, we must do our part to protect Israel from Iran-sponsored terror, ultimately ensuring our friendship with them. If the administration wants to help Israel and the Palestinians, it needs to confront Iran and undo Iran’s capacity to support the terrorists that hold the entire region in a state of perpetual oppression.
Two weeks ago I took a trip to Europe and the Middle East. It was an honor to be the first member of the United States government to welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu back to office. After meeting with him and many other leaders in Jerusalem during my visit, it is clear to me that Israel remains committed to a strong, special friendship with the United States.
However, during my trip it became evident that the U.S. policies in the Middle East are changing in a way that could undermine efforts to ensure peace and security in the region. The shared principles and values that unite Israel and the United States are at risk, and at the heart of the problem lies Iran.
Whether it is their exportation of terrorism, their funding and arming of Hamas and Hezbollah, or their single-minded pursuit of nuclear weapons, the Iranian regime’s behavior poses a clear and present danger to Israel. And no ally of the United States should have to live in fear of state-sponsored terror.
No evidence exists suggesting a diminishment of Iran’s penchant for violence and international mischief. Just last week, Iran announced it had enough centrifuges to produce enough uranium for a nuclear bomb. It is only a matter of time until Tehran, an unrepentant nexus of nuclear weapons and organized terrorism, represents the world’s biggest threat to the security of the United States, Israel, and the rest of the Middle East. Therefore, I believe it is time the United States confronts Iranian influence in the Middle East and takes the necessary steps toward improving the peace and prosperity of the region.
The United States should impose serious and targeted sanctions on Iran, including limits on their supply of refined gasoline. Unfortunately, the Obama administration would rather talk to Iran in the vain hope that its apocalyptic tyrants don’t actually want to produce a nuclear weapon. Such naiveté not only further erodes Israel’s security and destabilizes the entire Middle East, but it also subtly encourages Iran’s continued and unpunished mischief.
The Obama administration needs to stand by our allies, not force a false peace upon them. Though it is clear to me that Israel remains committed to working with the United States, we must do our part to protect Israel from Iran-sponsored terror, ultimately ensuring our friendship with them. If the administration wants to help Israel and the Palestinians, it needs to confront Iran and undo Iran’s capacity to support the terrorists that hold the entire region in a state of perpetual oppression.
Obama's approval rating falls to low level, dissapprove numbers matching up 34-32
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of +2 .
Overall, 54% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. That’s his lowest total approval rating to date. Forty-five percent (45%) disapprove.
Overall, 54% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance so far. That’s his lowest total approval rating to date. Forty-five percent (45%) disapprove.
In time of victory, why is the left so angry?
(washingtonexaminer).These should be happy times for liberals and the Democratic party as a whole. They control the White House and both houses of Congress, while opposition Republicans are leaderless and lost. So why do some Democrats, particularly those farther to the left, appear so angry?
If you doubt it, just watch a few minutes of MSNBC, where the recent nationwide series of "tea parties" to protest federal spending and taxes set off an angry, almost manic response. The most telling came on Keith Olbermann's program, during which the actress Janeane Garofalo, who plays an FBI computer geek on “24,” denounced the tea parties as "racism straight up." Watch here
"Let's be very honest about what this is about," Garofalo said. "It's not about bashing Democrats. It's not about taxes…This is about hating a black man in the White House."
Garofalo linked the tea parties to what she described as a peculiar feature of the conservative brain. "The limbic brain inside a right-winger, or Republican, or conservative, or your average white power activist -- the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person," she explained. "And it is pushing against the frontal lobe. So their synapses are misfiring." (The limbic brain is the deep portion of the brain that mediates, controls and expresses emotion.)
Now, it's possible Garofalo was joking; she used to do comedy. But she didn't seem to be joking,Why were she, and Olbermann, and many others on the left, so apparently troubled by a virtually powerless opposition?
I asked William Anderson, a friend who is a political conservative, a medical doctor, and a lecturer in psychiatry at Harvard. "They are angry, but I think they are also scared, and I think it's because they have a sense that their triumph is a precarious one," Anderson told me. Democrats won in 2008 in some part because of the cycles of American politics; Republicans were exhausted and it was the other party's turn. Now, having won, they are unsure of how long victory will last.
"They see that they have a very small window of opportunity to do all the things they want," Anderson continued. "They see the window of opportunity as small because they know in their deepest hearts that the vast majority of the American people wouldn't go for all of the things they want to do." So they are frantic to do as much as possible before the opposition coalesces. And the tea parties might be the beginning of that coalescence.
If you doubt it, just watch a few minutes of MSNBC, where the recent nationwide series of "tea parties" to protest federal spending and taxes set off an angry, almost manic response. The most telling came on Keith Olbermann's program, during which the actress Janeane Garofalo, who plays an FBI computer geek on “24,” denounced the tea parties as "racism straight up." Watch here
"Let's be very honest about what this is about," Garofalo said. "It's not about bashing Democrats. It's not about taxes…This is about hating a black man in the White House."
Garofalo linked the tea parties to what she described as a peculiar feature of the conservative brain. "The limbic brain inside a right-winger, or Republican, or conservative, or your average white power activist -- the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person," she explained. "And it is pushing against the frontal lobe. So their synapses are misfiring." (The limbic brain is the deep portion of the brain that mediates, controls and expresses emotion.)
Now, it's possible Garofalo was joking; she used to do comedy. But she didn't seem to be joking,Why were she, and Olbermann, and many others on the left, so apparently troubled by a virtually powerless opposition?
I asked William Anderson, a friend who is a political conservative, a medical doctor, and a lecturer in psychiatry at Harvard. "They are angry, but I think they are also scared, and I think it's because they have a sense that their triumph is a precarious one," Anderson told me. Democrats won in 2008 in some part because of the cycles of American politics; Republicans were exhausted and it was the other party's turn. Now, having won, they are unsure of how long victory will last.
"They see that they have a very small window of opportunity to do all the things they want," Anderson continued. "They see the window of opportunity as small because they know in their deepest hearts that the vast majority of the American people wouldn't go for all of the things they want to do." So they are frantic to do as much as possible before the opposition coalesces. And the tea parties might be the beginning of that coalescence.
Mitt Romney: Obama shrank from defending liberty , Obama failed early International test
(Article today in NRO).At last week’s Summit of the Americas, President Obama acquiesced to a 50-minute attack on America as terroristic, expansionist, and interventionist from Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega. His response to Ortega’s denunciation of our effort to free Cuba from Castro’s dictatorship was that he shouldn’t be blamed “for things that happened when I was three months old.” Blamed? Hundreds of men, including Americans, bravely fought and died for Cuba’s freedom, heeding the call from newly elected president John F. Kennedy. But last week, even as American soldiers sacrificed blood in Afghanistan and Iraq to defend liberty, President Obama shrank from defending liberty here in the Americas.
In his first press interview as president, he confessed to Arabic television that America had “dictated” to other nations. No, Mr. President, America has fought to free other nations from dictators. And in Strasbourg, the president further claimed that America has “showed arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” London’s Daily Telegraph observed that President Obama “went further than any United States president in history in criticizing his own country’s action while standing on foreign soil.” Of course, it was not just the Daily Telegraph that was listening: People around the world who yearn for freedom, who count on America’s resolve and support, heard him as well. He was heard in China, in Tibet, in Sudan, in Burma, and, yes, in Cuba.
The words spoken by the leader of the free world can expand the frontiers of freedom or shrink them. When Ronald Reagan called on Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” a surge of confidence rose that would ultimately breach the bounds of the evil empire. It was the same confidence that had been ignited decades earlier when John F. Kennedy declared to a people surrounded by Communism that they were not alone. “We are all Berliners,” he said, because “freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.” Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s confident commitment, spoken as he led us into the war that would free millions in Europe, inspired not only Americans but freedom fighters around the globe: “The American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.” Such words of solidarity, of confidence, and of unwavering conviction that America is indeed “the last best hope on earth” are what freedom’s friends would have expected to hear from our president when our nation was slandered. Instead he offered silence, smiles, and a handshake.
Even more troubling than what he has or has not said is what he has not done. Kim Jong Il launched a long-range missile on the very day President Obama addressed the world about the peril of nuclear proliferation. As one of the world’s most oppressive and tyrannical regimes is on the brink of securing the “game changing” capability to reach American shores with a nuclear weapon, the president shrinks from action: no seizure of North Korean funds, no severance of banking access, no blockade.
Not to be outdone by Kim Jong Il, President Ahmadinejad announced that his nation has successfully mastered every step necessary to enrich uranium, violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it has signed. So, like North Korea, Iran will have changed the world’s equation for peace and security: It will be capable of devastating Europe and America, and of annihilating Israel. And as with North Korea, the Obama administration chooses inaction — no new severe sanctions, no hint of military options. Ahmadinejad can act with confidence that the forceful options once on our proverbial table have been shelved.
Vice President Biden was right that the new president would be tested early in his administration. What the world learned was not good news for freedom and democracy.
In his first press interview as president, he confessed to Arabic television that America had “dictated” to other nations. No, Mr. President, America has fought to free other nations from dictators. And in Strasbourg, the president further claimed that America has “showed arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” London’s Daily Telegraph observed that President Obama “went further than any United States president in history in criticizing his own country’s action while standing on foreign soil.” Of course, it was not just the Daily Telegraph that was listening: People around the world who yearn for freedom, who count on America’s resolve and support, heard him as well. He was heard in China, in Tibet, in Sudan, in Burma, and, yes, in Cuba.
The words spoken by the leader of the free world can expand the frontiers of freedom or shrink them. When Ronald Reagan called on Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” a surge of confidence rose that would ultimately breach the bounds of the evil empire. It was the same confidence that had been ignited decades earlier when John F. Kennedy declared to a people surrounded by Communism that they were not alone. “We are all Berliners,” he said, because “freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.” Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s confident commitment, spoken as he led us into the war that would free millions in Europe, inspired not only Americans but freedom fighters around the globe: “The American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.” Such words of solidarity, of confidence, and of unwavering conviction that America is indeed “the last best hope on earth” are what freedom’s friends would have expected to hear from our president when our nation was slandered. Instead he offered silence, smiles, and a handshake.
Even more troubling than what he has or has not said is what he has not done. Kim Jong Il launched a long-range missile on the very day President Obama addressed the world about the peril of nuclear proliferation. As one of the world’s most oppressive and tyrannical regimes is on the brink of securing the “game changing” capability to reach American shores with a nuclear weapon, the president shrinks from action: no seizure of North Korean funds, no severance of banking access, no blockade.
Not to be outdone by Kim Jong Il, President Ahmadinejad announced that his nation has successfully mastered every step necessary to enrich uranium, violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it has signed. So, like North Korea, Iran will have changed the world’s equation for peace and security: It will be capable of devastating Europe and America, and of annihilating Israel. And as with North Korea, the Obama administration chooses inaction — no new severe sanctions, no hint of military options. Ahmadinejad can act with confidence that the forceful options once on our proverbial table have been shelved.
Vice President Biden was right that the new president would be tested early in his administration. What the world learned was not good news for freedom and democracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)