November 11-13, 2011
Nov 11 11:35 CBS Poll shows shifting GOP presidential race Nov 11 13:17 Obama's prayers won't be answered Nov 11 16:24 Will Obama get better or is this it? Nov 12 11:35 The high price of crony capitalism Nov 12 23:20 CBS Commander-in-Chief debate notes Nov 13 00:15 A liberal's take on tonight's debate Nov 13 08:31 Spin Room Shocker Nov 13 12:16 Will Cain's gaffe get him the hook? Nov 13 18:59 The new Democratic Party
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CBS Poll shows shifting GOP presidential race
This CBS poll isn't good news for the weeks-long frontrunners:
The field of Republican candidates now has three candidates within striking distance of each other at the top of the list: with 18 percent, Herman Cain is in the top spot, followed by Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich with 15% each. Support for both Cain and Romney has declined since late last month, and Gingrich is the only one of the top three whose support is steadily, if slowly, on the upswing.
This is just one poll so I don't want to overemphasize it. Still, if this is the start of a trend, this doesn't bode well for Mssrs. Cain and Romney. In fact, this hurts Mr. Cain more than it hurts Mitt. If GOP caucus-goers and primary voters start thinking that the scandals hurt his electability factor, then Cain's lack of organization will cripple him.
If this polling is accurate, this isn't good news for Mitt, either. What it's saying is that Newt has now caught him, thereby demolishing Mitt's inevitability and Mitt's electability arguments.
Conservative bloggers and DC pundits have predicted Cain's tumble. This information isn't good news for Mr. Cain, either:
Cain has lost support among women since late October. Then, he led among women, garnering 28 percent of their support. Now, his support among women is just 15 percent. He has also lost ground with conservatives, from 30 percent to 23 percent now. And there has been some movement among Tea Party supporters as well; their support for Cain has declined from 32 percent to 19 percent . Romney has lost support among men, while Gingrich's support among that group has increased eight points.
Of those statistics, the one that should worry Cain's campaign the most is the 40% drop in TEA Party support. The minute Mr. Cain loses TEA Party support, his campaign can fold up the tent because it's over at that point.
Other polling shows Mitt's difficulties. Polling in South Carolina shows Mitt dropping into third place behind Cain and Gingrich:
Cain 26%
Gingrich 19%
Romney 16%
That's bad news for Mitt. It highlights the perception that Mitt isn't able to win southern states.
The only person that thinks this is good news is Newt. He keeps inching up in the polls. He keeps dazzling during the debates. His credentials keep getting more attention. Newt's momentum continues.
Posted Friday, November 11, 2011 11:35 AM
No comments.
Obama's prayers won't be answered
President Obama announced that he won't make a decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline until after the election. DC pundits speculate that he's doing that to take the issue off the table for the 2012 election. These DC pundits don't get it.
President Obama's 'voting present' on this issue guarantees that this issue will be a weapon used mercilessly against President Obama.
The 2012 presidential election could be close, with President Obama needing support from every segment of his political base to win re-election.
So the president's move (made through the State Department) to delay his controversial decision on the Keystone XL pipeline until beyond Election Day 2012 isn't really a shocker. The White House, for the record, denies that politics played a role in the decision.
Environmentalists opposed to the project which would construct a 1,700-mile pipeline to transport oil from Canada's Alberta tar sands region to refineries in the U.S. and ports on the Gulf of Mexico, recently protested en masse at the White House.
The protests involving thousands were meant as a last-minute reminder to the White House of the political risks the president ran if he approved the pipeline despite such concerns.
Given so much environmental opposition to the pipeline, the president would have certainly outraged an important part of his political base, environmental activists, less than a year before Election Day.
This undoubtedly will excite President Obama's base just as surely as it'll turn independents against him. Independents will see the high gas prices and the jobs that could've been created and they'll take it out on the guy who's won't put country ahead of political considerations.
During his jobs tour, President Obama kept repeating the line "Pass my bill now." Now that Republicans are pushing a project that would create 20,000 jobs, President Obama didn't take positive action. Instead, he 'voted present'.
The Keystone XL Pipeline project will be used, politically speaking, to beat President Obama bloody on multiple fronts. The GOP presidential candidate will use it to bring up the Solyndra/Green Jobs scandal. The GOP presidential candidate will use it to highlight President Obama's putting his re-election ahead of doing what's right for the nation. The GOP presidential candidate will use it to prove President Obama puts a higher priority on satisfying his political allies than he puts on creating jobs.
If I were managing the GOP presidential campaign's messaging, I'd have the candidate and his running mate highlight this decision for all of the above reasons at every stop they make.
The American people want, in overwhelming numbers, an all-of-the-above energy policy. This administration has pursued a green-jobs-first energy policy. This administration's energy policies have been rejected. The American people don't like this administration's environmental policies either.
I'd highlight the Solyndra/loan guarantees/Obama bundlers scandal, the high gas prices and President Obama's dismal jobs record daily. Keystone XL would be the centerpiece of the campaign's messaging.
This was terrible energy policy. It's stupid political strategy. This won't be a base election. This will be about the American people voting for a leader who's putting nation ahead of political cronies. Mostly, this will be a repudiation of President Obama's administration.
If Newt is the GOP nominee, and I think he will be, President Obama and the Democrats will certainly face a wave election because that's Newt's specialty. Democrats laughed at his Contract with America, often calling it the Contract On America.
Vic Fazio, now a retired Democratic congressman, said the night before the 1994 slaughter that Republicans would be fortunate to gain 25 seats in the House. He said that they'd misplayed their hand. That Tusday night, House Republicans gained a net 52 seats.
The point to all this is that a) President Obama's decisions go against the will of the American people and b) Newt's gifted in creating national governing majorities. That's because he listens to people, a talent President Obama doesn't have.
Posted Friday, November 11, 2011 1:17 PM
No comments.
Will Obama get better or is this it?
Steve Benen's article says that the economy has improved during President Obama's time in office. Considering the state it was in in late September, 2008, it's almost impossible for it not to be.
Benen's chief argument appears to be the job growth during President Obama's administration. Benen's chief sub-argument apparently is that private sector job growth should be the only measurement of job growth. That's an incredibly silly argument since robust economic growth is needed to sustain the public sector.
The reason why there's been so many jobs lost in the public sector is because we've had anemic economic growth. The euphemism for anemic economic growth is "the new normal", which is a remnant philosophy that I first heard during the Carter administration.
At the time, interest rates were sky high. (When a friend of mine bought his first house, he paid 16% interest.) Experts talked about the likelihood that we'd never see interest rates lower than 9%. The economy was so bad that Sen. Hubert Humphrey teamed with Rep. Augustus Hawkins to push through the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment And Balanced Growth Act to artificially spur job growth.
Another storyline amongst liberals was that the presidency was just too big for 1 man. Conservatives like George Will argued to the contrary, saying that the presidency was too big for the current president, Jimmy Carter.
Will was vindicated when President Reagan took command in 1981.
As an amateur baseball historian since the mid-1960's, I well remember Baltimore's fiery manager Earl Weaver. George Will, a huge baseball fan, once wrote this about Mr. Weaver :
Time was, the Baltimore Orioles' manager was Earl Weaver, a short, irascible, Napoleonic figure who, when cranky, as he frequently was, would shout at an umpire, "Are you going to get any better or is this it?"
The point of the baseball analogy is to give a political answer to Earl Weaver's question. With President Obama, this is it. Things won't get better. The economy won't see any dynamic growth spurts. There won't be any dramatic job growth numbers as long as President Obama is president.
Certainly, we won't see job growth like September, 1983, when 1,100,000 jobs were created. Yes, that's 1.1 million jobs created in a single month. We won't see 11,000,000 jobs created in 4 years while Bill Clinton was president and Newt Gingrich was Speaker. That's creating an average of 275,000 jobs per month for 4 years.
By contrast, President Obama hasn't strung 3 straight months of 275,000 jobs growth together.
Americans don't yet know that things will improve decisively with a conservative in the White House and the GOP controlling the House and Senate. They'll soon know that, though. That's what campaigns are about.
History is repeating itself. Once again, we elected a man who isn't qualified for the job. Once again, our president is arguing that the economy is stagnating and it'll never get better.
Americans know better than that. They know that this administration is what's holding this nation back. We haven't gotten lethargic, which this president has suggested. We're just treading water until we get a real president again, one who isn't prone to making stupid decisions about gas pipelines , a president who isn't prone to letting regulatory agencies kill important jobs .
Posted Friday, November 11, 2011 4:24 PM
No comments.
The high price of crony capitalism
ABC News is reporting in this article that this administration knew Solyndra was in trouble. A chief advisor also recommended that Energy Secretary Steven Chu be fired:
New internal White House emails reveal that a scathing critique of Energy Secretary Steven Chu by a former Obama political advisor was widely circulated at the highest levels of the administration.
The Feb. 25, 2011 email that sparked the deliberations landed on West Wing desks just as the solar energy firm Solyndra was starting to show outward signs of financial trouble. It was sent by Dan Carol, a former Obama campaign staffer and clean energy advocate who was described by Obama's then-Chief of Staff Pete Rouse as someone whose views "reflect the President's general philosophy on energy policy."
Carol's four-page proposal to restructure the Energy Department included the blunt recommendation that Chu be fired, and that his leadership team also be replaced, calling it time for "serious changes, even if they are uncomfortable to make."
That this administration knew Solyndra was in trouble isn't surprising. That someone inside the administration recommended that Chu be fired is.
Carol also predicted the political fallout that would result from what he saw as inevitable failures of the Energy Department's now-embattled loan guarantee program. He made the dire predictions when advising that Obama replace Chu with someone who was not "too associated : with [the] Silicon Valley business elite."
"Not because they aren't talented," Carol writes, "but because that appointment will be caught up in the wave of GOP attacks that are surely coming over Solyndra and other inside DOE deals that have gone to Obama donors and have underperformed. No reason to fuel that coming storm, and believe me it will come."
Unfortunately, that isn't the only crony capitalism this administration is involved in. This deal is disgusting:
Over the last year, the Obama administration has aggressively pushed a $433-million plan to buy an experimental smallpox drug, despite uncertainty over whether it is needed or will work.
Senior officials have taken unusual steps to secure the contract for New York-based Siga Technologies Inc., whose controlling shareholder is billionaire Ronald O. Perelman, one of the world's richest men and a longtime Democratic Party donor.
When Siga complained that contracting specialists at the Department of Health and Human Services were resisting the company's financial demands, senior officials replaced the government's lead negotiator for the deal, interviews and documents show.
When Siga was in danger of losing its grip on the contract a year ago, the officials blocked other firms from competing.
Siga was awarded the final contract in May through a "sole-source" procurement in which it was the only company asked to submit a proposal. The contract calls for Siga to deliver 1.7 million doses of the drug for the nation's biodefense stockpile. The price of approximately $255 per dose is well above what the government's specialists had earlier said was reasonable, according to internal documents and interviews.
It's bad enough that HHS didn't know if the drug was needed. It's worse that this administration put in its own negotiating team. It's disgusting that the final arrangement was a no-bid contract that guaranteed the contract to a major Obama supporter. That's the definition of corruption.
"We've got a vaccine that I hope we never have to use; how much more do we need?" said Dr. Donald A. "D.A." Henderson, the epidemiologist who led the global eradication of smallpox for the World Health Organization and later helped organize U.S. biodefense efforts under President George W. Bush. "The bottom line is, we've got a limited amount of money."
Dr. Thomas M. Mack, an epidemiologist at USC's Keck School of Medicine, battled smallpox outbreaks in Pakistan and has advised the Food and Drug Administration on the virus. He called the plan to stockpile Siga's drug "a waste of time and a waste of money."
This administration won't hesitate to do anything to help their allies. They're spending money they don't need to spend on something that we don't need with money we don't have. How stupid is that?
There's a reason why this administration has run up the 3 biggest deficits in U.S. history. They've spent money foolishly on things that won't strengthen the U.S. economy.
I can't put a pricetag on how much money this administration, aided by congressional Democrats, has spent on their political allies, though I'm certain it's in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Think state and UAW bailouts in the stimulus.
That's before factoring in the money spent on guaranteed loans to companies like Solyndra.
We can't afford 4 more years of this administration's spending habits. Next November, they must be defeated. To do that, prosperity-loving Americans must do everything possible to get out the pro-prosperity vote.
If prosperity-loving 'activists' spread the word that this administration's economic plan is based on crony capitalism, as opposed to real capitalism, and spending money foolishly, we'll see another wave election next year. We'll sweep out this administration and many of their allies in Congress.
That can't happen fast enough.
Posted Saturday, November 12, 2011 11:35 AM
No comments.
CBS Commander-in-Chief debate notes
First, tonight's biggest losers by far were CBS corporately and Scott Pelley individually. Pelley thought he was the enforcer of the clock. He thought the debate was about him. He should never be allowed to moderate another debate the rest of his life.
Likewise, the first 10 minutes of CBS's livestream was utterly worthless. I was one of thousands of Twitter users who criticized them mercilessly. Ari Fleischer had it exactly right. If the debate is 90 minutes, air it on the network.
It's sad to say but Pelley isn't even qualified to be timekeeper. He insisted on cutting people off in mid-sentence. His liberalism shined through once. Fortunately, Newt gave him his comeuppance in this clip:
NEWT: Well, he isn't a terrorist suspect. He was a person found guilty under review of actively seeking the death of Americans.
PELLEY: Not found guilt in a court, sir.
NEWT: He was found guilty by a panel who reported it to the president.
PELLEY: It's not...
NEWT: Let me tell you a story...
PELLEY: the rule of law...
NEWT: It is the rule of law. That is explicitly false. It is the rule of law.
PELLEY: NO.
NEWT: If you engage in war against the United States, you are an enemy combatant. You have none of the civil liberties of the United States. You cannnot go to court. (LOUD APPLAUSE) Let me be very clear about this. There's a huge gape here, frankly, that far too many people get confused over. Civil defense...criminal defense is a function of being within the American law. Waging war on the United States is outside the criminal law. It is an act of war and it should be dealt with as an act of war. And the correct thing in an act of war is to kill people who are actively trying to kill you. (LOUDER APPLAUSE)
The depth of Gingrich's knowledge was on full display here. He utterly schooled Pelley on the difference between criminal law and acts of war. The two issues are galaxies apart.
While Newt probably won the debate, Gov. Perry had his strongest performance yet. He showed a thorough understanding of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan. He was strong in talking about what he'd do with regards to Iran. Gov. Perry's answers were thorough enough to picture him as commander-in-chief.
Mitt Romney had a solid performance until his answer to Jim DeMint's question on the national debt as a national security issue. That's when he talked about cutting the budgets to a bunch of tiny agencies. Cutting tiny budgets won't balance the budget.
Newt gave a strong, detailed answer to how his administration would deal with Iran. Newt said that he'd employ the most aggressive covert operations possible to support the Iranian people in their attempt to topple the mullahs.
Newt talked about the roles Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul II played in toppling the Soviet empire without firing a shot. Newt then said that their model would translate well with Iran.
At the end of the night, it's easy picturing Newt, Mitt and Rick Perry as commander-in-chief. That said, if I had to pick from that bunch, I'd pick Newt because his answers on Iran just made total sense.
Posted Saturday, November 12, 2011 11:20 PM
No comments.
A liberal's take on tonight's debate
Michael Hirsch's article for the National Journal is so steeped in liberal ideology that I couldn't resist ripping it to shreds.
Here's one part of Hirsch's off-the-mark analysis:
Rick Perry, badly needing to put his brain-freeze moment behind, came out strong, winning audience applause for his 'zero-budget' approach to foreign aid (though he stumbled a bit when he suggested that Israel, along with Pakistan, might have to make the case anew why it should receive U.S. assistance, a comment that will arouse the wrath of many GOP voters. But ultimately Perry delivered a somewhat mystifying answer when he was asked whether the U.S. was engaged in 'financial warfare' with China. He awkwardly invoked Ronald Reagan's famous prediction that the Soviets would end up on the 'ash heap,' saying the Chinese regime would end up in the same place 'if they do not change their virtues.' For a candidate who does not need another reason to remind people of George W. Bush, it was a moment that did just that.
Gov. Perry had a strong performance, talking much more fluently about Pakistan and Afghanistan than most people expected, then talking about how to stop China from stealing our intellectual property. (What Hirsch is talking about is anyone's guess.)
Cain, Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich also seemed willing to turn the clock back to an uglier, earlier period when waterboarding was permitted and the rest of the world's views didn't matter, which it seems most have moved past.
What Mr. Hirsch is talking about is the fact that Cain, Bachmann and Gingrich won't hesitate to use proven intelligence-gathering methods to protect the United States. Apparently, Mr. Hirsch thinks we're better off being appeasers rather than doing what's necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.
Mr. Hirsch apparently doesn't believe CIA operators who've written that waterboarding KSM helped the CIA break him, leading to the breaking up multiple major terrorist plots, including a planned attack on Los Angeles.
If my choices are being liked or preventing terrorist attacks by waterboarding KSM, I'll opt for waterboarding KSM every time.
Mr. Hirsch needs to get a job with CODEPINK. He doesn't belong writing about national security.
Posted Sunday, November 13, 2011 12:15 AM
No comments.
Spin Room Shocker
After the debate, journalists, candidates and their spokespeople piled into the spin room. This is the CBS video of the spin room:
Just before the 5:00 mark, with CBS Correspondent John Dickerson interviewing R.C. Hammond, Newt's chief campaign spokesman, Hammond said this:
R.C. HAMMOND: Voters are really thirsting for that type of a response. And when you let a candidate go, keep him away from the consultants, away from the talking points. It's very refreshing. People are coming to that. We're slowly building our coalition support. We're going to be the number one candidate when it comes to the Iowa Caucuses, to the New Hampshire Primary and our goal is to seal the nomination right here in South Carolina.
That's a pretty bold statement, though he left himself with a little wiggle room by not predicting that they'd clinch the nomination in South Carolina.
Still, that's a pretty lofty goal. While you can't mathematically clinch in South Carolina, winning convincingly in Iowa and South Carolina and doing well in New Hampshire would create alot of momentum. It would put alot of pressure on the other candidates, too, putting them essentially in must-win situations the rest of the way.
Whether Newt can accomplish that is still far from certain. Still, it's a worthwhile goal to shoot for. If you achieve it, you win everything. If you fall a little short, you're still in a strong position.
Mitt's spokesman wasn't controversial in his remarks, though he emphasized Mitt's line about the 21st Century being an American century.
Clearly, the happiest man in the Spin Room was Gov. Perry's spokesman. Gov. Perry had a strong performance, showing a solid grasp of foreign policy and national security issues. Gov. Perry said implicitly that his time in the military helped form his opinions.
Follow this link to read Part 1 of the debate transcript. Follow this link to read part 2 of the debate transcript.
Posted Sunday, November 13, 2011 8:31 AM
No comments.
Will Cain's gaffe get him the hook?
Most of the reviews said that Herman Cain survived Saturday night's debate. Most cite as fact that Cain didn't make any soundbite-worthy gaffes. I don't know if that's accurate. I'd consider this reply to Major Garrett's querie to be a major gaffe:
Major Garrett: A quick follow up, Mr. Cain. You say assisting the opposition, would you entertain military assistance and opposition?
Herman Cain: I would not entertain...military opposition. I'm talkin' about to help the opposition movement within the country. And then there's one other thing that we could do. We could deploy our ballistic missile defense capable (UNINTEL) war ships strategically in that part of the world. We have the biggest fleet of those warships in the world. And we could use them strategically in the event that they were able to fire a ballistic missile.
A presidential candidate who takes the military option off the table with Iran isn't qualified to be our next commander-in-chief. Does Mr. Cain think that they'll give up their ambition to have a nuclear weapon because we way pretty please? That's absurdly naive national security policy.
The Des Moines Register is right in saying that Mr. Cain played in the shallow end of the pool :
Tonight's debate on foreign policy helped Texas Gov. Rick Perry get his head above water after his campaign-swamping stumble on Wednesday. Herman Cain, meanwhile, never got out of the shallow end of the pool.
Cain knows his lines well but continually saying that he'd consult with his generals is getting tired. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, President George H.W. Bush didn't need to consult with Jim Baker, his secretary of state. He didn't need to consult his generals. He was instantly on the phones contacting allies around the world in his attempt to put a robust coalition.
President Cain couldn't come close to doing that. He'd be fortunate to know who his generals are.
People are getting tired of his constant referrals to his "bold 9-9-9 plan." People are looking for more substance than just tax policy.
Couple his refusal to talk about anything other than taxes during debates on the economy with his national security inexperience and it's becoming apparent that Mr. Cain isn't a top-tier candidate.
Mr. Cain can raise all the money he wants. Money won't save Mr. Cain from his policy naivete. People won't replace one person who isn't qualified to be commander-in-chief with another candidate who isn't qualified to be commander-in-chief.
Certainly GOP voters and right-leaning voters certainly shouldn't settle for a candidate who doesn't have a strong grasp of national security issues, especially issues involving Iran. We certainly shouldn't pick a candidate who announces on national TV that he'd take the threat of military action off the table with Iran.
The one-trick pony's gallup is slowly but surely coming to an end. In the end, people will pick the candidate with gravitas and competence, not the candidate with a cache of catchy slogans.
Posted Sunday, November 13, 2011 12:16 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 13-Nov-11 02:48 PM
I think you are being too tough on Mr. Cain. He is infinitely more qualified than the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania. And his "bold 9-9-9 plan" is something worth considering that, again, is vastly better than the tax code we now have. Obviously we are in the primary process now, where we can exercise choice and find the best candidate (some would say most conservative, others more electable, and a few of us say both). But we should also be on the lookout for the best ideas, and not dismiss those just because the candidate isn't the best salesman for it.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 13-Nov-11 05:05 PM
Mr. Cain isn't more qualified on national security than President Obama, which is shameful. Taking the military option off the table is something a CODEPINK pacifist might do but sane people don't do that.
Also, his bold 9-9-9 plan is stupid because it gives Democrats an extra revenue stream to grow government. It's your right to advocate to give Democrats that ability but that isn't conservatism.
Decisions should be based on intelligent principles & policies. You can use whatever criteria you want but don't think that giving government additional revenue has anything to do with limited government conservatism.
On issue after issue, Mr. Cain doesn't meet the minimum threshhold for national security, tax policy or the economy.
He's been repeatedly exposed as nothing more than a salesman. Lord knows he isn't a policy wonk. He isn't even close on what really matters.
Comment 3 by Adjoran at 14-Nov-11 03:35 AM
He won't drop out, but his poll numbers will float back down to low double digits as his shortcomings come ever more into scrutiny as the actual voting looms.
He still hasn't organized in any state in the manner of a contender, and his offices in Iowa are often closed and not busy when open. Cain isn't running like a man who thinks he can win and intends to inconvenience himself to do it.
Comment 4 by edthurston at 14-Nov-11 06:43 AM
The people are being too tough on Herman Cain, he's like being convicted to the sexual harassment allegations without being put into real trial. Despite everything, Cain still remained to be standing strong and his 999 tax plan (detailed here: http://HermanCainsTaxPlan.com) still gains a lot of supporters.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 14-Nov-11 08:00 AM
I haven't convicted Mr. Cain about the allegations. I've criticized his campaign's communications problems, his campaign's whining about being the target of baseless allegations while making baseless allegations against a) the Perry campaign & b) the Democratic machine.
He's lost support amongst GOP women (from 28% to 15% now) & he's lost TEA Party support.
Comment 5 by J. Ewing at 14-Nov-11 10:11 AM
while you may be correct that Cain's "9-9-9" plan "gives Democrats another revenue stream" (in the sales tax) I can guarantee you that Democrats will fight this like the plague, for at least three reasons. First and foremost, it entirely removes their ability to conduct their signature (Marxist) class warfare, since this tax is perfectly progressive - the more you make and spend the more you pay. Second, it removes their ability to corrupt the tax code for social Engineering purposes (and to pad their pockets with lobbyist dollars). Finally, because everyone will pay some tax (and Dems cannot insert tax increases by simple rule change), Democrats will lose the ability to raise taxes at whim. EVERYBODY will object to having their taxes raised, rather than the situation now where everyone believes someone else will pay the tax increase.
So far as Mr. Cain's foreign-policy expertise goes, you are judging him deficient on the basis of one seemingly blundering statement, while we have years of Mr. Obama's foreign-policy fiascoes to consider. In short, Mr. Cain couldn't possibly be worse and, unlike Obama, I expect he would be willing to take advice from people with more knowledge on the subject.
Comment 6 by Gary Gross at 14-Nov-11 01:10 PM
So far as Mr. Cain's foreign-policy expertise goes, you are judging him deficient on the basis of one seemingly blundering statement.I'm judging him deficient on the basis of his statement that we should take any option off the table against Iran or any other enemy. I'm judging him deficient because he can't describe what's going on in Pakistan & Afghanistan with any specificity.
His line that he'll consult with his generals, etc. is pathetic.
Mr. Cain is charismatic & a great orator who doesn't have much insight into national security issues, especially in the world's most dangerous region.
Why anyone is foolish enough to settle for that is beyond me.
The new Democratic Party
In the 60's, Democrats were the party of main street and neighborhoods. Fifty years later, that Democratic Party doesn't exist, having been replaced by a new PTA. The people that make up today's Democratic Party are progressives, thugs and anarchists.
Hardline progressives have controlled the Democratic Party since 2005. That's when a) the nation's policies took a hard left turn and b) the economy took a dramatic nosedive.
The last time the GOP controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, that year's unemployment rate was 4.6% and the deficit was $161,000,000,000.
Thanks to the Democrat's hardline policies, unemployment has stayed above 9% and the last 3 deficits averaged $1,300,000,000,000 annually. In short, unemployment has doubled and stayed there and the deficit is 800% bigger than it was in 2006.
Another 'member' of the Democrats' new coalition are union thugs. It isn't that unions' associations with the Democratic Party is something new. It's that the unions now associated with the Democratic Party are outright thugs and criminals .
These unionistas didn't hesitate in invading private property to threaten children. SEIU thugs beat up a conservative black man a) for selling flags outside a townhall meeting and b) because he's conservative.
Another major piece of the new Democratic Party puzzle are anarchists like David Graeber . Here's a brief bio on Mr. Graeber:
Graeber is a 50-year-old anthropologist - among the brightest, some argue, of his generation - who made his name with innovative theories on exchange and value, exploring phenomena such as Iroquois wampum and the Kwakiutl potlatch. An American, he teaches at Goldsmiths, University of London. He's also an anarchist and radical organizer, a veteran of many of the major left-wing demonstrations of the past decade: Quebec City and Genoa, the Republican National Convention protests in Philadelphia and New York, the World Economic Forum in New York in 2002, the London tuition protests earlier this year. This summer, Graeber was a key member of a small band of activists who quietly planned, then noisily carried out, the occupation of Lower Manhattan's Zuccotti Park, providing the focal point for what has grown into an amorphous global movement known as Occupy Wall Street.
That's a brief Businessweek bio of Mr. Graeber. Here's what he did this summer:
Graeber began the summer on sabbatical, moving back to New York from London and frequenting an artists' space called 16Beaver. It was an intellectual activist salon, located near Wall Street, the sort of place where people would discuss topics like semiotics and hacking and the struggles of indigenous peoples. Like many other American activists, Graeber had been deeply moved by the occupation of Cairo's Tahrir Square and by the 'Indignados' who had taken over central Madrid; in mid-July, he published a short piece in Adbusters asking what it would take to trigger a similar uprising in the West. For much of the summer, the discussions at 16Beaver revolved around exactly that question. When a local group called Operation Empire State Rebellion called for a June 14 occupation of Zuccotti Park, four people showed up.
On July 13, Adbusters put out its own call for a Wall Street occupation, to take place two months later, on Sept. 17. Setting the date and publicizing it was the extent of the magazine's involvement. A group called New Yorkers Against Budget Cuts - student activists and community leaders from some of the city's poorer neighborhoods - stepped in to execute the rest. For three weeks in June and July, to protest city budget cuts and layoffs, the group had camped out across the street from City Hall in a tent city they called Bloombergville. They liked the idea of trying a similar approach on Wall Street. After talking to Adbusters, the group began advertising a 'People's General Assembly' to 'Oppose Cutbacks And Austerity Of Any Kind' and plan the Sept. 17 occupation.
The OWS movement is developing quite a list of felonies. Here's the first 75 items Big Government's John Nolte has documented thus far:
1. NY: 10/1/2011 - Police Arrest More Than 700 Protesters on Brooklyn Bridge
2.Madison, WI: 10-27-2011 - Madison Occupiers Lose Permit Due to Public Masturbation
3.Phoenix: 10/28/2011 - Flier at Occupy Phoenix Asks, 'When Should You Shoot a Cop?'
4.NY: 10/18/2011 - Thieves Preying on Fellow Protesters
5.NY: 10/9/2011 - Stinking up Wall Street: Protesters Accused of Living in Filth as Shocking Pictures Show One Demonstrator Defecating on a POLICE CAR
6.NY: 10/7/2011 - Occupiers Rush Police : More
7.Cleveland: 10/18/2011 - 'Occupy Cleveland' Protester Alleges She Was Raped
8.NY: 10/10/2011 - 'Increasingly Debauched': Are Sex, Drugs & Poor Sanitation Eclipsing Occupy Wall Street?
9.Seattle: 10/18/2011 - Man Accused of Exposing Self to Children Arrested
10.10/12/2011 - Iran Supports 'Occupy Wall Street'
11.Portland: 10/16/2011 - #OccupyPortland Protester Desecrates Memorial To U.S. War Dead
12.Portland: 10/15/2011 - #OccupyPortland Protesters Sing 'F*** The USA'
13.Chicago: 10/17/2011 - COMMUNIST LEADER Cheered at Occupy Chicago
14.10/15/2011 - American Nazi Party Endorses Occupy Wall Street's 'Courage,' Tells Members to Support Protests and Fight 'Judeo-Capitalist Banksters'
15.Boston: 10/14/2011 - Coast Guard member spit on near Occupy Boston tents
16.Boston: 10/11/2011 - Boston Police Arrest Over 100 from Occupy Boston
17.New York: 10/11/2011 - 'You Can Have Sex with Animals.'
18.New York: 10/15/2011 - Harassing Police with Accusations of Phony Injuries
19.New York: 10/9/2011 - 'Occupy Wallstreet' Protesters Steal from Local Businesses
20.New York: 10/25/2011 - Three Men Threatened to Kill 24-Year-Old Occupy Wall Street Protester for Reporting Rape
21.Baltimore: 10/18/2011 - #OccupyBaltimore Discourages Sexual Assault Victims from Contacting Police
22.Portland: 10/27/2011 - Occupy Portland's Attempt At Wealth Redistribution Ends In Theft
23.Los Angeles: 10/14/2011 - Anti-Semitic Protester at Occupy Wall Street
24.10/27/2011 - A Death Threat From an Occupy Wall Street Protester
25.10/27/2011 - Anti-Semitic Tweet From Occupier or Sympathizer
26.Boston: 10/20/2011 - Occupy Boston Doesn't Want Police Involved in Rape
27.New York: 10/5/2011: Anti-Semitic Occupier Screams About Jews, Israel
28.New York: 10/4/2011 - Occupier Taunts Jewish Man
29.Boston: 10/2011 - Occupiers Block Street
30.New York: 10/2011 - Occupier Tries to Steal Police Officer's Gun
31.New York: 10/27/2011 - Occupiers Block Traffic, Get Arrested
32.Oakland: 10/27/2011 - Occupiers Throw Garbage at Police
33.Oakland: 10/19/2011 - Abusive #OccupyOakland Protesters Ban Media from Tent City
34.Eugene, OR: 10/19/2011 - Occupiers Displace Farmers' Market Threatening Hundreds of Jobs
35.Portland, OR: 10/18/2011 - Capitalist Offering Jobs at Occupy Portland Finds Few Takers
36.NY: 10/20/2011 - #OccupyWallStreet Threatens Businesses, Patrons
37.NY: 10/14/2011 - Violence Breaks Out During #OccupyWallStreet March Toward Stock Exchange
38.NY: 10/14/2011 - Protesters March On Wall Street, Scuffle With Cops
39.Oakland: 10/19/2011 - #OccupyOakland Protesters Threaten Reporter
40.Oakland: 10/26/2011 - Occupiers Scuffle with Police
41.Oakland: 10/24/2011 - Protesters Storm, Vandalize, Shut Down Chase Bank
42.Dayton, OH: 10/22/2011 - Protester: 'F*ck The Military, F*ck Your Flag, And F*ck The Police'
43.Chicago: 10/14/2011 - Protesters' Message At #OccupyChicago Rally: 'Destroy Israel'
44.NY: 10/23/2011 - #OccupyWallStreet Supporter Rants Against Israel, Jews
45.NY: 10/22/2011 - #Occupy Kid: 'Burn Wall Street, Burn!'
46.NY: 10/21/2011 - New Yorkers Fed Up With Noisy, Defecating Protesters
47.Oakland: 10/21/2011 - Occupy Oakland Evicted After Reports Of Crime And Intimidation
48.Oakland: 10/19/2011 - #OccupyOakland Out of Control: Rats, Graffiti, Vandalism, Sexual Harassment, Public Sex and Urination
49.Chicago: 10/26/2011 - Occupiers Under Investigation by FBI for Links to Terrorism
50.Cleveland: 10/29/2011 - Rape Reported at Occupy Cleveland
51.Dallas: 10/24/2011 - Police Investigating Possible Sexual Assault Of Teen At Occupy Dallas
52.Bloomington, IN: 10/26/2011 - Man Claims Occupy Bloomington Protesters Drugged, Handcuffed Him
53.NY: 10/10/2011 - Sex, Drugs and Hiding from the Law at Wall Street Protests
54.Glasgow: 10/26/2011 - Woman Gang-Raped
55.Boston: 10/23/2011 - Occupy Boston Protesters Arrested For Dealing Heroin - With 6 Year-Old in Tent
56.Portland: 10/16/2011 - Sex Offender Registers Occupy Portland Camp as Address
57.Denver: 10/15/2011 - Occupy Denver Demonstrator Accused of Groping TV Photographer
58.Lawrence, KS: 10/25/2011 - Sexual Assault Reported at Occupy Camp
59.Minneapolis, MN: Bricks, Rocks, 'Riot Supplies' Discovered by Police
60.Phoenix, AZ: 10/27/2011 - Neo-Nazis Patrol 'Occupy Phoenix' With AR-15?s
61.Chicago: 10/26/2011 - Occupy Chicago Invades City Hall
62.10/26/2011 - ACORN, Occupy Email Talks About Assault on Banks
63.10/26/2011 - OccupyWallStreet Strategy for Reports of Violence Against Cops
64.Chicago: 10/26/2011 - Unrepentant Domestic Terrorist Bill Ayers Wows Occupiers
65.Chicago: 10/25/2011 - Ayers Coaches #OccupyChicago, Calls for School 'Occupations'
66.10/26/2011/ - Occupy Protests Have Jewish Leaders Concerned
67.Wash DC: 10/27/2011 - OccupyDC Leftists Provoke Police, Hang Flag on Top of DC Statue
68.Albuquerque, NM: 10/26/2011 - Occupy Squatters Riot With Police
69.San Diego: 10/25/2011 - Flag Used as Chew Toy by Occupier's Dog
70.Oakland: 10/25/2011 - Occupiers Throw Bottles at Police
71.NY: 10/27/2011 - Occupy Wall Street Protesters: Rush Limbaugh Is Bigger Threat Than Al-Qaeda
72.10/27/2011 - Occupy Wall Street Launching First Nationwide General Strike in America Since 1946
73.NY: 10/28/2011 - Fox 5 News Reporter Assaulted at OWS
74.10/28/2001 - Total Occupy Arrests Made Thus Far: 2750
75.Nashville: 10/28/2011 - 30 Arrests Made at Wall St. Protest
These hardline progressives, union thugs and anarchists are the face of today's Democratic Party. Democratic leaders like President Obama and Nancy Pelosi are the most prominent Democrats to have praised the OWS anarchists.
I used to be Democrat when I was young. I knew alot of Democrats back then. I especially admired Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. These were principled patriots.
That Democratic Party is gone, replaced with pathetic professional protestors, pigheaded progressives and aggressive anarchists.
The Democratic Party I knew and supported, I'm afraid, is gone forever. What a shame.
Posted Sunday, November 13, 2011 6:59 PM
Comment 1 by edthurston at 14-Nov-11 06:48 AM
The Occupy movement are being tainted because of the works of the anarchist. There are also those arrestables (http://Arrestables.com ) who are willing to have themselves arrested just to be able to show violence.
Comment 2 by eric z at 15-Nov-11 12:20 PM
Oh my!
Time to call out the Pinkertons, ya sure, ya betcha.
