Sunday, September 30, 2012

Dodd-Frank bill did opposite of what Obama claimed, caused ordinary Americans to bail out of stock market, $300 billion withdrawn in past 2 yrs., 25% in swing states say no confidence, Fidelity bombshell last wk., now has more than half its clients in bond funds

9/30/12, "US investors pulled $300B out of equity markets in last two years," NY Post, J.A. Byrne

"The US individual investor is taking his money and running for the exits.

Everyday shareholders can’t compete with high-frequency trading or the regulations coming out of the Dodd-Frank rules, which ironically were enacted to inspire confidence in the market.

Skittish investors have yanked more than $300 billion out of US equity markets in the last two years, with a drawdown of $4.47 billion last week alone.

That’s despite the huge climb in the Dow Jones industrial average since its depressionary low of 6,547 in March 2009.

A huge signpost on the road out of equities was the announcement late last week that Fidelity — the home of rock-star stock pickers like Peter Lynch — now has more than half of its customers’ $1.6 trillion assets in bond funds.

Most people haven’t made money in the stock market in the last decade-plus,” said Sonu Kalra, who manages the $15.4 billion Fidelity Blue Chip Growth Fund....

This market is operating on much lower volumes than even five years ago — and it’s driven by the antics of high-frequency traders, these experts add. Retail investors polled for an Aite Group study — those in mutual funds and those who dabble in stocks — are certainly not fooled....

Even given the divisive nature of presidential politics, there is bipartisan support in both blue and red states, as well as among the undecided, for the proposition that investor confidence is low.

In the survey, the overarching belief is that this stock market stinks. A record 25 percent of Aite respondents in swing states had no confidence in US equities, along with 56 percent who were ambivalent — that is, “somewhat confident.”

Across the political spectrum, not too many respondents were “very confident.” It was 
  • 22 percent for Republican-leaning red states; 
  • 15 percent in swing states and  
  • 16 percent in Democratic-leaning blue states
like New York, New Jersey and Connecticut." via Michael Savage


43% of voters "certain" will vote for Romney, 42% certain for Obama, among 15% undecided only 14% think economy will improve with Obama, 28% believe it will be better with Romney

9/30/12, "Daily Presidential Tracking Poll," Rasmussen

(parag. 4): "Currently, 43% of voters are “certain” they will vote for Romney. Forty-two percent (42%) are that certain they will vote for Obama. The remaining 15% are either uncommitted or open to changing their mind. To many Americans, especially partisan activists, it is hard to imagine how someone could be anything but certain at this point in time. One of the distinguishing features of these potentially persuadable voters is that they don’t see the choice between Romney and Obama as terribly significant. In terms of impacting their own life, just 28% say it will be Very Important which man wins.

There is particular pessimism among these persuadable voters about the economy. Only 14% think it will get better if the president is reelected. But just 28% believe it will improve with a Romney victory." via Drudge


Today I donated to Dan Bongino for US Senate from Maryland

Dan Bongino for US Senate from Maryland

This was my first donation to Mr. Bongino and only a few hundred dollars, but a few minutes after making the donation my phone rang and a voice said, "Hi, this is Dan Bongino." I couldn't believe what I was hearing, then I thought it might be a robo-call, but it wasn't, it was actually Dan Bongino himself! He sounded terrific. Then I read at Legal Insurrection and its comments that the establishment GOP isn't giving him money because they don't think his chances are good. Hopefully this is no longer the case but I don't waste time wondering about the GOP establishment. In any case, I will probably be giving Mr. Bongino the maximum allowed by law. Go Dan! Photo above from the candidate's website.


Saturday, September 29, 2012

Dallas Morning News endorses Mitt Romney for President, Editorial cites Obama's negative campaigning against Romney

9/28/12, "We recommend Mitt Romney for president," Dallas Morning News Editorial

"Barack Obama will forever be a historic, as well as historical, figure in American life. The 44th U.S. president, yes, but more noteworthy, he will forever be the first African-American to lead a nation riven through centuries by racial and ethnic division.

His election in November 2008 inspired. Even those who may not have supported him could not deny the significance.

With it came an optimism that the ideals he stressed as a candidate, like a post-partisan Washington where Democrats and Republicans worked together, were within reach. He took office amid great turmoil, a crashing economy and two wars atop his priorities.

Candidate Obama, an orator of great skill and cadence, might have overcome everything and put the U.S. on a brighter path. President Obama, unfortunately, fell short of the challenge. The wars have largely faded from headlines, but the economic struggles remain, along with an attendant worry about future federal spending, deficits and debt.

Obama’s Democratic supporters would argue that no one could have succeeded in what he inherited, that the nation’s problems were far more severe than anyone could handle in four years.
We respectfully disagree. On the central issue that will define his presidency — a stalled U.S. economy weighed down by crushing annual deficits and accumulated debt — Obama showed himself to be less leader than follower. While he expended his political capital on new government programs, unemployment stayed at debilitating heights.

For that reason, this newspaper recommends Republican challenger Mitt Romney for president.

We see evidence of Obama’s shortcomings in his re-election campaign, a relentlessly negative push to disqualify his opponent instead of standing on his accomplishments. His campaign has worn voters’ patience thin by constantly blaming predecessor George W. Bush for “the mess he left behind.” 

Cleaning up that mess, however large, was what Americans trusted to Obama.
Romney had to survive a fractious primary by steering too far right on some issues. At his core, however, we see him as a “Chamber of Commerce Republican,” more attuned to business interests than the tea party/social conservatism that defines today’s GOP.

Importantly, Romney speaks the language of industry. His tenure leading Bain Capital, for instance, has come under sharp criticism for years, but it also reveals a man who understands capital formation and how that, extrapolated through an economy, can lift the U.S. from its stalled state. Even some of Obama’s Democratic allies — notably rising star Cory Booker, former adviser Steven Rattner and former Rep. Harold Ford — were quick to criticize the campaign’s Bain-centric attacks on profit.

Unlike many in his party, Romney understands that government has a place in the economy and in American life, just not as much of a place as Obama would afford it. 

Obama has cited, with some justification, recalcitrance from congressional Republicans for thwarting him. 

But in his first two years, when Democrats had a wide margin in the House and filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, Obama’s wounds were self-inflicted. He put his chips on a necessary but ill-conceived stimulus program and a massive health care overhaul. Left to languish were a broad-based energy bill, comprehensive immigration reform, entitlement reform and, most ominously, effective job-creation programs.

Obama’s people warned of unemployment rates as high as 8 percent without the stimulus spending, only to see rates exceed 8 percent, anyway, for 43 consecutive months — and counting. Real household income has fallen in consecutive years. Food stamp enrollment has hit record highs; the percentage of adults in the workforce approaches record lows. 

Annual deficits for every year of the Obama presidency will top $1 trillion, pushing the federal debt past an astounding $16 trillion. 

Obama’s Affordable Care Act was his signature domestic achievement. Its many laudable features included the individual mandate, but one was not its financing, which led this newspaper to oppose it. Obama left the details to Congress, and what emerged had no realistic funding stream and did too little to contain future costs. 

Of most concern, Obama was not unaware of the fiscal problem. He put together a bipartisan panel to help forge a solution but then abandoned it. Left to languish, the Simpson-Bowles group could not achieve the votes to force congressional action. The proposal, which included a roughly 3-to-1 package of spending cuts to revenue increases, was the kind of compromise candidate Obama had advocated. As president, he chose not to act. 

Romney has shown an ability to lead, from turning around the deficit-ridden 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics to his term as Massachusetts governor. His plans for tax and entitlement reform are encouraging, shifting the focus from government first to freeing the private sector to innovate. Voters should demand more specifics, but at the heart of his plans — especially on reforming a teetering Medicare system — is an instinct to rely on competition over regulation to drive growth. 

Yet Romney does give us pause. His famed flip-flops on issues from immigration to health care, always pushing further right, are worrisome. His difficulty in speaking precisely and inoffensively on such issues as London’s Olympic preparedness, Israeli Palestinian issues and U.S. embassy assaults paint him, at best, as a foreign policy neophyte. 

And his secretly recorded comments at a Boca Raton, Fla., fundraiser drew an unreasonably sharp line between those who pay income taxes and “the 47 percent” of Americans who only take and would never support him, anyway. These ill-advised statements offended many and played directly into the Obama campaign’s picture of an excessively wealthy candidate out of touch with the common man. 

Not his finest moment, nor was it the lone defining one for Romney. What we’ve seen of him over many years — from business success to running a state to impeccable personal and family attributes — convinces this newspaper that the time is right for someone with his broad skill set. 

Obama himself once said that if he didn’t repair the economy “in three years, this would be a one-term proposition.” The facts show it’s time for a principled, pragmatic leader who can get Washington working again." via Free Republic


Obama former beautiful person Steven Rattner says US must face health care rationing, that seniors just aren't entitiled to all our advanced medical procedures and medicines (unless they're Beltway politicians, then they get the best of everything, all paid for by the same seniors who won't be able to get the same care themselves)

9/29/12, "Bailing Out Obamacare: Sarah Palin Was Right," Powerline, Steven Hayward

"I missed this piece from Steven Rattner (who was a key figure in the Obama auto bailout) when it appeared in the NY Times a couple weeks ago.  Tacitly acknowledging that costs are going to soar out of sight, Rattner opens with this frank admission: “We need death panels.  Jonah Goldberg wonders: When can Sarah Palin expect her letter of apology?”

Rattner goes on to back away from “death panels,” but instead uses the R-word: rationing.

"Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.

But in the pantheon of toxic issues — the famous “third rails” of American politics — none stands taller than overtly acknowledging that elderly Americans are not entitled to every conceivable medical procedure or pharmaceutical."" via Free Republic


Steven Rattner had to pay $10 million in fines for the heinous financial crime of bribing state officials over deals with pension funds. He's still one of the beautiful people.


Arab Springed Tunisia is so great now, Islamists let police sexually and financially harass women who look 'immoral,' 'democracy' is so great for savages

9/28/12, "Tunisia 'police rape' condemned," BBC

"A lawyer for the woman says she was charged with public indecency after being raped by two officers.

The Tunisian interior ministry says that before the alleged rape took place, the woman and her fiance were found in an "immoral position".

The woman's lawyer, Bouchra Belhaj Hmida, told AFP news agency that the governing Islamist Ennahda party bore a "political and moral responsibility".

She said there had been "many cases of sexual, moral, and financial harassment" of women by officers since Ennahda came to power in October 2011.

The incident involving the unnamed woman occurred earlier this month."


The Obama administration backed the most vicious, radical Muslims in 'Arab Spring democracy' takeover of Tunisia. Because of what Obama did, moderate Tunisians now understandably hate America:

"The dour men and women of Ennahda, Tunisia's version of the Muslim Brotherhood."...Tunisians say, "we made the revolution and they got the power."

3/21/12, "No to America and No to Radical Islam," World Affairs, Michael Totten

"Radical Islamists are making inroads in the Arab world's most advanced, liberal, and tolerant country. And the secularists think the United States is helping them do it....

People here think the United States is cooperating with Ennahda,” said local journalist Ashraf Ayadi, referring to the Islamists who won 42 percent of the vote in the election last October. Even though a majority of Tunisians voted against them, they still got more votes than any of the other various parties, so they got to choose the prime minister.

People here are against the United States helping Ennahda,” Ayadi continued. “All Americans who come here are against the Islamists, but the American government is supporting them. I wish we had a good, modern, respectful Islamic party. I'm a Muslim and I'm proud of it, but I'm not proud of this party.”

The Americans are with the Islamists. They support Ennahda in Tunisia and the Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia.

I've heard this complaint from every single secular person I've interviewed in this country without exception, from academics and democratic activists to journalists and teachers. They seem to be unanimously shocked and dismayed and appalled. The subject comes up again and again in conversation even when I ask about other things. It's impossible to spend any time here whatsoever without hearing about it.

These people are not part of a marginal fringe movement like their Egyptian counterparts. Politically secular Tunisians make up half the country or more. And they're depressed about what is happening now. Rami Sghayier, a young activist who does volunteer work with Amnesty International, seems to speak for most when he says, We made the revolution and they got the power.”
They, of course, are the dour men and women of Ennahda, Tunisia's version of the Muslim Brotherhood.".


This is the Obama supported 'democracy' of Tunisia:

8/17/12, "VERY GRAPHIC VIDEO: Tunisian Islamists behead convert to Christianity for apostasy," The Right Scoop

"This happened in June of this year and it’s horrible. Probably the most graphic thing I’ve ever seen. Before I provide a link to the video you should read Raymond Ibrahim’s description of the video and decide whether or not you want to view it:

"Liberal talk show host Tawfiq Okasha recently appeared on “Egypt Today” airing a video of Muslims in Tunisia slicing a young man’s head off for the crime of apostasy, in this case, the crime of converting to Christianity and refusing to renounce it.

A young man appears held down by masked men. His head is pulled back, with a knife to his throat. He does not struggle and appears resigned to his fate. Speaking in Arabic, the background speaker, or “narrator,” chants a number of Muslim prayers and supplications, mostly condemning Christianity, which, because of the Trinity, is referred to as a polytheistic faith: “Let Allah be avenged on the polytheist apostate”; “Allah empower your religion, make it victorious against the polytheists”; “Allah, defeat the infidels at the hands of the Muslims”; “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.”

Then, to cries of “Allahu Akbar!—or, “God is great!”—the man holding the knife to the apostate’s throat begins to slice away, even as the victim appears calmly mouthing a prayer. It takes nearly two minutes of graphic knife-carving to sever the Christian’s head, which is then held aloft to more Islamic cries and slogans of victory.

Visibly distraught, Tawfiq Okasha, the host, asked: “Is this Islam? Does Islam call for this? How is Islam related to this matter?…These are the images that are disseminated throughout the electronic media in Europe and America…. Can you imagine?” Then, in reference to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis, whose political influence has grown tremendously, he asked, “How are such people supposed to govern?”

Now that you’ve decided, click the photo [at link] to see the video:



Senate backs Obama push to give $450 million US taxpayer dollars to Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood after Morsi admitted they "took their time" responding to attack on US Embassy in Cairo, just hastens further attacks and puts Americans at greater risk than they already are. It is US weakness over decades that they despise, say experts.

UPDATE, 9/29/12, "US Embassy issues terror warning for Americans in Egypt," Times of Israel with AP

Savages keep burning down your house, and every time they burn down your house you say here, take all this money because I'm a forgiving, superior person. The US has been doing this since the 1970's in response to Muslim terrorism.

9/22/12, "Egypt’s New Leader Spells Out Terms for U.S.-Arab Ties," NY Times, Kirkpatrick, Erlanger

"And he (Morsi) dismissed criticism from the White House that he did not move fast enough to condemn protesters who recently climbed over the United States Embassy wall and burned the American flag in anger over a video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad.
We took our time” in responding to avoid an explosive backlash, he said, but then dealt “decisively” with the small, violent element among the demonstrators.
“We can never condone this kind of violence, but we need to deal with the situation wisely,”"


Senate votes 81-10 to keep sending aid to savages. If you enable savages, you belong in jail.
9/23/12, "Senate overwhelmingly rejects foreign aid cuts for Egypt, Libya and Pakistan," Daily Caller

"By a vote of 81 to 10, the Senate on Saturday defeated legislation that would have suspended foreign aid to Pakistan, Egypt and Libya in the wake of the violent anti-American demonstrations in those countries. All 10 supporters of the bill were Republicans."...

Before and after both September 11's, US elites continue to support Islamic radicals across the middle east:

9/17/12, "The dangerous U.S. double standard on Islamic extremism," Justin Gengler,

"The death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. officials in Libya last Wednesday should serve to draw much-needed attention to an increasingly untenable contradiction in U.S. policy toward the Middle East. Even while it seeks to recover from this latest attack by Islamic radicals, United States' unwitting support for the latter through continued patronage of that very same ideology elsewhere in the region, most clearly in Syria and in Bahrain. There, U.S. policymakers should expect equally frightening results. ... 

When demonstrators in Cairo and Sanaa succeeded in gaining entry into their respective U.S. embassies, in each case they replaced the U.S. flag with a black pennant bearing in white the Muslim profession of faith: "There is no God but God, and Muhammad is the Prophet of God." The banners, which U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland downplayed disingenuously as a "plain, black flag," should by now be familiar enough to administration officials. It is the same one adopted by other Salafi extremists, including those belonging to al Qaeda and its regional affiliates, from Mali to Yemen. Not coincidentally, it has made an appearance in each of the mass protests witnessed thus far -- in Benghazi, in Tunis, in Khartoum, and even in Doha.  

That the Obama administration would fail to acknowledge the flag's overt symbolism is indicative of an uncomfortable yet enduring truth about U.S. policy in the Middle East: that the United States' enemies in one country are its allies of convenience in another. Even as it reels from the first death of a sitting ambassador in more than two decades, the United States continues to supply logistical and other "command-and-control" support to rebels in Syria, while Gulf allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar pour in money and arms. Of little or insufficient concern, apparently, is the nature of those being empowered, or the broader ideological forces underlying their struggle....

The result is a social and political climate that not only features unprecedented polarization, but that presents a grave threat to U.S. interests -- both political and physical -- in the region.  

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, brought to the fore uncomfortable questions about the sources of violent Islamic extremism, and about the United States' unwitting support for the latter through continued patronage of those who help sow the seeds of this mindset. One hopes that these uncomfortable questions will now be revisited, and to greater substantive effect, when on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11 there should occur yet another act of political violence committed by individuals associated with that very same ideology." 


US ruling class relationships with Mideast regimes guarantee more Americans will die:

10/20/11, "The lost decade," Angelo M. Codevilla, Claremont Institute

"That would have pointed to the Middle East’s regimes, and to our ruling class’ relationship with them, as the problem’s ultimate source. The rulers of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian Authority had run (and continue to run) educational and media systems that demonize America.

Under all of them, the Muslim Brotherhood or the Wahhabi sect spread that message in religious terms to Muslims in the West as well as at home.
That message indicts America, among other things, for being weak.  

And indeed, ever since the 1970s U.S. policy had responded to acts of war and terrorism from the Muslim world by absolving the regimes for their subjects’ actions."...


Absentee ballot requests down for Democrats in Ohio for 2012 election, perhaps because ACORN was permanently banned from Ohio in 2010 as part of a racketeering settlement

9/27/12, "Tracking Ohio’s absentee ballot requests.", Moe Lane

"We[**] got a guy out there doing just that, and the link to his spreadsheet is here.
Executive summary: the process is ongoing, and what’s being tracked are absentee/early ballot REQUESTS, not turned-in ballots.  So it’s not telling us who’s ahead in Ohio; it’s merely telling us what we know of which party’s members are asking for ballots.  In other words, it’s a possible measure of voter enthusiasm in Ohio.  So…"...

 List of counties at link, just a few counties in so this is very early reporting.

In 2008, Democrats had double the number of absentee ballots. In 2012, it looks like Democrat enthusiasm is way down, and Republican is inching up.


ACORN banned from Ohio:

7/29/2011, "Mississippi NAACP leader sent to prison for 10 counts of voter fraud," Daily Caller, Matthew Vadum
 "And ACORN, which filed for bankruptcy last November, was itself convicted of voter fraud in Nevada in April. Sentencing is scheduled for Aug. 10 in Las Vegas. ACORN was also banished from Ohio in 2010 when it settled a state racketeering filed against it by the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, a project of the Buckeye Institute. Under the settlement ACORN, which is now reorganizing its state chapters under different names, agreed never to return to the state."

Time Magazine Editor says Tea Party is like Salafi Muslims

9/27/12, "On 'Morning Joe,' TIME's Richard Stengel Compares Radical Islamists to Tea Party; No One Protests Swipe," NewsBusters, Ken Shepherd

""We have a great piece by Bobby Ghosh, who's been on here before about the rise of the Salafis, in the Middle East, they're the Tea Party of Muslim democracy, and that's a fantastic, insightful story as well," Stengel noted. Neither Joe Scarborough not co-host Willie Geist threw a penalty flag at Stengel's unnecessary roughness, comparing the Tea Party to radical advocates of stringent Sharia law." (audio and video at link) (Stengel is Managing Editor of Time Magazine.)


In Sharia law you can chop off peoples' hands. Below, smiling man holds amputated hand of man punished by Sharia law in Nigeria, 2/15/08. Nigeria is a member of the UN Human Rights Council. Just like the Tea Party.


Pennsylvania poll of likely voters O 47, R 45 with 6% undecided, majority of undecided unhappy with country's direction

Three in four (undecided voters) say the country’s going in the wrong direction,” Lee said. If they believe that, they’re unlikely to back the incumbent, he said. “They’re either staying home or they’re voting for Romney.” Poll conducted Sept. 18-20 by Susquehanna.

9/22/12, "Poll: The presidential race is tight in Pennsylvania,
" Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Mike Wereschagin

"Two percentage points separate President Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney in a state poll conducted for the Tribune-Review, even though the campaigns largely are ignoring Pennsylvania and concentrating on other battlegrounds.

Obama polled 47 percent to Romney's 45 percent among likely Pennsylvania voters, with 6 percent of voters undecided and 44 days until Election Day, according to the survey by Susquehanna Polling & Research. The survey of 800 voters, conducted Sept. 18-20, has a margin of error of 3.46 percentage points.

The poll showed most voters are disappointed with the country’s direction, evenly split on whether Obama deserves another term and hesitant to back Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Fifty-one percent of the state’s voters approve of Obama’s job performance.

Other recent polls showed a larger margin for Obama, leading some to speculate that Pennsylvania — which hasn’t voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1988 — no longer is a swing state. Two of those last four polls gave Obama a lead larger than his margin of victory in 2008, when he defeated Sen. John McCain of Arizona by 10 percentage points.

“All the evidence points to a much closer margin,” said Jim Lee, Susquehanna president. “Nothing suggests we’re looking at anything like 2008.”"...via Drudge


Ed. note: Doesn't give sample size.

Not only has Brokaw not been fired for admitting he knew nothing about Obama 4 days before his 2008 election, now Brokaw blames Romney for the fact that he (Brokaw) won't talk about Obama's fatal failure in Libya

9/28/12, "NBC's Brokaw: Romney 'Missteps' Gave Obama 'Air Cover' And 'Camouflage' On Libya," Newsbusters, Drennen

"On Friday's NBC Today, special correspondent Tom Brokaw demonstrated the blatant media effort to ignore Obama administration failures surrounding the consulate attack in Libya: 

"Romney turned out to give the President air cover. There are serious questions about what happened in Libya and the absence of security and what is our Middle East policy, but Romney's missteps really have given the President more camouflage than he would have expected."

Brokaw lamely attempting to blame Mitt Romney for the failure of the media to ask tough national security questions of Obama echoed a recent
revealing statement by CBS News political director John Dickerson, who declared that it was solely Romney's responsibility to hold the President to account over Libya because the media would not."...(transcript and video at link)

List of MSNBC advertisers to boycott

Ads on MSNBC Saturday, 11/23/13, 4:13AM

Discover Card
Shields for Men (male drip)
Ram Trucks
Bob's Furniture
The following 13 ads ran on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show, Sat. AM 2/16/13, between 12:30-1AM

USAA Insurance
Progresso Soup
Ishares by Blackrock
Prilosec (for heartburn)
Nice n Easy hair color, Clairol
Citrucel (for irregularity)
Febreze air freshener
Crestor (cholesterol) (auto insurance)
Alka Seltzer


Beginning 12:30 AM. Sat. 9/29/12/ I'll be adding to this list as I have time to monitor the station:

Activia Breakfast Yogurt
Lazyboy Furniture Galleries
National Rent a Car
UFT and NYC Teachers
Marriott Residence Inns
Spark Business Card from Capital One
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nissan (Election sponsor)
Home Depot


MSNBC caught again doctoring video to slander the GOP presidential candidate and lie to the entire country, time to boycott MSNBC advertisers

9/28/12, "MSNBC Caught--Again--Twisting Video to Attack Romney," Breitbart, Joel B. Pollak

"Once again, the Democrat propaganda network known as MSNBC has been caught editing video to slander Mitt Romney. This morning on Morning Joe, co-hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough featured a video of a rally with Romney and running mate Paul Ryan in Dayton, OH. The crowd chanted "Romney! Romney!" but MSNBC added a caption 
  •  to make it seem that the crowd was chanting "Ryan! Ryan!
  •  and rejecting Romney.
The hoax was busted by a caller to the Pat and Stu Show at The Blaze, who had actually been at the rally and who told the hosts that Romney had not been--as MSNBC suggested--reminded the crowd that he was the candidate, but instead reminding them to include Ryan in their chant. "He stopped us to add, 'Romney-Ryan,' and if you watch the clip again, Ryan throws up his hand like, 'Oh, you don't have to add me to the chant.'"

The hosts, initially skeptical, were convinced when they viewed the tape again. The caller's account is confirmed by the raw C-SPAN video of the event, which did not include MSNBC's misleading caption.

This is not the first time MSNBC has manipulated video to make false accusations about Romney or Republicans. Andrea Mitchell tried the same in June, and was promptly called out by new media. In August 2011, Ed Schultz cut off a Rick Perry speech to make it appear that a reference to a "big black cloud" was a racist remark about President Obama. 

No word yet on whether Brzezinski and Scarborough will apologize." via Free Republic


Friday, September 28, 2012

41 million Tea Party supporters ready to vote, 16 million advantage over 25 million who identify as liberal- AP Poll, Sept. 13-17, 2012 (NY Times editorial page members, grab the Digitalis)

"THE AP-GfK POLL, September 2012," poll dates, 9/13-9/17

 9/28/12, "41 Million Tea Party Supporters Set to Vote," Breitbart, D. Hawkins

"A new Associated Press poll shows tea party supporters may have the last laugh in November.

The AP/GFK poll shows that 31% of likely voters consider themselves Tea Party supporters. With 131 million votes cast in the 2008 elections, that translates into an incredible voting bloc of 41 million Tea Party supporters waiting to cast ballots. These voters have already made their voices heard in Wisconsin earlier this year, as well as in Republican primaries in Texas and Nebraska.

That 31% of likely voters figure is greater than the 19% who described themselves as either strongly or somewhat liberal. Surprisingly, liberals have escaped media characterization as being a small, fringe-like group with little power or influence. At 19% of likely voters, self-described liberals would have a turnout of 25 million voters, some 16 million fewer voters than the Tea Party.

The good news for Mitt Romney and other Republican hopefuls is that the Tea Party supporters also appear ready to turn out in much higher numbers than all other voters. For instance, while they only made up 23% of the initial polling sample, which was a sample of all adults, their numbers improve as unlikely voters were removed by the AP from the data. When unregistered and unlikely voters were taken out of the poll, their share of the vote increased by 35%, to nearly one-third of the voting population. 
Meanwhile, self-described liberals fell 11% from the initial sample to the likely voter sample, while moderates increased by 3% and conservatives increased by 8%. This enthusiasm gap could make the difference in November. Once unregistered and unlikely voters were removed from the AP poll sample, Obama’s share of the vote plummeted by 10%, while Romney’s share of the vote increased by 28%. That support is driven, of course, by a supposedly dead movement. Overall, the poll shows a statistical tie with Obama at 47%, and Romney at 46%." via Free Republic


Ed. note: I'm a Tea Party supporter though I've never attended a rally or meeting. The Tea Party didn't exist when George Bush was President but I would would have supported it before the end of his first term. It became obvious that the establishment GOP was happy to throw this country down the drain. And that they despised ordinary, right of center Americans like me. If anything, they despise us more today. The Tea Party considers job 1 saving this country. Individual supporters may have views on various social issues but social issues aren't the main focus. They've never been my focus at any time. The NY Times editorial page has made clear it views Tea Party supporters as "embarrassments" at best. I'd be happy to meet anyone from the NY Times editorial page at a coffee shop and talk with them. I'd like them to tell me to my face why I'm a "national embarrassment." Obviously, that won't be happening.

"9/16/10, NY Times Editorial, "The Tea Party's Snarl"

"For both parties
  • and certainly the broad swath of independent voters,
imperative to avoid the sense of national embarrassment from each
  • divisive and offensive utterance,
In desperation, the Times even reaches for help from proven failure

  • Karl Rove,
calling him, "long the party's tactical mastermind."
  • Translation: Karl Rove is a proven failure despite the spin. He's only around now to make sure we don't get the candidates we need to save this country, to keep the GOP broken. The Times wants Rove to keep this up:
  • (The article below about Rove was written shortly before the November 2010 elections).
10/22/10, "Karl Rove's Flameout" The Daily Beast, Matt Latimer
"The GOP guru’s campaign cash binge this fall is the last gasp of a guy with rich friends. Ex-Bush aide Matt Latimer on how Rove hurt his boss, and why the right thinks he’s a fraud."...


8/31/12, "Exclusive: Inside Karl Rove's Billionaire Fundraiser," Bloomberg, Sheelah Kolhatkar


For the NY Times to praise Rove means they trust him to deliver for the left, not the right--as their guy McCain did. For the Times, everyone should be happy that both political parties and media are on the same side of issues, and strictly control the flow of information. Like they said in the movie, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," no more tears, no feelings, no choice. Conformity. Which used to be viewed as horrible.
  • everyone else thinks has never felt so cool....The good news is, as in Invasion of the Body Snatchers, there are still a few hold-outs....
But it’s awfully late in the day. The end is near, we face the final curtain, and it’s an open question whether the spirit...can triumph over the soporific, sophomoric,

self-flattering conformism:
Groupthink compliance has never felt so right!"

Scenes from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," 1956, wherein everyone is forced to be alike.


Gallup Poll right after Democrat convention shows independents deeply opposed to growth of big government, exact opposite of democrats

9/28/12, "The Liberal Media Is Ignoring Romney's Strength With Independents," US News & World Report, Mary Kate Cary

"If you believe, as I do, that the central question in this election is whether to grow the government going forward or reform the government we have, then here's the most telling number of all: In Gallup's polling right after the Democratic convention, nearly two-thirds of independents said that government "is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses." 

That's almost exactly the opposite of what two-thirds of Democrats said that government should do more. 

That's a huge disconnect between the president and independent voters, and there's not a peep about it in the media. I don't think that's by accident."


9/17/12, "Majority in U.S. Still Say Government Doing Too Much
," Gallup Poll, Frank Newport

"More than six in 10 independents agree that the government is doing too much."
Trend: Some people think the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. Others think that government should do more to solve our country's problems. Which comes closer to your own view? By party IDchart from Gallup 

22% of swing state voters say they could still change their mind before election day-Gallup

9/19/12, "Obama 48%, Romney 46% in Swing States
," Gallup Poll

"One in Five Swing-State Voters Could Change Minds"

"Twenty-two percent of swing-state voters are either undecided (5%) or say there is at least a slight chance (17%) they may change their vote preference between now and the election, underscoring the competitiveness of the election and the uncertainty about its ultimate outcome.

That 22% of swing-state voters includes 10% who currently support Obama and 7% who now prefer Romney. The candidates have roughly the same percentage of committed voters -- 39% of Romney supporters and 38% of Obama supporters in the swing states say there is no chance they will change their mind."...via Free Republic


Did you know local public school decisions have been taken over by an unelected person, Mrs. Obama, who has caused school meals to increase in price and leave children hungry?

9/27/12, "N.J. High School Students Planning Cafeteria Boycott To Protest Obama Guidelines,"

"Students at Parsippany Hills High School held a strategy session on Thursday to discuss a potential lunch strike, on Friday, over what they have called inadequately sized meals.

This year you’re eating lunch and you’re like ‘Did I even eat?’ You’re not even full,” senior Brandon Faris told CBS 2′s Derricke Dennis.

New federal guidelines stemming from first lady Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign have resulted in limits on protein and bread, and an increase in vegetables and fruits. The changes have also come at an increased cost.

All of it has also sparked a student campaign that has included online parody videos of students falling sleep in class and performing sluggishly in sports."...via Free Republic

above poster via Free Republic


Obama media business partners tout poll claiming their guy will win using data even pollster admits won't likely be reflected on election day. Polls are dreams sold as, hey, look, our guy's gonna win, it's all over

9/26/12, "Quinnipiac Pollster Admits: ‘Probably Unlikely’ That Electorate Will Feature Massive Dem Skew," NewsBusters, Matthew Sheffield

"With no manufactured outrage to hammer Mitt Romney at the moment, liberal journalists are now eagerly touting a series of polls which appear to show President Obama pulling away from the GOP nominee in several key states.

Unfortunately, these polls are relying on sample sizes which are skewed tremendously leftward with far more Democrats than Republicans and as such, they are unlikely to be good predictors of actual Election Day turnout. Do the pollsters themselves actually believe in their own sample sizes though? 
  • At least one appears not to.
Interviewed last month by conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt, Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac polling operation was particularly squeamish about sampling under tough questioning from Hewitt about a poll which Quinnipiac had released showing Democrats with a 9 percentage point advantage in the state of Florida.

In the conversation, Brown defended Quinnipiac’s sampling techniques but admitted that he did not believe that Democrats would outnumber Republicans to that degree in Florida come November. Pressed by Hewitt, the pollster said he believed that was a “probably unlikely” scenario. Instead, Brown kept saying that he thought his poll was an accurate snapshot of reality at the time.

“What I believe is what we found,” he insisted while also touting his organization's record of polls closer to actual elections.

Unfortunately, this cavalier attitude toward accuracy is actually widespread throughout the entire polling industry. As NewsBusters noted in June, exit polls, which rely on far larger sample sizes than those conducted by Quinnipiac and others have long been known to oversample Democrats, sometimes even drastically. 

Sadly, the awful record that many pollsters have is something that most people barely know anything about. As such, it is one of the media’s “dirty little secrets” since Americans certainly won’t hear about it from the press."...via Free Republic


Thanks to Republicans giving Obama much more than he ever dreamed of in the so called debt deal, Obama is now able to hide economic disasters til after the election and attack Romney as 'heartless.' But the GOP showed us who's boss.

Seniors are oblivious that in a few months $7.4 billion will be cut from MediCare Advantage. Thousands of Defense Dept. pink slips are written out but won't be delivered til after the election.

9/28/12, "How Obama and Allies Are Suppressing News of Economic Disaster Ahead,
" Front Page, A. Ahlert

"On May 7th, it was revealed that the Obama administration spent $8.35 billion on a “demonstration project” designed to postpone the vast majority of Obamacare’s Medicare Advantage cuts until after the election. On July 31st, it was revealed that the Labor Department warned defense contractors against notifying workers of impending layoffs before the election as well, despite the fact that it would require violating the law to do so. On September 21, it was revealed that a report on the Greek bailout will also be postponed until after the U.S. election. On September 13th, Fed Chief Ben Bernanke announced that he will be pursuing a third round of Quantitative Easing (QE3), once again under the auspices of “stimulating” the economy. The over-arching theme here is clear: anything that constitutes an “inconvenient reality” for this president, especially with respect to economics, will be delayed until after the election.

Thus, the president can continue to campaign on the “heartless” cuts a Romney administration will administer to healthcare in general, and seniors’ healthcare in particular, even as those same seniors remain oblivious to the reality that $7.4 billion will be cut from the Medicare Advantage program in 2013. As a result, enrollees will lose an average of $515 in benefits. Americans remain equally oblivious to the reality that family health insurance premiums have gone up by an average $2,730, despite a 2008 promise Obama made to lower premiums by $2500 by the end of his first term.

With respect to layoffs of employees who work in the defense industry, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act is quite clear: employers are required to give employees 60 days notice before mass layoffs take place. As a result of the failure of the congressional super-committee to reach a budget deal during the debt ceiling negotiations last August,"...
  •  [Ed. note: In other words, as a result of the GOP giving Obama more than he could ever have dreamed of].
(continuing): "automatic cuts in defense spending, aka sequestration, are scheduled to kick in on January 2nd. If the WARN Act were enforced, thousands of defense employees would receive their layoff notices on November 3rd–three days before the election."...  via Free Republic


Democrat Friedersdorf won't vote for Obama, says he's done more to wage war on whistleblowers than any modern executive, kills innocent children with illegal drones which creates more terrorists than it kills

"Obama has done more than any modern executive to wage war on whistleblowers."...

9/26/12, "Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama," The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf

"On stage, as he smiles into the camera, using words to evoke some of the best sentiments within us, it's hard to believe certain facts about him:      

1. Obama terrorizes innocent Pakistanis on an almost daily basis. The drone war he is waging in North Waziristan isn't "precise" or "surgical" as he would have Americans believe. It kills hundreds of innocents, including children. And for thousands of more innocents who live in the targeted communities, the drone war makes their lives into a nightmare worthy of dystopian novels. People are always afraid. Women cower in their homes. Children are kept out of school. The stress they endure gives them psychiatric disorders. Men are driven crazy by an inability to sleep as drones buzz overhead 24 hours a day, a deadly strike possible at any moment. At worst, this policy creates more terrorists than it kills; at best, America is ruining the lives of thousands of innocent people and killing hundreds of innocents for a small increase in safety from terrorists. It is a cowardly, immoral, and illegal policy, deliberately cloaked in opportunistic secrecy. And Democrats who believe that it is the most moral of all responsible policy alternatives are as misinformed and blinded by partisanship as any conservative ideologue.  

2. Obama established one of the most reckless precedents imaginable: that any president can secretly order and oversee the extrajudicial killing of American citizens. Obama's kill list transgresses against the Constitution as egregiously as anything George W. Bush ever did. It is as radical an invocation of executive power as anything Dick Cheney championed. The fact that the Democrats rebelled against those men before enthusiastically supporting Obama is hackery every bit as blatant and shameful as anything any talk radio host has done. 

3. Contrary to his own previously stated understanding of what the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution demand, President Obama committed U.S. forces to war in Libya without Congressional approval, despite the lack of anything like an imminent threat to national security. 

In different ways, each of these transgressions run contrary to candidate Obama's 2008 campaign. (To cite just one more example among many, Obama has done more than any modern executive to wage war on whistleblowers

In fact, under Obama, Bush-era lawbreakers, including literal torturers, have been subject to fewer and less draconian attempts at punishment them than some of the people who conscientiously came forward to report on their misdeeds.) Obama ran in the proud American tradition of reformers taking office when wartime excesses threatened to permanently change the nature of the country. 

But instead of ending those excesses, protecting civil liberties, rolling back executive power, and reasserting core American values, Obama acted contrary to his mandate. The particulars of his actions are disqualifying in themselves. But taken together, they put us on a course where policies Democrats once viewed as radical post-9/11 excesses are made permanent parts of American life....

If enough people start refusing to support any candidate who needlessly terrorizes innocents, perpetrates radical assaults on civil liberties, goes to war without Congress, or persecutes whistleblowers, among other misdeeds, post-9/11 excesses will be reined in."...via Instapundit