WATCH: Arizona Voters Savage John McCain’s Syria Support at Town Hall

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) came face-to-face with his constituents Thursday during a tense town hall event in Phoenix, Arizona. The senator, who has perhaps been the loudest Republican voice supporting military action in Syria met voters who were vehemently opposed to intervention and let their voices be heard.

According to a report by CNN’s Kevin Liptak, one man told McCain, “We didn’t send you to make war for us. We sent you to stop the war,” drawing applause from the crowd. Another man held up a bag on marshmallows, telling him, “This is what I think of Congress. They are a bunch of marshmallows. That’s what they are. That’s what they’ve become. Why are you not listening to the people and staying out of Syria? It’s not our fight.”

Videos captured at the event show McCain contending with the often angry crowd. At one point, a man repeatedly attempted to interrupt McCain mid-speech, causing the senator to stop and address him. “What you’re doing is not just disrespectful to me, but disrespectful to others who want their opinions and views heard.”

Later, a woman who said she had a young cousin living in Syria delivered an emotional plea to McCain. “For me, to listen to you say there is no good option in Syria-–I refuse to believe that,” she told him. “The good option right now is to take Saudi Arabia and Iran and force them to stop supporting the two sides in Syria. And you could do it. You can do it by diplomacy, not bombs, Sen. McCain. We cannot afford to shed more Syrian blood.”

McCain thanked the woman, who got loud support from the crowd, for her “emotional plea,” but disputed what he saw as her support for the Assad regime. “To say that Bashar Assad is anything but a merciless butcher, then we have a strong disagreement.”

Watch the two exchanges in the video below:

Via: Mediaite.com

Continue Reading....

McCain opposes Syria strike resolution

Sen. John McCain, President Obama's biggest cheerleader on Capitol Hill for a strike in Syria, said Wednesday that he would not support a Senate panel's draft resolution authorizing the use of force. 

"There are a number of people who are unhappy," McCain told reporters on Capitol Hill. Asked if he supported the measure, McCain said, "In its current form, I do not." 

The decision is a setback for the administration's effort to win swift support from Congress for an attack. McCain's opposition is likely a negotiating tactic to win more aggressive language in the resolution. But it's unclear how far the rest of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will go, with some members worried the resolution goes too far. A vote on the committee level was expected as early as Wednesday

. 

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., though, said the committee might delay the vote on the heel's of McCain's comments. 

McCain, who has long favored stepped-up U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, said he opposes the resolution crafted by fellow Sens. Bob Menendez of New Jersey and Bob Corker of Tennessee. The resolution puts a 90-day limit on action and says no American troops can be sent to Syria. The draft language also calls on the administration to submit to Congress its strategy for "achieving a political settlement" in Syria. 

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

HURRICANE SANDY AID BILL INCLUDES $150 MILLION FOR ALASKAN FISHERIES

One out of every $20 spent in a new bill to aid victims of Hurricane Sandy will go to "non-relief-related pork," says American Majority Action Spokesman Ron Meyer in an email to Breitbart News.

On Friday, the U.S. Senate passed a $60.4 billion bill that contains expenditures for areas that were unaffected by the storm, including $2 million roof repairs for Smithsonian Institution museums, $150 million for Alaskan fisheries disasters, and $58 million in taxpayer dollars to plant trees on private property in areas where Sandy never touched down.  Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) attempted to remove the $150 million fisheries “pork” spending from the bill, but his amendment was defeated.  Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) tried to strike down the tree subsidies but his amendment failed as well.

“It’s disgraceful to load a bill like this that has good motives, that has good intentions that is going to help people, with pork,” said Mr. Meyer on Fox Business.  “Why are you putting your own projects in it? It’s disgraceful.  It’s typical of Washington.”

Particularly troubling, says Mr. Meyer, is the fact that 85% of the bill’s allocations do not kick in until after 2014.  “That’s not immediate relief,” says Meyer.

The bill passed the Senate on a 61-33 vote.  Twelve Republicans supported the bill.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Eleven Major Newspapers Switch To Romney, Only One To Obama

According to the University of California, Santa Barbara American Presidency Project study of the top 100 newspaper editorial endorsements, Mitt Romney has seen a vast wave of switches from 2008 Obama endorsers. Obama, meanwhile, has seen only one newspaper that endorsed John McCain come around to endorse him. At the same time, many newspapers have also switched from Obama to “no endorsement.”

Here are the stats. As of today, 11 newspapers that endorsed Obama in 2008 have now endorsed Mitt Romney:

• The New York Daily News;
• Long Island Newsday;
• Houston Chronicle;
• Fort Worth Star-Telegram;
• Orlando Sentinel;
• Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel;
• Nashville Tennessean;
• Des Moines Register;
• Illinois Daily Herald;
• Los Angeles Daily News;
• Los Angeles Press-Telegram.

The only newspaper that endorsed McCain in 2008 and has switched to Obama now is the San Antonio Express-News. Meanwhile, another seven papers that endorsed Obama in 2008 have switched to no endorsement.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Poll: Romney Up 6-Points In Florida, 51%-45%…

Florida continues to look good for Mitt Romney. The Republican holds a 6-point lead in the state essential to his hopes of defeating President Barack Obama, according to a new Tampa Bay Times/Bay News 9/Miami Herald poll.

The poll shows slight tightening, with Romney's 51-45 lead down 1 percentage point from the Times'statewide poll a month ago. Other Florida surveys show a tighter contest and both campaigns are blanketing the state with appearances geared toward scraping together every last vote.

Still, nearly every key indicator in theTimes' pre-Election Day poll reveals Romney's advantage in a state Obama won four years ago.

Florida voters trust Romney more to fix the economy and give him an edge, 50 percent to 48 percent, on who will look out more for the middle class — a stark turn from past months when Obama and his allies unleashed a barrage of TV ads portraying Romney as an out-of-touch corporate raider.

Romney even has a slight advantage on foreign policy, with 2 percent more voters saying they trust him over Obama, who has faced criticism over the fatal attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya.

"Florida typically is a little bit more Republican than the rest of the country," said Brad Coker of Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, which conducted the poll for the Times and its media partners.

In 2008, Sen. John McCain "only lost by 3 points here and he lost by 7 nationally," Coker added. "Three points is not a lot of ground to make up in Florida for a Republican, particularly when the president's popularity is mixed, at best."

Via: Tampa Bay News

Continue Reading...

Shift in proportion of white, minority vote could decide Obama-Romney race

The ethnic mix of this year’s electorate could decide the winner of the race between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

It’s a reality that gives both campaigns sleepless nights, since a shift of a percentage point or two in the turnout of any major racial group could swing the outcome on Nov. 6.

For Obama, the question is whether he can limit his losses among white voters — and whether minority turnout will remain strong enough for him to emerge victorious.

Romney’s challenge is to hold down his deficit among Hispanic voters, hope that black turnout does not match or even exceed 2008 levels, and pull out all the stops to push white turnout high enough to win.

According to exit polls from 2008, Obama lost the white vote to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) by 12 percentage points (43 to 55 percent). But Obama won black voters overwhelmingly (95 to 4 percent) and Hispanic voters by more than a two-to-one margin (67 to 31 percent).

The downward pressure on Obama’s poll numbers among whites is clear. But polls, even from the same organization, disagree about its extent.

A Washington Post/ABC News tracking poll from Oct. 25 put Obama’s shortfall among whites at 23 percentage points (37 to 60 percent), a finding that sparked confidence from Republicans and inspired dread among Democrats.

The most recent iteration of the same tracking poll, however, found the margin to be 5 percentage points tighter, with Romney leading, 57 to 39 percent.

Given that whites represent about three-quarters of all voters, that 5-point shift would equate to a 3.75-point change in the overall national result — more than enough to produce a completely different winner.

Via: The Hill

Continue Reading..

D+8 VA POLL: ROMNEY +21 AMONG INDEPENDENTS, OBAMA UP TWO OVERALL

A D+8 Quinnipiac/New York Times/CBS News Virginia poll found President Barack Obama with a two-point lead (49%-47%) in Virginia, even though challenger Mitt Romney holds a 21-point lead among independents.

The partisan breakdown of the poll was: 27% Republican, 35% Democrat, 35% Independent. 

In 2008 in Virginia, Democrats had a six-point turnout advantage at the polls, and independents made up 27% of the electorate (Democrats made up 39% and Republicans 33%). Obama beat McCain by one point among independents in 2008 (49%-48%). 

In the Q poll, independents make up 35% of the sample -- an eight-point increase from 2008 --  and Romney beats Obama by 21 points. Romney even leads Obama by seven points when voters were asked which candidate would work work better with "both Democrats and Republicans in Congress."

But the poll, which surveyed 1,074 Virginia likely voters between Oct. 25-28 and has a margin of error of +/-  three percent, has Obama leading by two points. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

GALLUP: OBAMA'S EARLY VOTE ADVANTAGE COLLAPSES 22-POINTS OVER 2008

My pal Guy Benson found a juicy nugget that helps to bring more clarity to the news from Gallup yesterday that shows Romney leading Obama in the early vote by a full seven points, 52-45%. Almost exactly four years ago (October 28, 2008),  according to Gallup, Obama was massacring John McCain among early voters with a fifteen-point lead, 55-40%. That means, at least according to Gallup, that Obama's early vote advantage has dropped 22 points when compared to '08.

Benson also notes that the percentage of voters who have or intend to vote early was 33% in 2008 and remains at 33% today. As Don Surber said in this tweet, "People don't wait in line to vote for the status quo[.]"

In his email to me, Benson makes The Point: "Obama had a 55/40 lead on McCain with early voters in '08, but only led by 3 pts with the election day crowd.  He ended up winning by 7 overall."

In other words, among those who actually voted on Election Day, Obama's advantage over McCain was only three points. Obama won by seven overall because of the early vote margins he had accumulated. If Gallup is correct about 2012 and Romney being ahead by seven with early voters, that means Obama's in very deep trouble. Even polls that show Obama with a small lead in states like Ohio confirm Romney will win among those who vote on Election Day.

Like me, Benson is skeptical of Gallup because, like its daily tracker that gives Romney a five point lead over Obama nationally, this early voting poll defies the CorruptMedia's conventional wisdom. But there are a few things you have to keep in mind.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

SUNDAY SHOWS: Republicans Tee Off on Libya

On Sunday's political talk shows, several Republicans criticized the Obama administration's response to the September 11, 2012, terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya. Here's Senator John McCain of Arizona on CBS's Face the Nation:

You know, this administration is very good at touting and giving all the details like when they got Bin Laden. But now, we know that there were tapes, recordings inside the consulate during this fight, and they've gotten—they came—the F.B.I. finally got in and took those, and now they're classified as "top secret." Why would they be top secret? So the president went on various shows, despite what he said he said in the Rose Garden, about terrorist acts, he went on several programs, including "The View" including "Letterman" including before the U.N., where he continued to refer, days later, many days later, to this as a spontaneous demonstration because of a hateful video. We know that is patently false. What did the president know? When did he know it? And what did he do about it?

McCain said for "literally days and days" the White House "told the American people something that had no basis in fact whatsoever."

Newt Gingrich, on ABC's This Week:

But the bigger issue is, whether it’s unemployment or it is what happened in Benghazi, where we’ve had this strange situation over the weekend that the Secretary of Defense apparently refused to obey the President’s order, if the president is telling the truth and he actually instructed his assistants to get aid to Benghazi, we're now being told that the Secretary of Defense canceled that. And I think these kinds of things all drag down the Obama campaign.

Ohio senator Rob Portman talked on Fox News Sunday about a "shocking breakdown" with regard to the Obama administration's response:

This is not about politics.  This is about a huge national security issue that affects all of us and there was a shocking breakdown, operationally, not to have the security there in the first place.   And then not to respond to these guys, in their pleas for help for 7 hours, during a firefight.  It’s unbelievable and now, we are hearing that the president of the United States, based on his own words, issued a directive immediately after he found out about the firefight, saying that he wanted to be sure those people on the ground were safe and they were getting what they needed.  It didn't happen.  This means either that the president's order was not followed, which would be a breakdown in terms of the White House procedure, or, it means the order wasn’t issued.  We need to find out about this, it is not about politics, it is a very serious situation.  After the fact, of course, there’s also been a lot of confusion about what happened and why it happened.

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading...

NYT: Obama’s Aura of Defeat

In an argument that was echoed and amplified around the liberal twittersphere yesterday, New York’s Jonathan Chait made the case that the Romney campaign has bluffed the press into covering the last two weeks of the campaign as though Obama’s losing. Like George W. Bush in 2000, who famously (and probably foolishly) campaigned in California to lend himself an air of inevitability in the closing days of the campaign, Team Romney’s current brash confidence is designed to persuade the media to overlook the underlying numbers that still point to an advantage for the incumbent. And it’s working, Chait argues: The “widespread perception that Romney is pulling ahead,” he writes, “is Romney’s campaign suckering the press corps with a confidence game.”

I agree with Chait that the numbers still show Obama with a slightly clearer path than Romney to an (excruciatingly narrow) electoral college victory. But if you’re looking for a reason (besides, of course, the national polling showing an ever-so-slight Romney edge) why the media narrative has tilted toward the Republicans over the last week or so, I think the Romney campaign’s guarantee of victory has mattered much less than the Obama campaign’s recent aura of defeat.

Losing campaigns have a certain feel to them: They go negative hard, try out new messaging very late in the game, hype issues that only their core supporters are focused on, and try to turn non-gaffes and minor slip-ups by their opponents into massive, election-turning scandals. Think of John McCain’s desperate hope that elevating Joe the Plumber would change the shape of the 2008 race, and you have the template for how tin-eared and desperate a losing presidential campaign often sounds — and ever since the first debate cost Obama his air of inevitability, he and his surrogates have sounded more like McCain did with Joe the Plumber than like a typical incumbent president on his way to re-election. A winning presidential campaign would not normally be hyping non-issues like Big Bird and “binders full of women” in its quest for a closing argument, or rolling out a new spin on its second-term agenda with just two weeks left in the race, or pushing so many advertising chips into dishonest attacks on its rival’s position on abortion. A winning presidential campaign would typically be talking about the issues that voters cite as most important — jobs, the economy, the deficit — rather than trying to bring up Planned Parenthood and PBS at every opportunity. A winning presidential campaign would not typically have coined the term “Romnesia,” let alone worked it into their candidate’s speeches.
Via: New York Times

Continue Reading...

BIDEN AND OBAMA AREN’T PART OF THE WHITE HOUSE, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Not Part of Administration

Courtesy of The Hill, a stunning admission from the White House:

The White House on Friday said Vice President Biden was speaking for himself and President Obama when he said the administration was unaware of additional requests for security in Libya.

“He was speaking directly for himself and for the president,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said at his daily briefing.

The explanation came after Biden made waves during his debate with GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan by indicating the administration was unaware of requests by State Department officials for additional security in Libya.

Oh, so the Obama White House isn’t part of the Obama Administration?  And “The White House” is an organization distinct from B. Hussein Obama and J. Biden?  They’re just a couple of guys the “White House” occasionally meets for drinks after work?  You learn the most amazing things listening to Jay Carney.

The staggering incompetence of the Obama Administration has rocked even some of their media supporters.  The best thing they can do at this point is try to downplay the significance of what Obama, Biden, and their spokespeople are saying.  They report the news as quickly as possible, in the softest whisper they can manage, and hope readers don’t absorb the import of what they’re saying.

Some reporters are doing nice work on the Benghazi debacle, but Big Media, as a whole, is not building a “narrative” that ties it all together, they way they most certainly would for a Republican administration.  If Vice President Sarah Palin had tried to excuse patently false statements made during a debate, concerning a debacle that claimed the lives of four Americans, by claiming that she and President John McCain really weren’t part of the McCain Administration, you’d be seeing 24/7 “America in Crisis” news coverage of it all weekend.

Leaving the Administration’s deceits unconnected by a narrative thread allows ridiculous falsehoods to be taken as serious responses.  Obama’s people keep insisting that they’ve been calmly and rationally “investigating” the Benghazi attack, and releasing the best information they have at each given moment.  That’s nonsense – they haven’t “released” anything since the “spontaneous video protest” fantasy.  All the valid information Americans have about the Benghazi attack has come from investigative reporting and Congressional oversight.  The Administration hasn’t given us the truth; we’ve taken it from them.

Via: Human Events

Continue Reading...

Obama launches pre-emptive strike ahead of Romney’s foreign policy speech

LEXINGTON, Va. — President Obama’s re-election campaign on Monday launched a pre-emptive strike ahead of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s planned foreign policy address, arguing that Mr. Romney has failed the the commander-in-chief test on the global stage — in part by staking out positions to the right of former President George W. Bush.

The Obama camp released a new television advertisement and issued a memo on Monday criticizing Mr. Romney’s bumpy overseas trip this summer as well as his response to the assaults on the U.S. diplomatic post in Libya — highlighting how a national security adviser to GOP Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign called Mr. Romney’s stance on Libya the “the worst possible reaction."

Mr. Romney is set to give a broad-scale attack on Mr. Obama’s handling of foreign policy and national security issues in a speech this morning here at the Virginia Military Institute.

In the memo, two former top Obama national security advisers — Michele Flournoy and Colin Kahl — say the former Massachusetts governor’s “latest effort to reboot and re-set the Romney foreign policy” cannot hide the fact that he pushes positions “outside of the mainstream and often to the right of even George W. Bush.”

That, they say, is not surprising because Mr. Romney has surrounded himself with the same ex-Bush advisers who embraced what they called the “with-us-or-against-us approach” that led to “some of the worst foreign policy failures in American history, including the Iraq War.”

The Obama camp also challenged Mr. Romney “to move beyond swagger and slogans” and spell out how exactly his foreign policy approach would differ from the current occupant of the White House.

Via: Washington Times

Continue Reading...

BATTLEGROUND POLL: ROMNEY UP 16 WITH INDEPENDENTS, UP 13 IN ENTHUSIASM

In 2008, President Barack Obama won the independent vote over John McCain by a margin of eight points, 52-44. This morning, a new Battleground Poll has Mitt Romney massacring Obama among indies by a whopping 16 points, 51-35.

That's a 24-point swing among independents since 2008, a group that makes up anywhere from a quarter to a third of voters, and yet Battleground still has Obama in the lead 49-48…?

But if I'm skeptical of those bottom-line numbers, our journalist overlords who have chosen to palace guard instead of question will declare me a "truther."

The Battleground Poll also shows a 13 point enthusiasm gap in Romney's favor. Only 73% of Obama's supporters are "extremely likely" to vote, compared to 86% of Romney's supporters.

But again, don't question Battleground's 49-48% outcome. In fact, don't questionanything anymore -- or the media will question you and mock you as a "truther. " This includes questioning our government about the release of counter-intuitive unemployment statistics very helpful to the president just 30 days out from the election.

Though the media hasn't yet decided it's time for a Romney Comeback Narrative, and probably never will, even if he wins -- there's no question Romney is rebounding in every national and swing state poll.

Nationally, Gallup has it all tied up among registered voters -- with the president dangerously below 50 at 47%. Rasmussen uses the more reliable likely voter screen and has Romney up 49-47%.

In the Real Clear Politics poll of polls,  nationally Romney is only down .09%. A week ago he was down over 4 points.

In Ohio, according to RCP's poll of polls, Obama's Ohio lead has shrunk to three --  Virginiahas Obama only up by 0.3. Florida and Colorado are tied.  

The good news for Romney is that we are now seeing polls from each of these states with the GOP nominee in the lead. The bad news for Obama is that in most of these swing state polls, he is not hitting 50.

Well, actually the worst news for Obama is 85% of the calls made for this new Battleground Poll were made prior to Obama humiliating himself in last week's debate. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

REPUBLICAN YOUTH VOLUNTEERS HIT THE ROAD IN SWING STATES

The Republican National Committee is deploying as many grassroots supporters as it can to go door-to-door for the Republican presidential ticket in three swing states, starting this weekend.

“Deploy to Ohio, Virginia, or North Carolina to knock on doors and make phone calls for Romney-Ryan 2012 and other Republican candidates,” reads the flyer for the Republican National Committee Swing State Bus Deployment.

The Republican campaign effort for this election cycle has vastly outpaced that for previous presidential elections. This year, volunteers for the Republican National Committee have made nearly 5 times more phone calls than in Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)’s 2008 campaign for president, according to a statement from Kirsten Kukowski, Communications Director for the RNC.

“We’ve already contacted more voters than both the 2004 and 2008 cycles and we still have 5 weeks left,” she said.

The bus deployment that starts this weekend is part of the larger Get Out the Vote ground game, she said.

Keegan Conway, a recent college graduate volunteering at the RNC headquarters, hopes to make the cut for this weekend’s bus trip to North Carolina, he said.

“I’d be going with another intern from the office and some of my friends at the phone bank,” he said.

Conway came to Washington from California’s Central Valley 3 months ago to educate people about Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s message, he said.

Via: Human Events

Continue Reading...

The 2003 Obama-PLO video and Obamacare – is there a pattern of hiding the facts?

SAN DIEGO, October 5, 2012 ― The line between political speech and public consequences is often blurry, if not complex. Many politicians mean well, but effect risky policies and laws that have unintended consequences.

Americans are a rich and multi-faceted people. Many people, including physicians of all backgrounds, demand more than platitudes when it comes to their careers and the well-being of their patients. In the setting of elections and the massive overhaul of the American medical system through Obamacare, it is just as valuable to know what is said as it is to uncover what is being hidden.

THE VIDEO

Flashback to the 2008 Presidential campaign between Obama and McCain: “The Los Angeles Times did not publish the [2003 Palestine Liberation Organization fundraiser] videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it,” said the newspaper’s editor, Russ Stanton. “The Times keeps its promises to sources.”

Apparently, Americans will never see the 2003 video in which touted "Barack Hussein Obama" and his wife, Michelle, are seen cavorting in an openly anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-American milieu at the P.L.O. event. The LA Times, which purportedly holds the only copy, refuses to release it so that it may retain its journalistic integrity and keep its promise to the original source.

Using the same logic as the LA Times, it would seem appropriate that an individual who feared personal harm or career-damaging actions would likewise seek protection for his 'story' of that same event.  Such an individual exists.

Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

Via: The Washington Times

Continue Reading...

White House Begs Defense Contractors Not To Issue Layoff Notices

The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.

The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs tied to sequestration cuts. But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed Martin, said they still were considering whether to issue the notices — which would be sent out just days before the November election.

But the Friday guidance from the Office of Management and Budget raised the stakes in the dispute, telling contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance.

The guidance said that if plant closings or mass layoffs occur under sequestration, then “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” would be paid for covered by the contracting federal agency.

Senate Republicans, who accused the White House of trying to hide job losses after the first guidance, said Friday that the new OMB statement “puts politics ahead of American workers.”

“The Obama Administration is cynically trying to skirt the WARN Act to keep the American people in the dark about this looming national security and fiscal crisis,” Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said in a statement. “The president should insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and move forward with the layoff notices.

Via: The Hill

Continue Reading...

DEMOCRATS: INVESTIGATE BENGHAZI ATTACK AFTER THE ELECTION

Don’t be fooled by the supposedly bipartisan effort to investigate the Obama administration’s actions after the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya. Democrats are no more serious about challenging their leader in the White House than they have ever been.  

Trying to pass off his actions as part of a bipartisan effort at investigation, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) started circulating a letter that his aides said would be asking for more information.

Republicans claimed that there were now calls from both parties for an examination of Obama and his administration’s actions; Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said:

It's my understanding today that all members of the Foreign Relations Committee — both Democrats and Republicans — are asking the administration for answers. So this is now something that certainly could never be colored as partisan.

John McCain had harsh words for Obama and his minions, calling Obama’s contention that the anti-Islamic video was to blame for the attack “unbelievable” and “disgraceful.”

When asked why Obama and his pals would act in such a way, McCain blasted:

Some allege that maybe it’s because they’re trying to convey to the American people that al Qaeda is no longer a threat, and that when Osama bin Laden left that was the case, but the reality is that al Qaeda is well and thriving in some places.

But here’s the salient point, and how the Democrats are duping the public into thinking that they truly want an investigation: Kerry and his pals’ letter to Thomas Nides, deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, is asking for more information and a full briefing after the Senate returns in November.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

THANK YOU, OBAMACARE: FAMILIES PAY $3000 MORE FOR INSURANCE; OBAMA PROMISED $2500 DECREASE

President Barack Obama promised that Obamacare would cut family health insurance premiums by $2,500 by the end of the first term--but instead they have risen by $3,000, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation study cited by Investor’s Business Daily. 

The cost of health insurance today is more than 50% higher than Obama promised it would be--and the costs are expected to continue to rise as Obamacare is impemented.

John Merline of Investor's Business Daily notes the rising costs specifically contradict a campaign promise Obama reiterated several times, including in debates with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and at events along the 2008 campaign trail. 

Furthermore, the data show that the rise in family premium costs, largely attributable to the costs of complying with Obamacare, has outpaced the rise in costs under eight years in the previous four years of George W. Bush. 

Health insurance companies have already been required to provide additional coverage for so-called “children” up to age 26, among other changes. That coverage is described by Obama as “free,” but in fact the costs are borne by other patients. 

Obamacare also does nothing to change the underlying incentives driving the rising costs of health care, and in fact makes them worse by adding mandates and reducing patients’ choices.

Over the next four years, if Obama is re-elected and Obamacare is not repealed, the federal government will have to apply cost controls, resulting in the rationing of health care by bureaucrats and/or hospitals. 

That is why the Obama administration placed such a heavy emphasis on the Independent Payments Advisory Board--and why vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has spent so much time attacking it.

Via: Breirbart

Continue Reading...

MEDIA POLLS: THE NEWEST NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN AD

Over the years, I've generally had little patience when partisans make the "polls are wrong" argument. I've usually found it to be the last refuge of campaigns which were clearly struggling. Sure, individual polls can be wrong, and some can occasionally produce a crazy outlier, but a collective average of polling produces a roughly accurate snapshot of the state of a race. This year, however, is different. The overwhelming majority of media polling this election employ such absurd assumptions about turnout this November that they not only misrepresent the presidential race, they are actively distorting it. I also believe it is intentional. 

In 2008, the electorate that elected Barack Obama was 39% Democrat, 32% GOP and 29% Independent. This is what we call a D+7 electorate. Obama defeated McCain by 7 points, the same margin. In 2004, the electorate was 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 26% Independent, in other words D/R +0. Bush defeated John Kerry by 3 points nationally. 

Yet, virtually every big media poll is based on a model in which Democrats equal or increase their share of the electorate over 2008. Beyond simple common sense, there are many reasons this won't happen. The Dem vote in '08 was the largest in decades. It came after fatigue of eight years of GOP control, two unpopular wars, a charming Democrat candidate who was the Chauncy Gardner of politics, a vessel who could hold everyone's personal dreams and hopes for a politician. It was a perfect storm for Democrats. 

None of the factors driving Democrat turnout in '08 exist today. Recent polls from AP, Politico and the daily tracking polls from Rasmussen and Gallup, all of which assume relatively lower Democrat turnout in November, show the race essentially tied. Only those polls showing an electorate with equal or greater numbers of Democrats show Obama with any sizable lead. 

Yet, it's these polls that are driving the political narrative. Every day the media launches a number of stories about Romney's "struggling" campaign. They cite anonymous GOP sources who wring their hands that the campaign is losing ground. The only real evidence of this, however, are the polls which heavily over-sample Democrat voters. Without these skewed polls, the media's narrative would be untenable. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...