Friday, October 12, 2012

BIDEN GRUNTS, GUFFAWS, SMIRKS AND BULLIES HIS WAY THROUGH VP DEBATE


Did Joe Biden bring in Al Gore as his debate coach? Did he review the tape from the Bush-Gore debate in 2000 and think obnoxious interruptions and smirks on questions of national security are the way to move voters? He sighed. He broke into Ryan's answers. He chortled. His actual answers were the least of his problems. His tone and demeanor were beneath the office he currently holds. 

Paul Ryan was fine. And, I mean that in the most literal use of the term. A snap CNN poll found that Ryan won the debate, 48-44. It wasn't the decisive mauling that Romney delivered to Obama, but it was enough to sustain Romney's momentum. At times, I wished Ryan had been more aggressive in defending his time to speak. Biden left some whoppers on the table that went unanswered. 
That said, Ryan gave forceful, passionate answers to several questions and his closing was especially strong. He had a firm command of the situation in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan. Most voters only know him as a budget guy, so his command of these issues was probably a pleasant surprise. There was nothing in his performance that would suggest he wasn't up to the job of being Vice-President. 
Biden though, was beneath his office. He clearly carried the weight of the campaign's recent stumbles on his shoulder. In the first hour, he acted like a man would had downed a six-pack of Red Bull before taking the stage. By the debate's end, the sugar rush had clearly worn off and his speech was much slower and more deliberate. The frenetic pace is better for him, because you can't pay as much attention to each word he says. As he slows up, the utter absurdity of what he's saying becomes more clear. 
Both Biden and Ryan had decent moments. In the end, Biden lost for two reasons. Ryan came off as an earnest and utterly reasonable person, with substantive ideas on a range of issues. He was likable. Biden's biggest problem, though, was his tone. He was rude, abusive and dismissive. He repeatedly smirked while Ryan was prosecuting the Administration's missteps in Libya. Smirking should be the furthest thing from anyone's mind when four Americans have been murdered. 

Ryan cites increased unemployment rate in Biden’s hometown to drive economic argument


Republican vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan slammed Vice President Joe Biden and the Obama administration’s economic record during Thursday night’s debate, referencing the high unemployment rate of Biden’s hometown of Scranton, Pennsylvania.
“You and I are from similar towns. He’s from Scranton, Pennsylvania, I’m from Janesville, Wisconsin. Do you know what the unemployment rate in Scranton is today?” Ryan asked.
“Sure do,” Biden responded.\
“Ten percent,” Ryan continued, “You know what it was the day you guys came in? 8.5 percent. That is happening all around America.”
“That’s not how it’s going,” Biden protested, “It’s going down!”
“Look, did they come into and we were in a tough situation? Absolutely, but we are going in the wrong direction,” Ryan explained. “Look at where we are. The economy is barely moving along. It is going at 1.3 percent — that is lower than it grew last year and last year was slower than the year before. Job growth in September was slower than it was in August and August was slower than it was in July. We are headed in the wrong direction.”
Ryan repeated some of the the statistics Romney used last week in his debate against Obama — including the 23 million Americans “struggling for work,” and high poverty rate.
“This is not what a real recovery looks like. We need new reforms for a real recovery,” he said.



RNC TO DOJ: INVESTIGATE OBAMA CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS


Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Reince Priebus fired off a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder today calling for an investigation into hundreds of millions of dollars in undisclosed Obama campaign contributions.

In part, the letter reads:
"[T]he President's campaign committee does not use the industry standard practices to guard against receiving fraudulent or excessive contributions via the internet," Priebus alleges in the letter. "As a result, the President's campaign committee is vulnerable to the receipt of prohibited contributions. Their failure to adhere to the industry standard has caused these questions regarding whether the campaign is deliberately inviting prohibited contributions."
We're talking about Eric "Fast and Furious" Holder here, so it's let's call it "pretty likely" that Priebus isn't looking for a whole lot of fast action. What he is looking to do, though, is to call some media attention to the issue. Hope does spring eternal.
For four years now, we've all wondered why a media so obsessed with things like Mitt Romney's tax returns (which the IRS have seen) and what private individuals do with their own money in the form of super PACs, is not at all curious about hundreds and hundreds of millions of undisclosed dollars that flooded and are flooding into Obama's '08 and '12 campaign coffers.
That was a joke.
We actually know precisely why the media's not interested -- they're worried that what they find might hurt Obama.
And now, with the release of a bombshell report that points to glaring and seemingly intentional security gaps in Obama's online fundraising juggernaut, the media looks like they might have good reason to worry. The report proves beyond any doubt that the potential for illegal overseas monies to flood into the Obama campaign and remain undisclosed thanks to a ridiculous (in the Internet age) $200 FEC cut-off, is almost limitless.
But as of today, though no one has refuted the report's major findings, the media is less interested in this potential scandal than even the real scandal surrounding Libya. Day after day after day, the Obama campaign keeps chumming its pet media-sharks with distractions like Big Bird and abortion. And day after day after day, the  sharks are more than happy to manufacture a frenzy that obscures the real issues -- like hundreds of millions of dollars in undisclosed campaign contributions.
Because the IRS has seen Romney's taxes and most of us couldn't care less about what private people do with their own money in the form of super PACs (unlike a pile of Obama money, super PAC money is publicly disclosed), those media obsessions have nothing to do with accountability or transparency.
The Obama campaign wanted Romney bloodied with his tax returns, and the corrupt media of course obliged. Moreover, the media lost all interest in toxifying super PACs once they figured out Obama wasn't going to be at a fundraising disadvantage. But hundreds of millions of undisclosed dollars going right into a sitting president's campaign coffers is a major story, whether the corrupt media wants to pretend it is or not.
In 2008, McCain disclosed the names and addresses of all his donors, including those under $200.
Obama did not.
In 2012, both Romney and Obama should be pressured to do the same. And if I were Romney, I would follow up on this letter by doing exactly that.

VP DEBATE: BIDEN, RYAN AT EACH OTHER ON EVERYTHING


DANVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- At odds early and often, Joe Biden and Republican Paul Ryan squabbled over the economy, taxes, Medicare and more Thursday night in a contentious, interruption-filled debate. "That is a bunch of malarkey," the vice president retorted after a particularly tough Ryan attack on the administration's foreign policy.

"I know you're under a lot of duress to make up for lost ground, but I think people would be better served if we don't interrupt each other," Ryan later scolded his rival, referring to Democratic pressure on Biden to make up for President Barack Obama's listless performance in last week's debate with Mitt Romney.

There was nothing listless this time as the 69-year-old Biden sat next to the 42-year old Wisconsin congressman on a stage at Centre College in Kentucky.

Nearly 90 minutes after the initial disagreement over foreign policy, the two men were still at it, clashing sharply over rival approaches to reducing federal deficits.

"The president likes to say he has a plan," said Ryan, a seven-term congressman. But in fact "he gave a speech" and never backed it up with details.

Biden conceded Republicans indeed had a plan. But he said that if enacted it would have "eviscerated all the things the middle class care about," including cutting health care programs and education.

As Biden and Ryan well knew, last week's presidential debate has fueled a Republican comeback in opinion polls.

Republicans and Democrats alike have said in recent days the presidential race now approximates the competitive situation in place before the two political conventions. Obama and Ryan are generally separated by a point or two in national public opinion polls and in several battleground states, while the president holds a slender lead in Ohio and Wisconsin.

Via: AP
Continue Reading...

The Joke's On Joe


 By PATRICK GAVIN | 10/11/12 9:56 PM EDT Updated: 10/11/12 9:58 PM EDT
Vice President Joe Biden and Rep. Paul Ryan were the two candidates on stage at Thursday’s vice presidential debate but a third character emerged: Joe Biden’s laugh, which didn’t escape the notice of tweeting politicos.
Weekly Standard’s Mark Hemingway: “Joe Biden’s laughing through talking about Iran sanctions?”
TIME’s Michael Scherer: “Not sure debate cameras have been light tested for Biden’s teeth. Best to watch with sunglasses.”
Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein: “Biden’s strategy seems to be to laugh at Ryan constantly. Will it work to infantalize Ryan, or backfire like Gore sighing?”

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Why Hasn't Obama Avenged the Deaths of Americans in Libya?


Today marks exactly one month since terrorists attacked the U.S consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killing our ambassador and three other American personnel. In the weeks since, Washington has been gripped by the unfolding scandals over the Obama administration’s failure to heed warnings of a growing terrorist danger in eastern Libya; its failure to provide additional security requested by U.S. personnel on the ground; and its failure to acknowledge that what happened in Libya was in fact a terrorist attack.
But all this has obscured the more serious scandal: the Obama administration’s utter failure to respond.
It took less than four weeks after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, for the Bush administration to gather intelligence, plan the full-scale invasion of Afghanistan and begin executing Operation Enduring Freedom. By October 7, 2001, multinational forces from the United States, Britain and Australia were on the ground, linking up with friendly Afghan forces, overthrowing the Taliban and driving al-Qaeda from the haven from which they had attacked our country.
By contrast, it is now Oct. 11 — four weeks after the attack of Sept. 11, 2012 — and the Obama administration has barely gotten a criminal investigation off the ground. The Post reported this week that while President Obama has vowed to “bring to justice” those responsible for the attacks, “nearly one month later, the White House has not spelled out how it plans to do so, even if it is able to identify and capture any suspects.... An unproductive, slow-moving investigation is complicating matters, with the FBI taking three weeks to reach the unsecured crime scene.”
Three weeks to reach the “crime scene”? Within days, CNN reporters were able to rummage through the rubble and recover the ambassador’s diary, and Post reporters were able to access and photograph the destroyed diplomatic compound. But the administration can’t get the FBI to the scene for three weeks? It should come as no surprise that the Obama administration is treating the attack as a crime — but it can’t even get the criminal investigation right.
This is not to suggest an invasion of Libya. But certainly by now we could have identified the groups responsible for the attack, targeted their compounds and retaliated in some fashion. Heck, the Libyan people have done more to retaliate than Obama has. The Associated Press reports that a few days after the attack, “Hundreds of protesters seized control of several militia headquarters … including the compound of one of Libya’s strongest armed Islamic extremist groups, evicting militiamen and setting fire to buildings as the attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans sparked a backlash against armed groups.”
What kind of signal does it send when a Libyan mob does more to avenge the killing of an American ambassador than the president of the United States?
Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

Times/Bay News 9/Herald exclusive Florida poll: Romney 51, Obama 44


Barack Obama's lackluster debate performance last week has dramatically altered the presidential race in Florida, with Mitt Romney opening up a decisive 7 percentage point lead, according to a new Tampa Bay Times/Bay News 9/Miami Herald poll.
The survey conducted this week found 51 percent of likely Florida voters supporting Romney, 44 percent backing Obama and 4 percent undecided. That's a major shift from a month ago when the same poll showed Obama leading 48 percent to 47 percent — and a direct result of what Obama himself called a "bad night" at the first debate.
The debate prompted 5 percent of previously undecided voters and 2 percent of Obama backers to move to Romney. Another 2 percent of Obama supporters said they are now undecided because of the debate.
"There's no question in my mind that debate made people stand up and pay attention, and it really wiped away any questions people had about Romney, whether they were undecided or soft for Obama," said Brad Coker of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, which conducted the poll for the Times and its media partners.
Across the board, from who is better suited to improve the economy, to who will protect Medicare, to looking out for the middle-class, to handling foreign policy, likely Florida voters now favor the former Massachusetts governor over the president.
"It's a very big shift since the debate, and where the shifts are taking place are very, very interesting because they are the types of shifts you see in Florida when something starts to break one way or another," said Coker, likening it to when Ronald Reagan shot past Jimmy Carter in 1980.
Take Tampa Bay, the battleground region that invariably mirrors statewide results. A month ago, Obama had a 4 percentage point lead in Tampa Bay. This week, Romney led by 8 percent, 52 to 44. In Central Florida, Romney now leads by 6 points.
Likewise, Obama's lead among likely women voters in Florida fell from 15 percentage points last month to just 2 points, 49 percent for Obama and 47 percent for Romney.

NY Times Calls Wisconsin A ‘Republican Haven’?


New York Times reporter Monica Davey was in Wisconsin on Thursday, playing up the Democratic candidate's Rep. Tammy Baldwin chances in her race for an open Senate seat against former Wisconsin governor, Republican Tommy Thompson. The headline was a puzzler: "A Republican Haven Is Finding Itself Split."
Though Gov. Scott Walker pushed through his public sector union reforms and survived a recall vote, Wisconsin hasn't been a "Republican Haven" for decades. The state has voted Democratic in the last six presidential elections, last voting for Republican Ronald Reagan in 1984 along with all but one other state. Between 1993 and 2011 Wisconsin was represented in the U.S. Senate by two Democrats, Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold (Feingold lost to Republican Ron Johnson in the November 2010 election, and Kohl is retiring, leaving the open seat Baldwin and Thompson are fighting over).
The Times is hypersensitive to the existence of "deeply conservative" states outside the East Coast, but suggesting Wisconsin isa traditional GOP safe haven is a real stretch.
Davis emphasized the very recent past to make the case:
In the battle for control of the Senate, this state would seem to have everything Republicans could dream of: a shift to red up and down the ballot in 2010, a Republican governor who decisively survived a recall effort a few months ago, and a local son turned vice-presidential nominee.
Yet with Election Day fast approaching, Representative Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat who has been rated among the most liberal members of Congress, finds herself about even in the polls with the Republican candidate, former Gov. Tommy G. Thompson, who once ran for president, and who not long ago was widely presumed to walk away with the open Senate seat here.
Even Ms. Baldwin acknowledged the other day that she had been taken by surprise -- “I pinched myself and said, ‘What?’ ” -- when polls began tipping her way. But the election here is a reminder that advertising matters (no matter how much voters complain about it), that people make choices on individual candidates (not only party ideology), and perhaps most of all, that Wisconsin, like some of the other Midwestern states that moved toward the Republicans in 2010, may remain relatively evenly split along partisan lines.
Davey eventually contradicted her story headline, rebranding Wisconsin as "volatile" and a place where "voters have always been split."
Beneath all of this is the question of where Wisconsin, arguably the most politically volatile state in recent years, stands now....But others say that Wisconsin voters have always been split and always will be, and that a vote in June to turn back a recall effort against Gov. Scott Walker was less a sign of Republicans’ dominance in the state than of “disquiet,” in the words of Dick Pas, the Democratic chairman in Waukesha County, with the broad notion of recall.
Davey concluded with this cutesy anecdote for the Democrat:
Still, Ms. Baldwin recalled a formative moment of her own, watching a tiny television from an efficiency apartment in 1984 as Geraldine A. Ferraro received the vice-presidential nomination, the first woman to do so for a major party. “The firsts also send a strong message,” she said, “to those who may think, ‘Can I do anything I want?’ ”
Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading...

Cutter’s Day Still Getting Worse: “I Promise To Resign As Soon As Romney Gives A Foreign Policy Speech With Some Policy In It”…


Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter continues to draw fire as she continues to criticize Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for questioning President Obama’s response to the terrorist attack in Libya.
“I promise to resign as soon as Romney releases his taxes or gives a foreign policy speech with some policy in it,” Cutter emailed a Huffington Post reporter, after clashing with Townhall’s Katie Pavlich, who asked her if she was going to resign.
Cutter also clashed with FOX News’ Bret Baier over her remarks earlier this evening.

Morning Bell: 10 Questions for the Vice Presidential Debate


Tonight’s debate between Vice President Joe Biden and Representative Paul Ryan is supposed to cover both domestic and foreign policy. The Heritage Foundation’s policy experts have submitted 10 questions they would like to see asked in the debate.
Watch with us tonight—we will be streaming the debate live at 9 p.m. ET on our Debate 2012 page, with an experts’ live blog.
DOMESTIC POLICY
1. Obamacare takes $716 billion out of Medicare to fund Obamacare. This includes $156 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage. Currently, 27 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage, which is a private alternative to traditional Medicare. The Medicare Chief Actuary projects that by 2017, Obamacare’s severe cuts will decrease enrollment in Medicare Advantage by 50 percent and result in less generous benefit packages for those who do remain in the program. What changes would you make, if any, to ensure that these seniors are able to keep their current Medicare Advantage plan?
2. Patient choice is working well within Medicare and other government health programs. In addition to the private plans in Medicare Advantage, there are 1,100 plans in the Medicare drug program and hundreds of plans in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. None of these plans use “vouchers”; they receive a direct government contribution toward the cost of the plans. Would you expand patient choice in Medicare? Why or why not?
3. Most people under the age of 40 will pay more in Social Security taxes than they will receive in benefits, and Medicare adds to federal deficits faster than any other government spending program. How would you focus entitlement reform on reducing spending?
4. Under Obamacare, the Health and Human Services (HHS) preventive services mandate requires nearly all employers to cover abortion drugs and contraception regardless of religious or moral objection, effectively exempting only formal houses of worship. Should Americans be able to live out their faith commitments outside the four walls of their church—in the public square and in the way they run their businesses or non-profits?
5. It has been almost four years since the federal government took control of General Motors. Vice President Biden has said the bailout of the firm was a success. Was this a success? Why or why not? And when should the federal government sell the shares it still owns?

CBS 5 Poll: Romney Gains 8 Points On Faltering Obama In California


SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) — The effects of President Barack Obama’s falter in the first debate with Mitt Romney are not just being felt in battleground states, according to KPIX-TV CBS 5′s latest tracking poll of California which shows Romney slicing eight points off Obama’s lead.
Obama had led by 22 points in the CBS 5 tracking poll released four weeks ago. Obama now leads by only 14 points, an 8-point improvement for Romney. At the same time, the poll found U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s support for her re-election bid remained largely unchanged, month-on-month, suggesting that the erosion in Democratic support is not across-the-board, but contained to Obama. Unclear is whether the Obama erosion is fleeting or long-lasting.
The poll data released Wednesday showed Obama 53%, Romney 39%, in California. Obama carried the Golden State by 24 points in 2008, so the poll found Obama is now running 10 points weaker than he ran 4 years ago. Among Independents, Obama led by 14 in September, but now trails by 9 in October, a 23-point right turn among the most coveted voters. One explanation, based on the poll data: The number of Romney supporters who said they were voting “for Mitt Romney” as opposed to “against Barack Obama” is way up, month over month.
In the U.S. Senate race, the poll showed Feinstein 54%, Republican Elizabeth Emken 35%. That’s largely unchanged from CBS 5′s last measurement, when Emken trailed incumbent Feinstein by 18 points.
On Proposition 30, the poll showed the issue to be a toss-up at this point. Among the most committed likely voters – those who said they “strongly support” or “strongly oppose” the measure, No narrowly leads Yes 38% to 33% with 29% uncretain. Among the larger group of likely voters, including those with soft support, Yes narrowly leads No 45% to 39% with 16% undecided.
National General Election
Obama          48% Romney        48%
Source: Rasmussen 10/6-8
National General Election
Obama          45% Romney        49%
Source: Pew Research 10/4-7
National General Election
Obama          47% Romney        49%
Source: Gallup 10/2-8


Morning Jay: Politics and the Gallup Poll


Since about the beginning of President Obama’s tenure, the Gallup poll has generally been one of the least positive polls for the Democratic party. This has prompted outrage and pressure from the left--even from presidential advisor David Axelrod.
Axelrod David
Over the summer Mark Blumenthal of Huffington Post wrote a critique of Gallup’s daily presidential job approval poll. The point of which was that Gallup was over-sampling whites and thus understating President Obama’s position in the adult population. I responded by arguing that Blumenthal’s case was underdeveloped and less-than-met-the-eye, and that was basically where things stood.
Until, that is, this week. President Obama enjoyed a bounce in his Gallup job approval number after the Democratic National Convention, as was to be expected, but there was a twist: it did not disappear. And while Gallup on average had found Obama’s job approval around 47 percent with adults through most of 2012, for the last five weeks it has been regularly above 50 percent. Yesterday, it stood at 53 percent, a number we have not really seen since 2009.

BIDEN CHALLENGE: KEEP DOWN-BALLOT DEMS FROM JUMPING SHIP


have cautioned Republicans that we shouldn't get too excited about Thursday's VP debate. Yes, Paul Ryan has forgotten more about the federal budget than Joe Biden ever knew. But, sometimes, having too much knowledge can trip you up in a debate. More troubling, Biden has a habit of just making stuff up on the fly. Its hard to debate crazy. That said, the real pressure is on the Vice President. If he whiffs this debate, Democrats will start running away from the Obama ticket. 

If I had to make a bet, I would wager that Paul Ryan will do very well in the VP debate. As I have noted, though, I don't think its the slam-dunk many people think and, given Biden's tendencies to just make shit up, there is no telling how the debate will go. I fully expect, at some point in the debate, Ryan will be forced to give a WTF look at the moderator because of something "Grandpa Joe" says. 
That said, the pressure on Biden is enormous. Last week, President Obama gave the worst debate performance in history. A Gallup poll of adults, which provides some institutional bias for Democrats, found that Romney beat Obama on the question of who won the debate by a 52-point margin. It was the biggest victory margin in history. 
Its another week until Romney and Obama face off again. Since the first debate, Romney is surging in virtually every poll. He is confident and steady on the campaign trail. Even if Obama can pick up his game in the next debate, that is a week away. Another week of "Romney crushed Obama in the debate" would be a terrible blow to Obama's reelection. So, all eyes are on the VP debate. 
Biden needs to go beyond his tendency to misspeak and make gaffes and nail a coherent vision for Obama's second term. If he doesn't, down-ballot Dems running for the Senate or the House will start to aggressively move away from the national ticket. Obama may do a better job in the debate next week, but without a powerful assist from Biden on Thursday, many Dems won't be able to wait that long. 

Systemic Medicare Fraud Under Houston's Sheila Jackson Lee


Will Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee have to distance herself from Houston's Riverside General Hospital now that top administrators have been caught in a major Medicare fraud scam?
Last week's roundup makes me wonder why the Obama administration is cracking down on Medicare/Medicaid fraud in the first place.  Aren't they the ones shelling out hundreds of millions to their Solyndra-like cronies with no consequences?
Is it to make them look tough on crime, or is it to make sure the recovered monies are going into their own wallets at the end of the day?
Since her days on the Houston City Council, Jackson Lee has pushed to use city funds to keep Riverside's doors open.  At that time, the councilwoman suggested that the facility was a good investment for the city. 
Jackson Lee's interest in Riverside goes back to the '80s when her husband Elwyn C. Lee, now University of Houston vice-chancellor (see video), served on Riverside's board from 1981-1988.  In his last year at Riverside, Mr. Lee was made chairman of that board, and over the years, husband and wife have been influential in keeping the financially strapped hospital open.  Jackson Lee was voted into Congress in 1994, representing the 18th district, where Riverside is located.
The president of Riverside, his son, and five others were arrested on October 4 as part of a nationwide Medicare fraud sweep.  Earnest Gibson III, chief executive officer of Riverside General Hospital for 30 years, has been charged with bilking $158 million out of Medicare over the last seven years.
His son, Earnest Gibson IV, was charged with thirteen counts, including money-laundering and conspiracy to commit health care fraud.  The older Gibson became president around the same time Jackson Lee's husband was appointed to the board in the early '80s.

Via: The American Thinker


Continue Reading...

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Organizing for America Assists Voter Fraud


In a new undercover video sting, James O’Keefe has captured a staffer for Organizing for America, which was established in 2009 to support the Obama Administration’s legislative agenda and is now connected to the Obama campaign, helping an undercover operative get set up to vote twice.
In the new video by the man who helped take down ACORN, an Obama volunteer who is working undercover for James O’Keefe tells Organizing for America’s director in Texas, Stephanie Caballero, that she wants to vote more than once to help re-elect President Obama.
According to O’Keefe’s organization, Caballero is listed in FEC filings as a Democratic National Committee employee.
Caballero then helps the Texas voter and volunteer get the form needed to request an absentee ballot for Florida, a key battleground state. Though Caballero never explicitly says voting twice is allowed, the dialogue in the video shows that she knows what the voter intends to do. Caballero says that she’ll print out the Florida form and “you just have to mail it back.” The double voter says that she doesn’t want “to get in any trouble, but like I said, if no one is gonna know.” Caballero’s laughing response? “Oh my God this is so funny! It’s cool though!” Caballero asks if the volunteer is “going to do what I think you are going to do?,” that is, vote in both Texas and Florida. After the volunteer says, “If no one is going to know,” Caballero gives the forms to the volunteer that will allow her to commit a federal felony by voting twice.

VP debate: An epic non-event?


Tomorrow night, the American electorate will watch another in a series of four debates intended to help voters decide who should be the next President.  In this event, however, neither presidential candidate will be present.  Instead, the two running mates will discuss and debate policies and issues on national television for 90 minutes.  While that will no doubt provide much entertainment for the pundit class, will it move the needle for the election?
Politico’s Jonathan Martin thinks it might:
Vice presidential debates typically matter as much as vice presidential picks — which is to say not a lot — but a convergence of factors is raising the stakes on this week’s faceoff between Paul Ryan and Vice President Joe Biden.
Looming most heavy over the clash in Kentucky is President Barack Obama’s remarkably weak debate performance last week, a showing that has given Republicans their first sense of hope in weeks and increased the pressure on Biden to get Democrats back on course. …
If “Gentleman Joe” took the stage four years ago, determined not to come off as patronizing or bullying Sarah Palin, it seems almost certain that Thursday will bring the appearance of “Scranton Joe,” the scrappy pol who’s never been afraid to throw a punch.
That’s probably true, although we’re a lot more likely to see Gaffemaster Joe, too — the one who helpfully explained that the middle class had been “buried the last four years,” while he and his boss occupied the White House.  Ramesh Ponnuru notes that while mainly discounting its impact, but predicts a walkover for Paul Ryan anyway:
The Democratic reaction to Obama’s debate loss may also point Biden in the wrong direction. Among liberals — and among some Democratic strategists, too — the prevailing view is that Obama lost because he didn’t call Romney on his outrageous lies, and especially because he didn’t draw a stark contrast on Medicare and Social Security. Obama even said the two candidates had a “similar position” on the second program. Democrats will be urging Biden to be more combative.
The vice president isn’t above demagogic attacks: In his convention speech, for example, he claimed “experts” had said that one of Romney’s tax proposals would create 800,000 jobs, “all of them overseas, all of them.” In fact, Biden was referring to a study by one expert, and it didn’t say what he claimed: It estimated 800,000 jobs would be created overseas, but it didn’t examine the impact domestically. Yet Biden also likes to be liked, and has tended to take his hardest shots before partisan audiences rather than in front of the Republicans he is criticizing.
And the consensus Democratic view that Obama was too passive and disengaged probably misunderstands why he lost the debate. The real problem was that he was less up to speed on the arguments and counterarguments than Romney was. If Biden internalizes the Democratic conventional wisdom, he will be more engaged than Obama was — but it won’t help unless he is also better informed. An amped-up yet inadequate response can come across as bluster.
Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading... 

DHS Report On Immigration: Lowest Number Of Illegal Alien Arrests Since 1972…


(CNSNews.com) – The Department of Homeland Security’s 2011 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics was released last month, including figures that show that the number of illegal aliens apprehended in the United States was the lowest in 40 years.
The report shows (page 91, table 33) that in fiscal year 2011, the number of illegal aliens apprehended was 641,633 – at that time the lowest total apprehensions since 1972 when the number of illegal aliens apprehended was 505,949.
The report shows that the number of illegal aliens apprehended has steadily decreased over the course of the Obama administration, from 869,857 in fiscal year 2009 to 641,633 in fiscal year 2011.
The table includes the following totals for fiscal years 2008-2011:
2008: 1,043.863
2009: 869,857
2010: 752,329
2011: 641,633
The table also shows that from 1976 to 2008, the number of apprehensions ranged from 910,361 in 1980 to 1,814,729 in 2000.
The largest number of apprehensions during the Obama administration – 869,857 in fiscal year 2009 – which, at the time, was the lowest total since 1974 when 788,145 illegal aliens were apprehended.

Enrollment in Federal Social Welfare Programs Outpaces Job Growth in Last 4 Years


Enrollment in Food Stamps, Medicaid, and Disability Far Outpaces Job Growth in Last 4 Years
A new chart provided by the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee details the alarming fact that enrollment in federal social welfare programs like Food Stamps, Medicaid, and Disability have far outpaced job growth over the last four years. Here's the chart:
In terms of percentage growth, Food Stamp enrollment has jumped 65.2 percent over the last four years, Medicaid enrollment 19.3 percent, and Disability enrollment 17.6 percent. The "total number of employed people," according to the chart, has grown at a negative rate, -0.7 percent.
Via: The Weekly Standard

Continue Reading...

The Actor Who Created Big Bird Makes About $314,000 a Year


Even Big Bird has to make some money. The Sesame Workshop's 990 form for the 2010 tax year reveals that Caroll Spinney, the man behind the newsworthy yellow guy and Oscar the Grouch, made $314,072. That's the most recent form available at Guidestar, which covers the tax year ended June 30, 2011. At MSN Jonathan Berr writes that Spinney's salary shows that "like for-profit media companies, Sesame needs to pay top dollar to attract talent." Spinney has played the bird since the show began in 1969, though others have stepped into the role at times.
For a comparison in the world of children's television, the girl who voiced Dora the Explorer (and became embroiled in a legal tangle with Nickelodeon) made about $300,000 over three years, TMZ reported in 2010. Spinney, however, is a long-term resident on Sesame Street. 
Big Bird made national headlines last week when presidential candidate Mitt Romney invoked the character's during the debate. Now, to Sesame's chagrin, the Obama campaign is trying to make votes out of Romney's pledge to cut PBS funding. But Big Bird has a greater villain than Mitt Romney, Berr says—for instance, his for-profit competitors like Dora. Berr writes that "competition for the preschool market is tough and getting harder," and Sesame has had losses and layoffs

Popular Posts