Los Angeles Times Endorses Obama for president

When he was elected president in 2008, Barack Obama was untried and untested. Just four years out of the Illinois state Senate, he had not yet proved himself as either a manager or a leader. He had emerged from relative obscurity as the result of a single convention speech and was voted into office only a few years later on a tidal wave of hope, breezing past several opponents with far more experience and far clearer claims on the job.

Today, Obama is a very different candidate. He has confronted two inherited wars and the deepest recession since the Great Depression. He brought America's misguided adventure in Iraq to an end and arrested the economic downturn (though he did not fully reverse it) with the 2009 fiscal stimulus and a high-risk strategy to save the U.S. automobile industry. He secured passage of a historic healthcare reform law — the most important social legislation since Medicare.

Just as important, Obama brought a certain levelheadedness to the White House that had been in short supply during the previous eight years. While his opponents assailed him as a socialist and a Muslim and repeatedly challenged the location of his birthplace in an effort to call into question his legitimacy as president, he showed himself to be an adult, less an ideologue than a pragmatist, more cautious than cocky. Despite Republicans' persistent obstructionism, he pushed for — and enacted — stronger safeguards against another Wall Street meltdown and abusive financial industry practices. He cut the cost of student loans, persuaded auto manufacturers to take an almost unimaginable leap in fuel efficiency by 2025 and offered a temporary reprieve from deportation to young immigrants brought into the country illegally by their parents. He ended the morally bankrupt "don't ask, don't tell" policy that had institutionalized discrimination against gays in the military.

ENDORSEMENTS: The Times' recommendations for Nov. 6

The nation has been well served by President Obama's steady leadership. He deserves a second term.

His record is by no means perfect. His expansive use of executive power is troubling, as is his continuation of some of the indefensible national security policies of the George W. Bush administration. This page has faulted him for not pushing harder for a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws. Obama swept into office as a transformative figure, but the expectations built up by the long campaign thudded back to earth amid an unexpectedly steep recession and hyperbolic opposition from the right. That the GOP has sought to block his agenda wherever possible is undeniable, but truly great leaders find ways to bring opposing factions together when the times demand it; Obama has not yet been able to do so.

Via: Los Angeles Times

Continue Reading...

OBAMACARE'S HEAVY TOLL ON MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS

President Obama likes to say his campaign is about building up the middle class, but his signature initiative in office — ObamaCare — will pile thousands of dollars in new taxes and higher health costs on top of America’s middle class.

How so? Through redistribution, of course. The president has made no secret of his fondness for using the government’s tax and spending powers to spread our diminished wealth around from one group of Americans to another. And ObamaCare is nothing if not a massive redistribution machine. It places huge new financial burdens on some Americans — primarily those who already have health insurance, including the vast majority of middle-class families — in order to extend new federal entitlement commitments to other households, primarily the uninsured.

In broad terms, the amount of redistribution is easily ascertained form the aggregate expenditures and taxes contained in ObamaCare. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), in 2020, ObamaCare will spend $229 billion on a Medicaid expansion and a new subsidy program for health insurance. These expenditures will primarily benefit 29 million people newly enrolled in Medicaid and the insurance subsidy program. That works out to nearly $8,000 for every newly insured American, or about $21,000 per newly insured household.

Much of the rest of the legislation is devoted to extracting these resources from everyone else in the country — about 290 million people — who won’t benefit from the new spending programs, and doing so in way that obscures what’s taking place. For these Americans who already have insurance, the law contains nothing but new financial burdens, in the form of higher taxes, higher premiums for their existing plans, and lower benefits, particularly for those on Medicare.

The sum total of the new taxes and Medicare and Medicaid cuts is about $278 billion in 2020. That’s nearly $1,000 in costs on average for most of the country, or $2,500 per household.

ObamaCare’s apologists say that these costs will primarily affect the rich, but that is not true. ObamaCare’s taxes and benefit cuts will directly increase burdens on middle class families. Among the most burdensome provisions are the following.

• The “Mandate” Tax. The Supreme Court officially designated ObamaCare’s individual mandate as a new “tax” on persons who don’t enroll in government-sanctioned insurance. CBO recently indicated that about 11 or 12 million uninsured people will have to pay this tax, but only about 6 million will do so (the others will successfully evade it). The total tax payment for these individuals will reach $8 billion in 2020, or an average of about $1,400 per person. Almost all of these taxpayers will be middle-class Americans, as the poor are exempt and there are very few rich people who are uninsured. According to CBO, 80 percent of those paying the tax will have incomes below five times the poverty rate, or about $115,000 in income for a family of four in 2012.\

Via: E21

Continue Reading...

When desperation strikes incumbents

It’s been a while since we’ve had an incumbent President lose an election.  In fact, it was 20 years ago, when George H. W. Bush lost in a three-way fight to Bill Clinton.  What made that election remarkable was that Bush had enjoyed some of the best-ever job approval ratings of any modern American President just a little over a year earlier, into the 80s — unthinkable these days for anyone, Republican or Democrat.  Bush, a decorated veteran of World War II and a longtime player in diplomacy and national security, lost the election to an upstart Governor when the economy turned somewhat sour.

I recall the moment when I realized for the first time — not feared, but realized — that Bush would lose the election.  Bush was campaigning in Michigan at the end of October, trying to whip some energy back into his campaign in the home stretch, a task that would fall far short just a few days later.  Then-Governor John Engler told the Warren, MI crowd that the Bush campaign was “hot” and the Democrats “dead in the water,” which was merely the kind of fantasy all campaigns spin toward the end.

Bush then spoke, and went after Clinton and Al Gore in a personal, demeaning wayI’d not heard from the President before then:

At a midday GOP rally at Macomb Community College, the president unleashed a rhetorical fusillade on Bill Clinton and running mate Sen. Albert Gore Jr., attacking their fitness for office, their character and charging, “My dog Millie knows more about foreign policy than these two bozos.”

In particular, Bush targeted Gore, whom he now calls “Ozone Man,” or just plain “Ozone.” “You know why I call him Ozone Man?” Bush said. “This guy is so far out in the environmental extreme, we’ll be up to our neck in owls and outta work for every American. He is way out, far out, man.”

When I heard that, I thought to myself, “What President talks like that?”  Part of the advantage the office gives an incumbent is its gravitas.  Bush’s own history as a diplomat, intelligence executive, and war hero gave him plenty more of that.  Bush abandoned that in the final week in schoolyard name-calling. That’s not why Bush lost the election, of course.  It was, however, the moment that I knew he’d lost it — and was pretty sure he knew he was losing, too.

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading...

Obamacare Mandate: Anyone Who Works 30Hr Week Is Now 'Full-Time'

(CNSNews.com) – A little-known section in the ObamaCare health reform law defines “full-time” work as averaging only 30 hours per week, a definition that will affect some employers who utilize part-time workers to trim the cost of complying with the ObamaCare rule that says businesses with 50 or more workers must provide health insurance or pay a fine.

“The term ‘full-time employee’ means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week,” section 1513 of the lawreads.  (Scroll down to section 4, paragraph A.)

That section, known as the employer mandate, requires any business with 50 or more full-time employees to provide at least the minimum level of government-defined health coverage to those employees.

In other words, a business must provide insurance if it has 50 or more employees working an average of just 30 hours per week, which is 10 hours per week fewer than the traditional 40-hour work week.

If an employer meets the requirements and does not offer health insurance, it must pay a penalty per employee for each month it does not offer coverage – not exceeding $750 per employee over the course of a year.

The obscure provision recently reemerged in regulations issued by the IRS for how employers must account for which workers are full-time and which ones are not.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading...

What If Crowley and Her Accomplices Succeed?

Such an outcome would be worse than a scandal, it would be downright dangerous.

Shortly after Obamacare was passed and signed by the President, Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute noted a sudden plethora of articles that had begun to appear in a wide variety of MSM outlets about the probable ill-effects of "reform." This prompted him to ask, "Where were these reporters before the passage of the health care bill?" The answer to this question is now pretty obvious. They were colluding, via Journo List and other such forums that we don't know about, to make sure that no one screwed up and told the truth before that morass of taxes and regulations became the law of the land. To the nation's cost, their self-censorship succeeded.

Today, we face a similar but much more dangerous situation. The "reporters" of the establishment news media are engaged in a concerted campaign of misinformation to get Barack Obama re-elected. This has been evident for some time, but the breathtaking mendacity of this effort was writ large by Candy Crowley during last Tuesday's presidential debate. Everyone has by now seen the video clip: the President made the preposterous claim that he had identified the attack on our Benghazi consulate as an act of terrorism as early as September 12. Then, when Romney called him on this egregious whopper, Crowley repeated the lie.

This was no misbegotten attempt at instant "fact checking." It was a deliberately disingenuous attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the debate's 65 million viewers. Crowley herself admitted that she had reviewed the transcript of Obama's September 12 Rose Garden remarks in advance of the debate, and she is not dumb enough to believe Obama's characterization of his boilerplate comment about "acts of terror" in general. This tag-team prevarication may well backfire. Jeffrey Lord suggests, in Thursday's American Spectator, that it may turn out to be the "tipping point that makes Mitt Romney the 45th President of the United States."

That would certainly constitute a splendid example of poetic justice. But what if Lord is wrong? What if Obama's MSM pimps succeed in getting him re-elected? As we saw with Obamacare, these people wield a great deal of power and they are obviously willing to abuse it. Moreover, despite the increasing distrust with which the public regards the effusions of the Fourth Estate, nearly half of the nation's adults still believe what they see and hear in the media. Gallup released a survey last month showing that 40 percent of the electorate still has some measure of confidence that the MSM reports the news "fairly, accurately and fully."

Via: American Spectator

Continue Reading...

VP hopeful Paul Ryan energizes Moon crowd with campaign appearance

Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan attacked President Obama’s policies on jobs and energy on Saturday morning during a quick stop near Pittsburgh International Airport.

The rally between appearances in the election battlegrounds of Florida and Ohio highlights what analysts consider a renewed emphasis on Pennsylvania as polls show the gap narrowing between Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

Ryan made a dramatic entry, walking on stage right off the plane at Atlantic Aviation in Moon and saying: “We are going to win Pennsylvania, and we are going to win this election.” Supporters twirled yellow Romney-Ryan towels in Terrible Towel fashion. The Secret Service estimated the crowd at 1,000.

The seven-term congressman from Wisconsin warned that Obama’s energy policies were hurting Americans, telling supporters to look no further than the gas pump for evidence.

“Look, gas prices are more than double what they were four years ago. Who knows what they’re going to be if he got four more years,” Ryan said.

“Not only are these policies wrong, not only do these policies cost us jobs, not only do they mean that American energy dollars go to the Middle East; they are keeping us from having a boon,” he said. “They are keeping us from having jobs. They are keeping us from making our paychecks stretch farther.”

Democrats responded before Ryan even landed.

“If we’ve learned anything over the last few weeks, we have learned that Mitt Romney will say anything to get elected,” Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald said as he stood with fellow Democrats at a small rally in the Airside Business Park. About 20 people attended the rally 90 minutes before Ryan spoke.

“Trying to cover up his own record, because over the last six years, he ran as a severely conservative candidate, and now just a few weeks before the election, he’s trying to turn himself into ‘Moderate Mitt.’ ”

Via: Trib Live

Continue Reading...

Eight states hold key to White House

Sorry, Florida. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney may be ardently courting America's biggest battleground state, but their real passion is for Ohio. Because as un-American as it sounds, all votes are not created equal in a presidential election. Don't be offended. With barely two weeks before Nov. 6, it's all about the electoral math. And as uncertain and unpredictable as the campaign looks heading into the final stretch, Ohio remains President Obama's best opportunity to block a Romney win — and Romney's biggest hurdle.

That's why in the past week, four of the top 10 TV markets for campaign ads were in Ohio, and only one was in Florida (Orlando), according to NBC. That's why, since September, Romney and Paul Ryan have done 34 Ohio campaign events and 20 Florida events, while Obama and Joe Biden have done 11 campaign events in Florida and 18 in Ohio.

"If you take Ohio off the board for the Romney campaign they basically have to win seven of the remaining eight battleground states," said Robert Gibbs, a senior Obama campaign adviser.

A president is not elected by the popular vote, but by the electoral votes of each state, and most states are so solidly Democratic or Republican that modern presidential campaigns are waged in eight to 12 states that can swing to one side or another. A resident of deep-red Utah, say, or deep-blue New York, won't see any campaign activity except for fundraising because the candidates need not worry about carrying them.

It takes 270 electoral votes to win. Based on polling and political trends Obama has 191 electoral votes solidly in his corner and Romney 169. Throw in the states that are leaning toward Obama or Romney, and it brings Obama to 237 electoral votes and Romney to 206.

Still up for grabs are eight states with a combined 95 electoral votes: Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire and Florida.

With the right combination, either candidate can win.

Obama's paths

For all the ups and downs of the 2012 campaign, the map has remained remarkably static through much of the past year. North Carolina, which Obama barely won in 2008, now appears to be leaning Romney, but overall the map still offers Obama more plausible paths to victory.

The president's campaign long ago spelled out four basic routes to a second term, and there also are multiple combinations of those paths. Assume he wins the same states John Kerry won in 2004, a total of 246 electoral votes.

• The Western path gives Obama New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado and Iowa, and brings him to 272 electoral votes.

• The Southern path, looking less likely based on recent North Carolina polling, gets him to 274 with wins in Virginia and North Carolina.

• The Midwest path involves winning Ohio and Iowa, giving Obama 270 votes.

• The simplest of all paths is through Florida. Win the Sunshine State's 29 electoral votes and Obama is re-elected with 275 electoral votes.

Via: Tampa Bay Times

Continue Reading...

October Surprise: Gas prices could soon drop 50 cents a gallon

USA TODAY - Autumn gasoline prices are about to drop faster than fall foliage.

With inventories rising and demand waning, gasoline prices could plunge 50 cents a gallon from October's $3.86 peak average over the next few weeks, providing a lift for the economy and possibly becoming a factor in next month's presidential election.

Gasoline, now averaging $3.69 a gallon, is expected to fall to $3.35 or lower by late November. In some regions, prices have already sunk below $3.

"Most of the country is heading appreciably lower the next few weeks,'' says Tom Kloza of the Oil Price Information Service, who notes wholesale prices in some key markets have dropped from as high as $4.35 a gallon to $2.71. Pump prices typically lag big wholesale drops. But Kloza expects retail prices to sink five to 15 cents a gallon over each of the next three weeks.

The drop could provide a boost to consumer spending and influence next month's presidential race, where gas prices have been a hot-button issue for much of the campaign. Several battleground states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, are enjoying big price drops.

"Certainly, lower gas prices are helpful in terms of consumer spending by increasing disposable income,'' says Brian Bethune, chief economist at Alpha Economic Foresights. "And if prices come down at a rapid rate in the next three weeks, that would tend to help the incumbent. It may not be logical, but if people see problems with the high cost of food or gas, it's the president who tends to get the blame."

Gas prices have remained stubbornly high well past their traditional Memorial Day weekend peak, due largely to supply shortages and refinery woes on the West Coast and Midwest. But with oil inventories rising and production issues ebbing, prices have been easing the past week, a trend likely to accelerate. "This is very much gravity at work,'' Kloza says. "The faster prices soar, the more prone they are to panic sell-offs."

Psst, taxes go up in 2013 for 163 million workers

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama isn't talking about it and neither is Mitt Romney. But come January, 163 million workers can expect to feel the pinch of a big tax increase regardless of who wins the election.

A temporary reduction in Social Security payroll taxes is due to expire at the end of the year and hardly anyone in Washington is pushing to extend it. Neither Obama nor Romney has proposed an extension, and it probably wouldn't get through Congress anyway, with lawmakers in both parties down on the idea.

Even Republicans who have sworn off tax increases have little appetite to prevent one that will cost a typical worker about $1,000 a year, and two-earner family with six-figure incomes as much as $4,500.

Why are so many politicians sour on continuing the payroll tax break?

(AP) Chart shows increase in Social Security tax in 2013 for various income levels Full Image

Republicans question whether reducing the tax two years ago has done much to stimulate the sluggish economy. Politicians from both parties say they are concerned that it threatens the independent revenue stream that funds Social Security.

They are backed by powerful advocates for seniors, including AARP, who adamantly oppose any extension.

"The payroll tax holiday was intended to be temporary and there is strong bipartisan support to let that tax provision expire," said Sen. Orrin of Utah, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. "The continued extension of a temporary payroll tax holiday has serious long-term implications for Social Security and, frankly, it's not even clear that it has helped to boost our ailing economy."

The question of renewing the payroll tax cut has been overshadowed by the expiration of a much bigger package of tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush. The Bush-era tax cuts also expire at the end of the year, and Congress is expected to try to address them after the election, in a lame-duck session.

The payroll tax cut could become part of the mix in negotiations that could go in many directions. But lawmakers in both political parties say they doubt it.

Via: MyWay

Continue Reading...

NY Times Caught Editing Story On Iran Nuclear Negotiations After White House Denial

The White House scrambled late Saturday to deny a New York Times report claiming Iran has agreed to meet directly with U.S. officials to discuss its nuclear program, sending New York Times editors rushing to quietly but substantially revise their initial reporting on a key foreign policy issue for the second time in as many months.

According to the Times, which anonymously quoted senior administration officials, Iran told diplomats it wanted to wait until after the November presidential election to put plans for the meeting in motion.

“It has the potential to help Mr. Obama make the case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the decade-long effort by the world’s major powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions,” the Times report said.

Within hours, White House officials responded the report was mostly inaccurate.

“It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections,” National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a statement. ”[However, the White House has] said from the outset that we would be prepared to meet bilaterally.”

“The President has made clear that he will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and we will do what we must to achieve that,” Vietor added. “It has always been our goal for sanctions to pressure Iran to come in line with its obligations. The onus is on the Iranians to do so, otherwise they will continue to face crippling sanctions and increased pressure.”

Meanwhile, a senior administration official told NBC News on background that back-channel talks with Iran were in progress, but confirmed that no definite agreement about a meeting had been reached. (RELATED OPINION: Obama, Iran in secret nuclear deal)

When the New York Times updated its story late Saturday to reflect Vietor’s statement, the paper made no mention of the update or any correction to the story, leaving readers with the impression that the White House’s denial had been in the story all along. In fact, the initial version of the story portrayed the development as a tentative victory for the Obama administration, which has recently been faced with foreign policy crises in the Middle East and Libya.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

THE BIG FAIL: “This Is A Symbol Of Where America Is Going”

Taxpayers Are Paying Millions For Workers At An Electric Car Battery Factory That Has Yet To Produce A Single Battery

WORKERS AT A BATTERY MAKER THAT RECEIVED $151 MILLION FROM THE STIMULUS SPEND THEIR DAYS PLAYING BOARD GAMES AND WATCHING MOVIES

Watch The Story From Holland, Michigan’s WOOD-TV Here

Workers At Stimulus Funded Battery Plant “Have So Little Work To Do That They Spend Hours Playing Cards And Board Games, Reading Magazines Or Watching Movies.” “Workers at LG Chem, a $300 million lithium-ion battery plant heavily funded by taxpayers, tell Target 8 that they have so little work to do that they spend hours playing cards and board games, reading magazines or watching movies. They say it’s been going on for months.” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,” WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

• “‘There’s No Work, No Work At All. Zero Work,’ Another Current Employee Said. ‘It Is What It Is. What Do You Do When There’s No Work?’” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,” WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

Taxpayers Have Spent $7 Million Paying The Idle Workers. “A Target 8 analysis of federal records shows taxpayers spent $7 million to train workers and have paid more than $700,000 for workers’ health and dental insurance.” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,” WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

• 40 Percent Of The $133 Million Spent By The Company So Far Has Gone To Foreign Companies. “The company has spent $133 million so far, most for construction and equipment, records show. About 40% has gone to foreign companies — mostly to Korea, a Target 8 analysis shows.” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,” WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

• $533,000 From The Stimulus Award Was Spent On The Groundbreaking Ceremony. “The company also spent more than $533,000 of that federal grant for the groundbreaking, records show.” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,”WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

“[Workers] Say The Last Of The Materials Needed To Make Battery Cells, Including Chemicals, Was Shipped Back To Korea.” “They say the last of the materials needed to make battery cells, including chemicals, was shipped back to Korea. It’s not clear if that includes any of the $1.8 million in materials paid for with that federal Recovery Act money. Workers say they made test battery cells, starting late last year, perhaps 100,000 or more, and that they did a good job. They say they produced perhaps 4,000 a week. But, they say, that worked ended for the most part last December.” (Ken Kolker, “Volt No Jolt: LG Chem Employees Idle,” WOOD-TV [Holland, MI], 10/18/12)

Via: GOP.com

Continue Reading...

The 'War on Women' Backfires

One of the intriguing aspects of this election is how the Democrats' shameless and clueless appeal to women is ending with the vaporization of the historic "gender gap" among voters.

The Lady Parts Convention
From the prancing Code Pink vulvas outside the convention venue to the choice of speakers, there was no doubt that the Democrat Convention was aimed at securing the women's vote. Indeed, Balkanizing women and minority voters was then as significant a part of the Obama strategy as securing the electoral votes of Ohio is now to them.

The thinking here apparently was that by highlighting a thirty-year-old law student whining that others should pay her contraceptive costs, emphasizing an unfettered right to abortion, and equal pay for equal work (a convenient code for further feathering trial lawyers nests with dubious claims for parity) and highlighting fluffy issues beloved of the ill-informed, Obama would lock up the women's votes. The Republican "War on Women" was the theme of a convention designed around obscuring the fact that the Democratic standard-bearer had no record to run on, no plan for a second term, and shared the ticket with a crazy person afflicted with logorrhea.

Reality Bites
This week, as Susan Fields observes, it is clear that strategy failed so badly that the long running gap between male and female voters has been practically erased.

The Gallup Poll now shows Mitt Romney trailing the president by only a point among women who are likely to vote in 12 swing states. This follows a Pew Research Center poll taken after the first presidential debate showing that President Obama's 18-point lead among women had shrunk to a tie, 47 percent to 47 percent.

"In every poll, we've seen a major surge among women in favorability for Romney," Democratic pollster Celinda Lake told USA Today after the first debate. These polls find women increasingly concerned with the deficit and debt, just like men. The social issues continue to be more important to women than to men, but these issues no longer dominate the discussion. [snip] In the second debate, Romney looked deeper into the dark side of Obama accounting, finding that 3.5 million more women are living in poverty than before he took charge of the economy. Women understand that an economy with 7.8 percent unemployment, when half of college graduates can't find good jobs, is not good for anyone.

I don't disagree with Fields' assessment that the terrible Obama economy and its effect on women have a lot to do with the shift, but I suggest that there's a great deal more to it.

Bad times tend to focus the mind and wise up all voters, including women. Maybe we really aren't voting for the head of a national PTA, Johnny Appleseed, or for our choice of "American Idol." Perhaps it would be a good idea to elect someone who does understand economics and business.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading...

Minnesota Schools Close So Teachers Can Play With Dolls, Learn About Teaching Islam

Each year, Minnesota government schools close for two days (just before the weekend, of course) so teachers’ union members can gather at a conference organized by their union.

It’s meant to “inspire teachers,” EAGnews.org reported, and the conference includes a session titled, “Using Persona Dolls to Promote Social Emotional Intelligence and Acceptance of Diversity.”

The union describes it this way: “Used around the world, persona dolls are lifelike dolls with personalities and stories you create. The dolls become members of your classroom community and children learn by empathizing with the dolls and giving them heartfelt advice on the same kinds of situations they struggle with daily in the classroom and on the playground.”

That’s weird. Teachers are taking time away from the classroom to learn how to play with dolls?

The conference also includes a workshop on how to teach about Islam. The union says about the session:

“An expert panel will present information on teaching about Islam in the context of social studies and world religion. They will share perspectives on how educators can help improve intercultural communication and well-being for immigrant and refugee students and families from Muslim countries.”

That sounds nice. Who’s betting they won’t hear anything about the September 11, 2001 hijackers’ jihad or suicide bombers blowing up American soldiers or Israeli children? And why the focus on only one religion?

And of course no teachers union conference would be complete without a session about the importance of the upcoming presidential election (it will become an Obama rally), and a discussion about how education reform efforts are misguided and dangerous.

Couldn’t the union hold this session during the summer, or on a weekend, when there are no classes to interrupt? They have to annually take time out of the school calendar to hold their union pep rally and play with dolls?

Is it any wonder American students are trailing behind their counterparts in South Korea, Estonia and Luxembourg? Is it too much for union teachers to remain in in the classroom and focus on the basics, instead of cancelling classes to talk about their ideas of “social justice” and promote their union’s political agenda?

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading...

US ‘too slow’ to act as drone’s cam captured Libya horror

The United States had an unmanned Predator drone over its consulate in Benghazi during the attack that slaughtered four Americans — which should have led to a quicker military response, it was revealed yesterday.

“They stood, and they watched, and our people died,” former CIA commander Gary Berntsen told CBS News.

The network reported that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft observed the final hours of the hours-long siege on Sept. 11 — obtaining information that should have spurred swift action.

But as Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three colleagues were killed by terrorists armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, Defense Department officials were too slow to send in the troops, Berntsen said.

EPA

VIEW TO A KILL: As terrorists attacked the consulate in Benghazi, a US Predator drone was reportedly observing from above.

“They made zero adjustments in this. You find a way to make this happen,” he fumed.

“There isn’t a plan for every single engagement. Sometimes you have to be able to make adjustments.”

The Pentagon said it moved a team of special operators from Central Europe to Sigonella, Italy — about an hour flight from Libya — but gave no other details.

Fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships — which could have been used to help disperse the bloodthirsty mob — were also stationed at three nearby bases, sources told the network.

When the attack began, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta “looked at available options, and the ones we exercised had our military forces arrive in less than 24 hours, well ahead of timelines laid out in established policies,” a White House official told the network.

Even as the administration continues to vow that the perpetrators will be brought to justice, the man identified by witnesses as a ringleader in the attack continues to walk the streets of Libya without fear of arrest.

Via: New York Post

Continue Reading...

BENGHAZI: Documents show Stevens worried about security threats, al-Qaeda

Across 166 pages of internal State Department documents – released today by a pair of Republican congressmen pressing the Obama administration for more answers on the Benghazi terrorist attack – slain U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and the security officers assigned to protect him repeatedly sounded alarms to their superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died.
 
On September 11 – the day Stevens and three other Americans were killed – the ambassador signed a three-page cable, labeled “sensitive,” in which he noted “growing problems with security” in Benghazi and “growing frustration” on the part of local residents with Libyan police and security forces.  These forces the ambassador characterized as “too weak to keep the country secure.” 
 
In the document, Stevens also cited a meeting he had held two days earlier with local militia commanders.  These men boasted to Stevens of exercising “control” over the Libyan Armed Forces, and threatened that if the U.S.-backed candidate for prime minister were to prevail in Libya’s internal political jockeying, “they would not continue to guarantee security in Benghazi.” 
 
Roughly a month earlier, Stevens had signed a two-page cable, also labeled “sensitive,” that he entitled “The Guns of August: Security in Eastern Libya.” Writing on August 8, the ambassador noted that in just a few months’ time, “Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape…The individual incidents have been organized,” he added, a function of “the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.”

Via: The Daily Brett Blog

Continue Reading...

OBAMA CAMPAIGN GRILLED ON LACK OF SECOND TERM PLANS

While the Obama campaign continues to demand that Mitt Romney spell out every aspect of every plan on every issue, Obama has demonstrated zero interest whatsoever in laying out his plans for the future.

That’s the point of a new Republican National Committee video culled from today’s Sunday morning news shows, during which David Gregory of NBC, George Stephanopoulos of ABC, Chris Matthews of MSNBC, Michael Duffy of Time, and Bob Schieffer of CBS all asked Obama surrogates just what Obama would do during his second term. Not one Obama official had a good answer.

And that’s the problem for Obama. As we grow closer to the election, the American people are becoming more and more comfortable with Mitt Romney, and less and less comfortable with the president’s tacit slogan: “Trust me.” Obama simply hasn't earned our trust.

Via: Brietbart

Continue Reading...

Obama campaign accepted foreign Web donation -- and may be hiding more

The Obama re-election campaign has accepted at least one foreign donation in violation of the law — and does nothing to check on the provenance of millions of dollars in other contributions, a watchdog group alleges.

Chris Walker, a British citizen who lives outside London, told The Post he was able to make two $5 donations to President Obama’s campaign this month through its Web site while a similar attempt to give Mitt Romney cash was rejected. It is illegal to knowingly solicit or accept money from foreign citizens.

Walker said he used his actual street address in England but entered Arkansas as his state with the Schenectady, NY, ZIP code of 12345.

’NET PROFIT: President Obama and Hillary Clinton are joined at a 2011 state dinner by Robert Roche (to Clinton’s right), who registered the site Obama.com, which directs visitors to a donation page.

“When I did Romney’s, the payment got rejected on the grounds that the address on the card did not match the address that I entered,” he said. “Romney’s Web site wanted the code from the back of card. Barack Obama’s didn’t.”

In September, Obama’s campaign took in more than $2 million from donors who provided no ZIP code or incomplete ZIP codes, according to data posted on the Federal Election Commission Web site.

The Obama campaign said the FEC data was the result of “a minor technical error.”

“All the ZIP codes and numbers are real and can be verified,” spokesman Michael Czin said.

Via: New York Post

Continue Reading...