Chart of the Week: Major Benefits of Free Trade

Nations that embrace international trade enjoy significantly stronger economies, achieve lower rates of hunger, and maintain a better stewardship of the environment, according to new data published by Heritage for the forthcoming Index of Economic Freedom.

There are, of course, other factors that contribute to such positive trends. But international trade undoubtedly plays a major role in determining the success of a nation and its economy. Contrary to the claims that “unfair” foreign competition hurts the jobs at home, the unemployment rate actually fares better in times of higher trade deficits. Bryan Riley and former Ambassador Terry Miller provide further clarification:

When the trade deficit increases, the unemployment rate decreases, and vice versa. For example, in 2009, the U.S. trade deficit shrank by 46 percent, and the unemployment rate increased by 60 percent.

Many critics of trade deals such as NAFTA and the WTO agreement argue that free trade benefits big multinational corporations and “the rich” at the expense of everyone else. In fact, poverty rates are much lower in countries with low trade barriers than in those where trade is restricted.

It adds up to this: Limited regulations on trade expand the economy and improve the well-being of both a nation’s citizens and its environment. With a lagging U.S. economy still bound by the recession, the expansion of trade is as important today as ever before. Trade can make everyone better off.

Via: The Foundry

Continue Reading...

AFL-CIO offers list of union-approved Halloween candy

Halloween is less than a week away and, just in time for Americans stocking up on candy, the AFL-CIO has identified the most union-friendly candy available.

Yes, there is such a thing as union-approved candy.

“If you want your Halloween to be all treats and no tricks, make sure all your candy is union-made, made in America,” Jackie Tortora writes at the AFL-CIO’s blog, linking to Local 144’s “Buy Union Directory.”

Tortora provides a list of union-approved candy highlights from the directory including Baby Ruths, Butterfingers, Caramellos, Hershey’s Candy Corn Kisses, Hershey’s Extra Dark Chocolate bars, Hershey’s Hugs, Hershey’s Kisses, Hershey’s Nuggets, Jelly Belly candies, Kit Kats, Laffy Taffy, Mike and Ikes, Rolos, Super Ropes, Tootsie Rolls and Trolli candies.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

ROMNEY CLOSES IN MINNESOTA

The last time Minnesota cast its electoral votes for a Republican running for President was 1972. Even Ronald Reagan failed to win the state in both back-to-back landslide elections. It has elected Republicans to the occasional state-wide office, but for President, it is a deep indigo blue. Except, perhaps, this year. A new poll released this morning by the Minneapolis Star-Tribune finds the race essentially tied. Obama holds a slim 3-point lead but, at 47% support, is below the critical 50% threshold. 

To be fair, Minnesota wasn't really part of Obama's firewall for his reelection hopes. It was more of a redoubt. It was state, like California or Illinois, which would absolutely support Obama's reelection. That we are even discussing the possible vote in MN, just a little over a week before the election, is a flashing sign of the troubles plaguing Obama's campaign. 

Last month, the newspaper's poll showed Obama with an 8-point lead. But that 5-point drop in support isn't the worst news for Obama in the poll. The number of voters identifying themselves as Republican has surged. In last month's poll, Democrats had a 13-point edge in the sample, 41-28. Today's poll, however, only gives them a 5-point edge, 38-33. An 8-point swing in one month is extraordinary. 

In 2008, the overall electorate had a Democrat advantage of 4 points, so Republicans still have some room to grow here. Especially considering Obama's collapse in certain voter sub-groups. In 2008, Obama won independents by 17 points. Today, he leads by 6. He won men by 3 points; today he trails by 13. He won women by 16; today, in spite of a singular focus on what Democrats consider women's issues, his support is slightly lower at 14 points.  

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Poll: Israeli Jews Favor Romney By Almost 3-1 Margin…

Israeli Jews prefer Republican candidate Mitt Romney over US President Barack Obama by an almost 3:1 margin, according to a "Peace Index" poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute and Tel Aviv University that was released Sunday.

The polling figures stand in stark contrast to polls taken of American Jews, which show they prefer Obama by a similarly wide margin. An American Jewish Committee poll at the end of September showed US Jews favoring Obama over Romney 63%-27%.

The "Peace Index" poll also puts Israel at odds with most of the rest of the world, which – according to a BBC poll published last week of nearly 22,000 people in 21 countries -- found Obama favored by an average of 50%, with only 9% for Romney. The Democrat was the preferred candidate in every country polled, except for Pakistan.

Asked "in terms of Israeli interests, who would be preferable to win the elections next month in the US,"  57.2% of Israeli Jews said Romney, while only 21.5% said Obama.

Among Israeli Arabs, the numbers were reversed, with 45% opting for Obama, and 15% for Romney.

A similar Peace Index poll in July found that Israelis felt that Romney "assigned more importance to defending Israel's national interest" than Obama by a 2:1 ratio: 40% for Romney to 19% for Obama.

Via: The Jerusalem Post

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...

Virtual tie in … Minnesota?

I’d be the first to tell people that my state is a quadrennial sucker bet for Republicans.  In 2008, no one thought we had a prayer, but in 2000 and 2004, Republicans actually thought they had a chance to break the Democrats’ presidential winning streak, as the state last went to the GOP in 1972.  I’ve been hearing Republicans get optimistic here again, but I’ve been highly skeptical of the prospects for Mitt Romney to even get close here.

Until now:

As the presidential race tightens across the country, a new Star Tribune Minnesota Poll has found that it is narrowing here as well, with President Obama holding a 3-point lead and Republican Mitt Romney making gains in the state.

The poll shows Obama with support from 47 percent of likely voters and Romney earning backing from 44 percent — a lead within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Last month, Obama had an 8-percentage point advantage in the Minnesota Poll. Romney has apparently cut into the Democrat’s advantage among women since then and picked up support from Minnesotans who were previously undecided or said they would vote for a third-party candidate.

Independents, on the other hand, are leaning more toward Obama. Barely a third supported him last month, but that number has grown to 43 percent. Romney’s support among independents remains virtually unchanged, with 13 percent of that group remaining undecided.

Bear in mind that this is the Star Tribune’s Minnesota Poll, which has a long and (un)glorious history of leftward tilt.  Mitch Berg has long documented this trend.  One has to wonder whether we’ll need to send paramedics to his house this morning after he reads Rachel Stassen=Berger’s report from the survey.

Snark aside, this looks like a relatively solid poll.  The sample is D+5, with a D/R/I of 38/33/29.  In 2008 when Obama won by 10 points, it was D+4 at 40/36/22, and I suspect that Republicans are going to be more motivated this time around. Obama wins the core counties in the Twin Cities, but only by a relatively weak 57/35.  Romney wins the Metro suburbs with a majority 51/39 and edges Obama 46/44 in the rest of the state.

In 2008, Obama had a 19-point edge in the gender gap, +3 among men and +16 among women.  This time, Obama has only a +1 — he’s up 14 among women but down 13 among men.  Obama still leads by 6 among independents, which he won by 17 points in 2008, but he’s only got 43%.  Late breakers are not likely to flow to the incumbent at this stage of the election; if the were inclined to support Obama, they’d already be in his corner now.

That’s true of the overall number as well. If Obama can only get to 47% in the Star Tribune poll with nine days left to go before the election in Minnesota, which has gone Democrat every presidential election over the last four years, this state is in play — and that’s why both campaigns are suddenly starting to spend money here.

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading...

Cutter: Des Moines Register endorsement not based 'in reality’

Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter on Sunday dismissed the Des Moines Register endorsement of GOP candidate Mitt Romney, saying it was not “based at all in reality.”

“They endorsed Mitt Romney in the primary, so this was not much of a surprise,” said Cutter on ABC’s “This Week” of the influential swing-state paper’s backing for President Obama’s challenger.

“It was a little surprising to read that editorial, because it didn't seem to be based at all in reality, not just in the president's record, but in Mitt Romney's record,” Cutter added. “It says that he'd reach across the aisle, which he'd do the exact opposite. It's the exact opposite of what he did in Massachusetts.”

Romney on late Saturday received the endorsement of the Des Moines Register, Iowa’s largest newspaper. 

The paper which had backed Obama in 2008 and not endorsed a Republican nominee in 40 years said Romney would be better at building bipartisan compromises in Washington. 

Via: The Hill

Continue Reading...

The Des Moines Register endorsement: Mitt Romney offers a fresh economic vision

Ten months ago this newspaper endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. An overarching consideration was which of the party’s candidates could we see occupying the White House, and there was no question that Romney was qualified for the job.

Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States.

Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Via: Ten months ago this newspaper endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. An overarching consideration was which of the party’s candidates could we see occupying the White House, and there was no question that Romney was qualified for the job.

Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States.

Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Via: Des Moines Register

Continue Reading...

Breaking: Sandy Prompts NYC, Other Coastal Evacuations

Hurricane Sandy remains on track to become a historical storm for the mid-Atlantic and southern New England with New Jersey and New York City bracing for very dangerous conditions and catastrophic damage.

The impact from Sandy will reach hundreds of miles from the center of landfall, including areas well inland and well ahead of the storm's landfall Monday night.

An overview of the catastrophic impacts that await the mid-Atlantic and southern New England can be found in this news story, while below are more detailed impact stories for specific cities and communities.

Updates on Sandy:

2:00 p.m. EDT: Wind gusts were reaching 52 mph in Norfolk, Va. and 58 mph on the North Carolina Outer Banks.

12:00 noon EDT: New York Governor Cuomo announced that the orderly suspension of all subway, bus and commuter railroad service will begin at 7 p.m. EDT, Sunday.

12:00 noon EDT: New York Mayor Bloomberg announced city schools are closed on Monday and ordered evacuations of some low-lying areas in lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, Staten Island and Queens.

11:00 a.m. EDT: A storm surge of up to 5.5 feet was flooding neighborhoods on North Carolina's Outer Banks. Multiple roads were under water.

10:30 a..m. EDT: Moderate coastal flooding was occurring near the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay in the Norfolk, Virginia area. Minor coastal flooding was already occurring along portions of the New Jersey coast at time of high tide.

9:30 a.m. EDT: Seas of 30 feet continue off the coast of the Carolinas. Seas were between 10 and 15 feet off the coast of New Jersey and Long Island and building.

9:24 a.m. EDT: Winds were gusting to 48 mph in Virginia Beach, Va., to 40 mph in Ocean City, Md., and to 36 mph in Atlantic City, N.J. with Sandy still hundreds of miles away.

9:00 a.m. EDT: Sandy is racking up rainfall. So far, Hatteras, N.C. has received 5.19 inches with 1.76 inches in Newport News, Va. A zone of heavy rain was developing farther north from the Maryland eastern shore to eastern Pennsylvania.

6:00 a.m. EDT: Sandy is a truly massive storm on satellite. One of, if not the largest tropical cyclone to ever develop in the Atlantic basin.

OHIO NEWSPAPERS' POLL: RACE TIED AT 49, ROMNEY ERASES 5-POINT OBAMA LEAD

Yet another poll has shown the presidential race in Ohio tied, with President Barack Obama dropping below the crucial 50 percent mark. The latest Akron Beacon Journal/Ohio Newspaper Organization poll shows the race in a 49%-49% tie, with Republican Mitt Romney erasing the 51%-46% lead Obama enjoyed as of late September.

The poll, with a D+3 sample, also showed Romney leading 51%-46% on the issue of the economy. Obama held a slight lead among independent voters, albeit with a very large margin of error, given the small number of uncommitted voters remaining. Obama has retained his double-digit margin among women, while Romney has opened a double-digit lead among Ohio men, according to the poll.

Both campaigns are attempting to spin recent Ohio poll numbers in their favor, with the Obama campaign insisting that it is holding onto a narrow lead. Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus told CNN's Candy Crowley on Sunday's State of the Union program that the race is tied, and that a tie "goes to the challenger."

The campaigns have also dueled over early voting numbers in Ohio and elsewhere. The Obama campaign claims a large lead among those who are voting early, but the Romney campaign insists that margin is among a very small proportion of voters, and that the gap between Democrats and Republicans in early and absentee voting has narrowed significantly since 2008.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Despite Promises of Transparency, Obama Administration Suppresses Report That Would Detail Rise in Welfare Dependence

Washington, DC - A day after his inauguration, President Obama promised his Administration would be defined by its openness and transparency, proudly declaring, "I will also hold myself, as president, to a new standard of openness….Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency."  Sadly, the Obama Administration has failed to live up to the President’s lofty rhetoric, and its record on transparency is littered with broken promises.  The latest example is the Administration’s withholding of Federal data about welfare receipt and dependence on government benefits.  Under a 1994 law, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is required to issue annual reports on the degree to which Americans are dependent on various welfare benefits.  This 1994 law was authored by Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), passed by the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.  Yet after nearly four years, the Obama Administration has never once issued this report.   
  
The 1994 law requires HHS to issue this report to leaders of key Congressional committees with jurisdiction over various welfare programs: the House Committees on Ways and Means; Education and the Workforce; Agriculture; and Energy and Commerce and the Senate Committees on Finance; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; and Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry.  Today, the Republican House Chairmen and Senate Ranking Members of these Committees sent a letter to HHS Secretary Sebelius asking for an immediate response as to (1) why HHS has failed to issue this report during her nearly four years as Secretary, and (2) when HHS expects to finally issue this report.  A copy of the letter is availablehere.

If issued, this report would reveal that dependence on government benefits has risen sharply during the Obama Administration.  All the more troubling is the fact that, while suppressing this annual report on welfare dependence for nearly four years, HHS recently took action to illegally waive work requirements for welfare recipients, which will result in even more welfare dependence.   

In their letter to Secretary Sebelius, the Chairmen and Ranking Members wrote, “HHS has failed to issue even one of these annual reports required by law during the nearly four years you have been Secretary.  It also means that the 2009 annual report is now more than 1,000 days overdue.” 

Via: Committee on Ways and Means

Continue Reading..

ObamaCare Work Disincentives: 4 Cliffs Hit Employees

In the time of Caesar, all roads led to Rome. In the time of ObamaCare, seemingly every path heads straight for a cliff.

The health law is filled with cliffs where the returns for more work take a nose-dive.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated ObamaCare will "reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by roughly half a percent" — about 800,000 full-time jobs. It seems likely that four especially steep cliffs — including two where marginal tax rates can approach 100% or more — will factor into work and hiring decisions.

The 50th employee: For companies with 49 workers that do not offer its employees health coverage, the hiring of just one more worker would carry a penalty of $40,000.

A firm with at least 50 workers that doesn't offer coverage must pay a $2,000 fine per worker (minus the first 30 workers) if even one of its employees receives ObamaCare subsidies.

Likewise, even if a business with 50 employees offers coverage, it would still face up to a $3,000 charge for each worker who nevertheless claims Obama-Care subsidies.

The law gives workers this option when employer coverage is deemed unaffordable because it costs more than 9.5% of the worker's household income.

France has 2.4 times as many firms with 49 employees as with 50 due to labor regulations that take effect with the 50th hire, BusinessWeek has noted.

How many firms will institute a hiring freeze to avoid ObamaCare penalties is unclear, but the risk is that the U.S. will go down a similar path as France.

The low-income cliff: At 200% of the poverty level is a dividing line. Deductibles for married couples on one side may be $300 vs. $3,500 on the other, according to one estimate provided to the Kaiser Family Foundation by Towers Watson.

In addition, a family at 200% of poverty would pay $830 less for subsidized insurance than a family at 225% of poverty, The Kaiser Family Foundation's health subsidy calculator shows.

Via: IBD

Continue Reading...

Proposal 4: SEIU union pumps money into Michigan's home health ballot measure

LANSING, MI – The Service Employees International Union has kicked in at least $5.5 million to support Michigan’s Proposal 4, according to campaign finance reports, but it's not clear if more SEIU money is involved.

Proposal 4 on the Nov. 6 ballot would amend the Michigan constitution to create a home healthcare registry and give workers some limited collective bargaining rights. The workers involved would be represented by the SEIU.

The main committee supporting Proposal 4 – Citizens for Affordable Quality Home Care – reported raising roughly $9 million overall. The money is listed as coming from Home Care First Inc.

According to Dohn Hoyle, co-chair of Citizens for Affordable Quality Home Care: “Home Care First Inc. is a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization formed and supported by Michigan’s leading senior and disability rights groups. Home Care First — along with the Michigan Disability Rights Coalition, Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, the Area Agencies on Aging Association of Michigan, the Arc Michigan and many more — strongly supports Proposal 4 ... "

Supporters of Proposal 4 have said there’s nothing secretive about their campaign. But former Attorney General Mike Cox has called Home Care First “clandestine” because there hasn't been full disclosure of donors.

Citizens Protecting Michigan’s Constitution is a coalition that opposes Proposal 2, 3 and 4. Nick De Leeuw, a spokesman for Citizens Protecting Michigan’s Constitution, said $1.4 million has been spent on Proposal 4.

Citizens Protecting Michigan’s Constitution is a coalition that includes the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and other business groups.

Via: Michigan Live

Continue Reading...

Gallup: Obama's Job Approval Drops 7 Points in 3 Days

President Barack Obama in Nashua, New Hampshire, on Oct. 27, 2012. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

(CNSNews.com) - In the most precipitous decline it has seen in more than a year, President Barack Obama's job approval rating has dropped 7 points in three days,according to Gallup.

In the three-day period ending on Oct. 23, says Gallup, 53 percent said they approved of the job Obama was doing and 42 percent said they did not.

On Oct. 24, that dropped to 51 percent who said they approved and 44 percent who said they do not.

On Oct. 25, it dropped again to 48 percent who said they approved and 47 percent who said they do not.

On Oct. 26, it dropped yet again to 46 percent who said they approved and 49 percent who said they did not.

In May 2011, Obama's approval dropped 7 points in four days, sliding from 53 percent on May 24 to 46 percent on May 28.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading...

Colorado “Democrat Of The Year” Convicted Of Stealing From Elderly Blind Woman With Cerebral Palsy…

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. (CBS4)- The woman named “Democrat of The Year” this year by the Jefferson County Democratic Party has been convicted of felony theft by a Jefferson County jury for stealing from a developmentally disabled 71-year-old woman.

“The jury did right,” said Cindy Maxwell, an advocate for the victim.

On Thursday, a jury convicted 66-year-old Estelle Carson of felony identify theft and felony theft from an at risk adult for stealing checks from the woman and using them to pay her own cable, cell phone and internet bills.

The victim is partially blind, developmentally disabled, has cerebral palsy and is confined to a wheelchair. She is on a fixed income of $596 per month according to the Jefferson County District Attorney’s Office.

Nearly as bothersome as the theft itself to Maxwell and other supporters of the victim, is the fact the Jefferson County Democratic Party was made aware of the ongoing criminal investigation and honored Carson anyway.

According to documents obtained by CBS4, in November of 2011, the Jeffco Democratic Party announced it planned to honor Carson for her activism on behalf of Democratic causes and her efforts to register voters.

But three days before the January 8 gala, advocates for the victim contacted the party via email and phone informing them of the criminal investigation.

One wrote “I am completely appalled,” to learn of the planned honor. The woman suggested the Democratic Party should “un-invite Estelle and not follow through with this honor.”

Cindy Maxwell told CBS4 she informed Democratic Party officials that Carson had already confessed to the theft as part of the investigation.

But Chris Kennedy, chairman of the Jefferson County Democratic party, dismissed the concerns saying there was not a conviction and bestowed the “Democrat Of The Year” honor on Carson.

Via: CBS Denver

Continue Reading...

The New Yorker’s Voting Myths Evidence shows that voter-ID laws are effective and fair.

The Left is committed to the false narrative that there is no voter fraud in the U.S. The latest article in the genre is Jane Mayer’s New Yorker piece “Voter-Fraud Myth.”

Like others before her, Mayer is convinced that efforts to assure the integrity of the electoral process are actually a right-wing conspiracy to suppress voter turnout. So when John Fund and I came out with Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk, a book that details numerous cases of election fraud, it was an invitation to a journalistic hit piece.

To maintain her belief that voter fraud is rare, Meyer apparently turned a blind eye to the news stories breaking all around her, none of which she mentions in her story. In just the past month, we’ve seen:

the Democratic nominee for Maryland’s first congressional district removed from the ballot after it was discovered that she had registered and voted in both Maryland and Florida in the 2006 and 2008 elections;

an Arkansas legislator resigning after pleading guilty (with three other defendants) to committing voter fraud;

a Canadian couple and a Mexican citizen arrested for illegally registering and voting in Iowa;

a New Jersey resident convicted on multiple counts of voter fraud;

three Indiana residents (including a former Democratic mayoral candidate) indicted for voter fraud;

three Ohioans indicted for double voting;

a Mexican drug dealer’s guilty plea for voting illegally in the 2008 presidential election;

Florida’s discovery of nearly 200 non-citizens illegally registered to vote, and

a city-council race in Vernon, Calif., overturned owing to voter fraud.

While ignoring the slew of voter-fraud cases erupting across the country, Mayer focuses on just a few incidents that Fund and I cite in the book. Then she misreports them.

Via: National Review

Continue Reading...

Backward on Women’s Dignity

“We have made woman a sex creature,” complained a psychiatrist at the Margaret Sanger clinic, according to Betty Friedan’s 1963 book The Feminist Mystique. A half-century later, a new Obama ad proudly likens voting for the first time to a young woman losing her virginity.

You’ve come a long way, baby. But not necessarily forward.

Women’s liberation is parodying itself in “The First Time” spot featuring Lena Dunham, 26-year-old creator of the shockingly sexualized HBO series Girls.

“Your first time shouldn’t be with just anybody,” Dunham provocatively begins the ad. “You want to do it with a great guy.”

“My first time voting was amazing,” says Dunham. She salaciously describes her vote for Barack Obama as a rite of passage to womanhood, dangling a policy teaser about free birth control along the way.

It is an astonishingly base, sex-centric monologue that degrades public discourse and demeans young women in particular. Seeing sexual double entendre everywhere is typically the sport of sophomoric boys. Now adults are using it to stoop for the youth vote—and expecting women to fall for it.

“The First Time” is the lowest yet in a year of new political lows when it comes to infantilizing women.

First, liberals fabricated the “War on Women” to shroud a bumbling Obamacare mandate that trampled on religious liberty. The coercive policy requires, with few exceptions, coverage of abortion drugs and contraception despite conscience objections. When religious charities sought relief, liberals accused them and their defenders of assaulting women’s freedom—as if the First Amendment’s religious freedom protections don’t apply to women, too.

Then they brought us the government-driven Life of Julia. The faceless female seemed hardly capable of taking a step in life without government intervention from the “hubby state,” as one observer dubbed it.

Via: The Foundry

Continue Reading...

IS VOTER FRAUD BEING COMMITTED IN OHIO?

Somali's Invade Polling Stations in OHIO accompanied by Democratic Interpreters.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Two volunteer poll workers at an Ohio voting station told Human Events that they observed van loads of Ohio residents born in Somalia — the state is home to the second-largest Somali population in the United States — being driven to the voting station and guided by Democratic interpreters on the voting process. No Republican interpreters were present, according to these volunteers.

While it’s not unusual for get-out-the-vote groups to help voters get to the polls, the volunteers who talked to Human Events observed a number of troubling and questionable activities.

A source, who wishes to remain anonymous, is a volunteer outside the Morse Road polling center.  She has witnessed Somalis who cannot speak English come to the polling center. They are brought in groups, by van or bus. The Democrats hand them a slate card and say, “vote Brown all the way down.” Given that Sherrod Brown is the incumbent Democrat Senator in Ohio, one can assume that this is the reference.

Non-English speaking voters may use an interpreter. The interpreters are permitted by law to interpret for the individual voting; however, they are forbidden from influencing their vote in any way. Another source who also wishes to remain anonymous has seen Democrat interpreters show the non-English speaking Somalis how to vote the Democrat slate that they were handed outside. According to this second source, there are not any Republican Somali interpreters available.

The logical follow-up question is whether a non-English speaking person is an American citizen. Although Republican leadership in Ohio passed a voting reform law, it was repealed by the legislature itself after the Democrats threatened a referendum. According to the Ohio Secretary of State’s web site, someone wanting to vote early in Ohio must supply one of the following in writing on the absentee ballot form, whether voting early by mail or in person: an Ohio driver’s license number; the last four digits of the social security number; or a copy of a current and valid photo identification, military identification, or a current — within the last 12 months — utility bill, including cell phone bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the person’s name and address in addition to the voter registration acknowledgement.

Via: Human Events

Continue Reading...

Obama's Second-Term Agenda: Poison for Suburban Women

RadNet, the country's largest imaging and diagnostic company, comments in its most recent investor presentation that mammogram volumes have been adversely affected by the weak economy and a "government taskforce changing the recommended age from 40+ to 50+."

The government taskforce comment is meaningful.  It means that during President Obama's first term, an HHS-supported advisory board recommended that women's health care be rationed.  This is the same entity that more recently recommended that men do without the PSA test, the standard prostate cancer screening procedure.  Admittedly, this is a different HHS-supported independent advisory board, but maybe Mitt Romney was on to something when he voiced concern about ObamaCare rationing our health care through its own IPAB.

RadNet's comment about government's negative impact on mammogram volumes certainly clears the fog created by the Obama campaign's relentless suggestion of a Republican "war on women."  Seen in this light, President Obama's "war on women" scare tactics are a smokescreen, particularly if women have already had their mammograms rationed.

Although both presidential campaigns seek the support of suburban women, President Obama is not talking to them.  He is talking to Planned Parenthood customers.  Suburban women are typically economically established, educated heads of households.  They are typically involved in schools, church, and community.  Not to state the obvious, but they also live in the suburbs, which are incidentally where Target stores sell birth control for nine dollars a month. 

On the contrary, Planned Parenthood's customer base is young and urban -- 75 percent of abortions are by teens and twenty-somethings.  As someone who mentioned the abortion giant five times in one debate and as a regular Planned Parenthood benefactor, the president knows that suburban women are not Planned Parenthood regulars.  Still unanswered is what, if anything, the president will do for suburban women.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading...

Illegal Aliens and Federal Benefits

Theoretically, the law forbids illegal aliens from receiving benefits reserved for American citizens with the exception of emergency Medicaid. In practice, it does not prevent any of them from applying for and receiving benefits paid for by American taxpayers who sometimes, are themselves denied benefits.

Emergency Medicaid provided in emergency rooms, although well intentioned, has been used and abused by illegal aliens as their own personal physician, resulting in the bankruptcy of many small hospitals across the nation, particularly in California.

Federal benefits distributed to illegal aliens include: grants, contracts, loans, professional and commercial licenses, retirement, welfare, WIC, disability, public housing, college education, Pell grants, food stamps, tax credits, earned income credits, tax refunds, and unemployment benefits

.

The Census Bureau reports 40 million foreign-born people residing in the United States. In this category, one-third is estimated to be illegal aliens. Liberal mainstream media calls them “undocumented workers,” “in the shadows residents,” or “unauthorized residents.”

According to the Pew Hispanic Center there were 11.2 million “unauthorized immigrants” in 2010. Their in-house demographer, Jeffrey Passel, used 2008 Current Population Survey (CPS) to estimate “the number of persons living in families in which the head of household or the spouse was an authorized alien,” for a total of 8.8 million families. Liberals like to redefine illegal aliens with euphemisms that suit their agenda. Other sources publish much higher numbers of illegals.

Illegal alien families are likely to have U.S. citizen children or “anchor babies.” These families are given “mixed status” by the Congressional Research Service. Passel also estimates that one in three illegal alien children is poor. This is obvious since illegal aliens have fled their home countries mostly for economic reasons and dire poverty.

Liberals lobby Congress to deal with illegal aliens based on controversies such as demographic issues, how to treat illegal families that have “anchor babies” who are U.S. citizens, and how strict identification requirements may hurt Americans who are denied benefits.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading...

[VIDEO] Weekly Republican Address 10/27/12: Ann Wagner

Via: You Tube