If the Democratic Party stands for anything — besides envy, slander, hypocrisy, cronyism, cowardice and socialism — it stands four square for the right to prevent and — failing prevention — to terminate precipitate and unwanted life.
What happened on Nov. 6 was a huge mistake — which this nation can ill afford.
Where is the morning-after pill when we really need it?
The Colorado Rockies have hired former big league shortstop Walt Weiss to be their new manager. Weiss succeeds Jim Tracy who resigned at the conclusion of the 2012 season following a last place finish in the NL West. The Rockies lost 98 games in 2012.
Weiss spent 14 seasons in the bigs bursting on the scene in 1988 with the Oakland Athletics when he won AL Rookie of the Year. After five years in Oakland, Weiss played for the expansion Florida Marlins in 1993 before joining the Rockies where he spent four seasons. Weiss was part of the 1995 Rockies which won the NL Wild Card. He finished his big league career with the Atlanta Braves.
After his retirement in 2000, Weiss has been largely out of baseball. In fact, Weiss’ only coaching experience is with his son’s high school team in Aurora, Colorado.
Weiss is on a very short leash. He was only given a one-year contract and is under the thumb of Rockies executive Bill Geivett who has an office in the Rockies’ clubhouse. Geivett’s presence in the clubhouse is the main reason Tracy resigned his position.
As long as the Rockies insist on having a starting rotation that is only allowed to throw 75 to 80 pitches a start, they can forget about contending. What pitching prospect would want to sign with the Rockies? What free agent starting pitcher in his right mind would consider Denver?
This hire makes Weiss the first Jew to manage a big league ballclub. OK, Lou Boudreau was born Jewish but he was adopted and raised as a Christian. So Weiss has made big league history.
UPDATE: As a commenter has noted, Norm Sherry was the first Jewish big league manager. Sherry replaced Dick Williams at the helm of the California Angels in the middle of the 1976 season only to be dismissed in the middle of the 1977 season and replaced by Dave Garcia. So Weiss has not made big league history. My bad.
Just because David Petraeus has resigned as CIA director doesn’t mean he shouldn’t testify to Congress about the Libyan disaster. He was the one in the chain of command at the time, and whether still in office or not, he damn well ought to be questioned. Congress should NOT excuse him from testimony; whatever information he has is vital to understanding what happened. For Congress, this should be a hill to die on. This isn’t to question the integrity of Petraeus (outside the marital realm); this is to get the information the public has the absolute right to know. Period.
Citing an extramarital affair, CIA Director David Petraeus has resigned, effective immediately.
NBC news is reporting that Mike Morrell, deputy CIA director and a longtime CIA officer, will be offered the job as acting director, and a nod to his permanent placement.
What follows is Petraeus’ resignation letter:
HEADQUARTERS Central Intelligence Agency
9 November 2012
Yesterday afternoon, I went to the White House and asked the President to be allowed, for personal reasons, to resign from my position as D/CIA. After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours. This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation.
As I depart Langley, I want you to know that it has been the greatest of privileges to have served with you, the officers of our Nation’s Silent Service, a work force that is truly exceptional in every regard. Indeed, you did extraordinary work on a host of critical missions during my time as director, and I am deeply grateful to you for that.
Teddy Roosevelt once observed that life’s greatest gift is the opportunity to work hard at work worth doing. I will always treasure my opportunity to have done that with you and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end.
Thank you for your extraordinary service to our country, and best wishes for continued success in the important endeavors that lie ahead for our country and our Agency.
With admiration and appreciation,
David H. Petraeus
It is always amazing to watch liberals — whose history includes support of every skin color judging idea and group in American history including but not limited to slavery to segregation, lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and racial quotas — make their pitch.
Case in point is racial bean counter Melinda Henneberger over at the Washington Post.
Here’s Henneberger going on about “the end of a long ugly road for the GOP’s southern strategy.”
In which the skin colorist Ms. Hennenberger steps to the plate to say that opposing the Obama welfare changes from a law signed by Bill Clinton was somehow racist. That the entire campaign was about “white resentment.”
Hello? Liberty, freedom, the free market, love of country are all about “white resentment”?
Says Henneberger with a trace of irony: “President Obama captured 93 percent of the African-American vote and 71 percent of the Latino vote.”
Hello again? So let’s see. Once upon a time Democrats used race to win 93 per cent or 71 percent or whatever of the white Southern racist vote — and now that they have continued with this tactic to appeal to blacks and Hispanics on the basis of race this is somehow a symbol of… tolerance?
This would be bizarre if it weren’t so understandable.
Liberalism is now dependent and has always been dependent on playing the race card. First, last and always liberals are about race. Racism is the coin of the realm to liberals.
And Melinda Henneberger is only the latest in a long line of modern race card players from Theodore Bilbo to Bull Connor to George Wallace to Al Sharpton to Maxine Waters to Chris Matthews.
I’d say shameful and immoral.
But what’s the point? This is how liberals get elected — and how they sell newspapers.
Political losses are interesting to watch. Generally speaking, the left and the right handle them differently.
Too often, the tendency of the right is to talk about how certain groups are holding the rest down. Primarily the debate is between those who favor social conservatism and those who favor economic conservatism. Each group insists that its approach is the correct one to get back to a ruling majority vote.
There certainly are quite a few larger problems facing the conservative movement. Right now, particularly among Hispanic, black, and Asian voters, the conservative side has a number of trends that do not favor it. The electorate remained, as it has been historically, more Democratic than Republican.
Fundamentally, however, fingerpointing is not the correct approach. For that, conservatives would do well to learn from their rivals on the left. Liberals handle political losses quite differently. Generally speaking, left-wingers focus on what they did wrong and how to fix it rather than try to cast off who is to blame. Aside from some quibbling between the hardcore communists and the New Democrat types, you simply do not see people calling for expulsion of Hispanics, chastening of gays, or repudiation of government unions. This communitarian approach has been a core part of how leftists have operated for centuries. The old French leftist phrase “pas d’ennemi à gauche,” no enemies on the left, has been something they live by to this day.
Not only is this approach more rational and free from acrimony, it is also actually more likely to lead to productive outcomes.
The primary challenges for the right are ones of messaging, demographics, and market penetration. The specific issues do not really matter that much to most people, largely because they do not care about policy. If you can get the larger societal trends moving in your favor, politics becomes much easier.
The left has long harbored a built-in advantage in the American system due to greater numbers of Americans identifying with its party. Historically, the GOP has been able to overcome this through maxing out its base vote. That happened once again in 2012. Conservatives of all varieties showed up and voted. The difference this year was that Democrats finally seem to have developed a real ground game. Mitt Romney did not lose the election. Barack Obama won it.
Policy is an outcome of the political process, it is the end. If conservatives wish to obtain that end, we should focus on the beginning of the process rather than fight over whose end is best. Before we can get to that point, however, we must focus on changing hearts and minds of those who disagree. Making speeches and TV ads does not do that.
Discussing and debating ultimate objectives is both necessary and entertaining but now is not the time for it, particularly when lashing out is the easy thing to do. Our challenge is not whom to expel but whom to invite in. The next four years are going to be very interesting for conservatives. Will we learn the lessons we need to, though?
That’s what Yuval Levin advocates in a brilliant mini-essay at National Review Online: “[C]onservatives need what conservatism says societies always need: to be ourselves but better.”
Between his fine piece and a good one by Erick Erickson at Red State, which again explains to our moronic consultant class that we need to actually explain our ideas to voters, there is enough wisdom for conservatives to start the rebuilding process. It will be long, tough process, because we are in a worse position than most seem to think, facing a ruthless and corrupt foe who is bent on using the power of the national government to destroy conservatism forever. To survive, and eventually to prevail, we will indeed need to be ourselves (in terms of principle), but better.
The Billion Ddollar Election: Who got paid? (CNN News)
Missteps by Rebels wrode their Support among Syrians (NY Times)
Can Rubio save GOP on Immigration? (Politico)
Election behind him, Obama to talk “Fiscal Cliff” (CBS News)
UK to end financial Aid to India by 2015 (BBC News)
Iranian Fighter Jets fire on US Predator Drone (ABC News)
Election over, Obama Inbox overflows with World Crises (MSNBC)
Jack Lew, Tim Geithner’s possible Replacement as Treasury Secretary, could disappoint (Huffington Post)
Why Russians think U.S. Elections are unfair (Washington Post)
China sends Vessels to intimidate Japan near disputed Isles (Washington Times)
This is not to bash Mitt Romney. He personally elevated his game in the last month, and he is a decent man. But his failures here were eminently predictable. Oh, by the final week, I thought he had overcome his problem in this area, almost by default. But I was wrong then — because I was right all throughout last year and through the winter and spring of this year. In a very long blog post, here was one of my key paragraphs:
But it is the blue-collar worker, or small-business retailer, who (polls show) votes more often on cultural cues (not necessarily social issues per se, although that is sometimes the case, but more on stylistic cultural cues and concerns) than on other factors. Again, this is obviously a gross over-generalization (as is most 30,000-foot-level political socio-analysis), but these are indeed, as Rick Santorum keeps saying, the people who swing elections in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Missouri. The are far more likely to swing behind Santorum (or Gingrich, or Perry) than behind the stiff rich guy with a “weird” religion and no middle-cultural social affinities (“shooting… small varmints” and flipping on homosexual “marriage”).
Romney’s campaign never fixed that problem. Given Romney’s background, personality, and demeanor, it might have been impossible to do so, even with the best of campaign messages and tactics. but there it is: Disaffected white voters stayed home rather than vote for Romney, even though such people usually will turn out to vote against the guy in power who they usually blame for their less-than-ideal economic/other circumstances. They were not going to vote for Obama no matter what, not because of his race but because he had produced poor results. If they had voted, they would have voted against Obama. But Romney never “connected” with them, so they didn’t vote. That’s why the election was lost.
George Neumayr is spot on this morning in “The Big Tent in the Middle.” There already is a Democratic Party. No need for two of them.
“Our liberals can beat their liberals” is not a battle cry Republicans can follow to victory. Even if it were, such a “victory” would be as hollow as a tennis ball.
The Democrats are unapologetically the party of the left. If Republicans would ever stop mincing around and start being the full-service party of the right they might get somewhere. As it stands, Republicans continue to natter on about the “electability” of yet another moderate, politically correct, Marquis of Queensberrry, oh-so-polite candidate who refuses to pin the tail on the odious donkeys and as a result gets his rear handed to him by Democrats who never hesitate to throw the fastball high and tight.
Two Visions of the Electorate (National Review)
With ‘Fiscal Cliff’ looming, Congress facing Compromise or Confrontation (CNN News)
Red Cross says it cannot cope with Syria Emergency (BBC News)
Demographic Shift brings new Worry for Republicans (NY Times)
Post-Sandy “Suckerpunch Storm” dumps Rain, Snow on Areas recovering from Superstorm (CBS News)
Iran and Russia among Countries with Messages for Obama (ABC News)
Life after Defeat for Mitt Romney: Public Praise, private Questions (Washington Post)
Hyundai, Kia Lawsuit: Automakers could pay $775 Million over claims they overstated Cars’ Fuel Economy (Huffington Post)
2016 Election: Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush? (Politico)
Hu not expected to give up all his Powers (Washington Times)
As I exited the Dunkin’ Donuts in Boston’s Seaport District this morning, I was approached by an attractive middle-aged, female newspaper reporter from Norway (along with her photographer) who wanted to know the three biggest challenges facing “the new President”.
After reminding her that President Obama wasn’t exactly new, I told her the three biggest challenges were the deficit, the Middle East and his ego.
I’ll see if I get hate e-mail from Norderhov.
I am just about to finish up Bob Woodward’s The Price of Politics. It is his account of the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations.
The more I read, the more I am depressed.
Although Woodward tries to portray President Obama in the most positive light possible, the fact is that he played a passive role in the negotiations and left most of the heavy lifting to Joe Biden. To the extent Obama was involved, his preening, petulant and prickly disposition rubbed Congressional officials and their staff from both parties the wrong way.
Don’t get me wrong. There is plenty of blame to go around. But it may be that its beyond the actors in question. There is also way too much government and even getting rid of a small fraction of it invites resistance sufficient for politicians to back off without even trying.
As I was reading the book, I kept asking myself how Mitt Romney would have handled this situation. Now we will never know. All we do know is that we have the same cast of characters and I don’t expect them to produce a meaningful resolution on Arbor Day much less reduce the deficit.
Democratic Massachusetts Senator-elect Elizabeth Warren took the stage alone at the Fairmont Copley Plaza hotel in Boston last night to deliver her acceptance speech after defeating incumbent Republican Senator Scott Brown 53 to 47 percent. She resorted to many of the same divisive talking points that she’s utilized throughout her campaign, riling up her supporters by feverishly clapping along to her own emphatic statements.
“For every family that has been chipped and squeezed and hammered, we’re going to fight for a level playing field,” she vowed. She spoke about a “system rigged,” about holding the “big guys” accountable, about making sure that the “millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share,” and she thanked her supporters for teaching “a scrappy first-time candidate how to get into the ring and win.”
And then came a moment largely unprecedented, even in modern politics. “You took on the powerful Wall Street banks and special interests and you let them know you want a senator who will be out there fighting for the middle class all of the time,” Warren thundered as her supporters let out their loudest and most forceful cheer. Last night, we witnessed a Harvard Law School professor defeat an Army National Guard Colonel in his own home state and then disparage him in her victory speech.
“And to the young people…” she began, but it doesn’t really matter what she told them next. Her words and actions, as a candidate and as a careerist, have already sent a pretty clear message to those young people, about how to carry themselves as individuals and about how to get ahead in this life. She’s probably right when she calls herself the intellectual godmother of my generation, because based on everything I’ve seen in my travels thus far, her message has not fallen on deaf young ears.
My Twitter feed, God bless it, quickly filled up with Warren supporters expressing happiness the only way they know how.
“Entire Scott Brown campaign: Elizabeth Warren is a professor (in Mass) and she’s not Native American. Heckuva job, Brownie” tweeted Berkeley-based Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas.
“Elizabeth Warren can never take Scott Brown’s ‘America’s Sexiest Man (1982)’, as determined by Cosmopolitan magazine, away from him,” chimed in the official Twitter feed of New York-based Vanity Fair magazine.
“Scott Brown has that truck, so it’s no sweat moving,” quipped Los Angeles talk show host Bill Maher.
And note the order of things in this one, from TV actress Eliza Dushku: “Scott Brown is OUT!! #ElizabethWarren we love you!”
Scott Brown gave his concession speech at Boston’s Park Plaza Hotel.
“You’ve got no business in politics unless you respect the judgment of people, and if you run for office you’ve got to be able to take it, either way, winning or losing,” Brown said, surrounded on stage by dozens of friends and family. He told his supporters not to boo Elizabeth Warren, assuring them, in his first political lie, “She won it fair and square.”
“I kept my promise to you… and I have never, ever, ever, regretted any decision I’ve ever made for you. You sent me to Washington to be my own man, and I am returning my own man.”
He added: “I’m kind of psyched that you guys hung around.”
Why wouldn’t they? Most Massachusetts people aren’t winners. They’re Red Sox fans who spent 86 years waiting for a World Series victory and grew closer together every time a ground ball went through a first baseman’s legs. They’re religious people who tell their children it doesn’t matter if they become the most successful, so long as they carry themselves with class and practice honesty and humility. They’re literary people in tune with the comedy of life and the virtue of feeling bad. And when they hear the Washington pundits talk dismissively about the “Have a beer” factor in politics — the idea that voters naturally scorn the pushiest activist candidates for the ones they’d rather have over to the house to drink too much and talk about what they’ve seen and what they’ve learned so far in this life- they say “Damn straight.”
Scott Brown did the most Massachusetts thing of all: he acted like a stand-up guy and he lost his job for it.
He can take solace in that. And the people of Massachusetts can take some solace in Elizabeth Warren’s victory: At least they won’t have to see her around for another six years.
Chris Wallace is saying that the Romney camp is saying not so fast. They are disputing FNC and other networks calling Ohio for Obama.
Twenty percent of the vote has yet to be counted and Obama leads by less than a thousand votes.
UPDATE: Well, as you all know by now, Romney delivered a concession speech a couple of hours later. Even if he had won the battle in Ohio, he would have lost the war.
It was painful to watch Michael Barone set Karl Rove straight as to why FNC called Ohio for Obama. Rove was grasping at straws. He didn’t question Barone’s methodology but questioned making the call too soon. But if they had waited, it would have only put off the inevitable.
With Barack Obama having won Iowa and Oregon, he has now been re-elected President.
They’ve killed Mitt Romney.
The good news is that he will only be President for four more years.
The bad news is that he will be President for four more years.
FNC has called Ohio for President Obama.
He is now at 262 electoral votes needing only eight for re-election.
Looks like Romney will be making a concession speech soon.
FNC has called the Virginia Senate race for former Governor and DNC Chair Tim Kaine over former GOP Senator George Allen.
Does this mean Obama is going to pull it out in Virginia?
Or are there enough people who cast ballots for Kaine who voted for Romney?
FNC is calling North Carolina for Mitt Romney.
I suppose this was not unexpected but it took a hell of a long time to sort out. Obama had a very strong showing in NC.
Still, it’s another 15 electoral college votes for Romney.
Despite Mitt Romney’s ties to New Hampshire, President Obama has prevailed in the Granite State.
I think New Hampshire should be considered a blue state given the Democrats have carried it in the last three elections.
After all, over the past decade, New Hampshire has seen a migration of Massachusetts liberals who prefer to not to pay state income taxes.
These people are affectionately (and sometimes not) known as Massholes.
With 40% of the ballots counted, FNC is calling the Massachusetts Senate race for Elizabeth Warren.
Alas, Scott Brown is a footnote in American political history.
I cannot say I am surprised. I went to the polls early in the morning. The lines were long and they were blue. Warren’s people have been on the ground for weeks and got out the vote. In the back of my mind, I thought Jamaica Plain isn’t necessarily representative of the rest of Massachusetts. But who the hell am I kidding? The People’s Republic of JP is representative of the Bay State. Brown’s brand of bipartisanship doesn’t sell here.
So Ted Kennedy’s seat is back in Democratic hands.
FNC has now also put Wisconsin in the Obama column.
Unless Romney has a clean sweep of Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire I see another four years of President Obama.
Naturally, I hope my pessimism is undue.
Instead of deferring to a U.S. attorney general who is not serious about enforcing the law against voter fraud, Ohio’s Republican secretary of state should have prioritized ballot integrity, Anita MonCrief, a former ACORN employee turned conservative activist, said in a phone interview. It is now clear that dead and ineligible voters will remain on the voter rolls in a state that could decide today’s presidential election.
Under Section 7 of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA),, state social welfare agencies are required to offer potential voters registration forms while they seeking other government services. This part of the law is commonly known as “motor voter.” But under Section 8 of the NVRA, state officials are required to maintain and update voter roles as a safeguard against fraudulent efforts. This means they must purge the rolls of dead voters and ineligible voters who have moved.
But attorney general Eric Holder, and other top officials within the U.S. Justice Department, according to several attorneys who previously worked in the Voting Section of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division including Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) has also accused the Obama DOJ of “selectively enforcing” motor voter while ignoring Section 8.
In February, Judicial Watch sent a letter to Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted presenting evidence that his state was not in compliance with the requirements of Section 8 under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Section 8 calls for state officials to purge the names of dead and ineligible voters from the rolls. After reviewing U.S. Census data, Judicial Watch found that a total of 34 counties had unusually high registration figures. The problem is particularly acute in Auglaize, Wood, and Morrow counties where the number of individuals listed on the voter registration forms exceeds 100 percent of the total voting age population.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said that in his response to the Section 8 allegations Secretary Husted wrote back to Judicial Watch that his office had been “hampered… by the restrictions and seemingly inconsistent provisions of the NVRA” and that he had a written letter to Attorney General Holder seeking guidance.
“The whole point of having a secretary of state and having someone in that position is to enforce the law and if you’re compromising on a critical question like this than it says to me you cannot be trusted,” MonCrief said. “We are talking about something that could decide outcome of the presidential election. Ohio could make all the difference.”
MonCrief is a former employee of ACORN’s Project Vote affiliate. She testified against both Project Vote and ACORN in 2008 as part of a voter registration fraud case in Pennsylvania. She is a now a senior advisor to True the Vote, a grassroots group based in Houston, Texas that favors ballot integrity initiatives. Judicial Watch and True the Vote have filed a lawsuit against Ohio state officials citing Section 8 violations. They have filed a similar suit against state officials in Indiana.
“Secretary Husted is just trying to come down the middle and avoid controversy,” MonCrief said. “He has future political ambitions and that’s what he’s trying to protect. But he should be protecting his constituents from voter fraud. If the election is stolen for President Obama, it will be stolen in Ohio.”
Right here in the heart of the suddenly-in-play Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
When I asked one of the poll workers about the turnout thus far… that would be at about 11 A.M. … there was a one word answer: “Heavy.”
What does that mean? For a Republican presidential candidate to carry the state the Philadelphia Democratic vote must be overcome. How? The Republican turn out in the four suburban counties around Philadelphia is always mentioned — and mentioned correctly. But the same rule applies to Central Pennsylvania, a mix of suburban and rural counties that extends in “T” shaped form up through the middle of the state from the Maryland border to the New York border and then extending east and west.
Two key issues that impact in Pennsylvania behind the jobs issue are Catholics and energy. Certainly the view is vivid in the Catholic Church that the Obama Administration has launched a direct assault on religious freedom — and that impacts in trying to get the substantial Catholic vote in places like Philadelphia, Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Erie, and Pittsburgh. The second — energy — is about coal. The state is immutably identified with its coal resources in both Northeastern and Southwestern Pennsylvania. And as with Catholics, there is real anger at the direct assault on the coal industry that has been part of the Obama era.
Taken together, it’s no wonder the Romney campaign has abruptly dumped millions in here.
They were right to do so — Pennsylvania is in play.
What will tomorrow bring for America?
I agree with Quin and RET: President Romney.
Great column with lots of details, by Publius. Vote fraud is real. It must be stopped.
When the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) became law in 1993, Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) warned at the time that the “motor voter” provision of the law could create opportunities for electoral mischeif. That’s what you call a prescient forecast.
The scandals that have beset the left-wing community organizing group known as ACORN, and its Project Vote affiliate, demonstrate how forward looking Sen. McConnell was at the time. But this is largely because President Obama’s Department of Justice refuses to enforce the NRVA’s Section 8, which requires state officials to purge the names of ineligible and dead voters. This has had serious consequences in recent election cycles and could impact the 2012 elections.
After obtaining documents from the Colorado Secretary of State’s office through an open records request, Judicial Watch found that state officials were pressured into accepting policy changes that set up to increase voter registration public assistance recipients. As a result, the number of the agencies responsible for public assistance jumped from rose from 3,340 in 2007 to almost 44,000 in 2010. But here’s the kicker: In the 2009-2010 period, eight percent of the voter registration forms that were rejected came from Colorado’s public assistance agencies. That’s over four times the national average of 1.9 percent.
An analysis of the voter registration rolls by ColoradoWatchdog.org found that a strong potential for voter fraud exists. Out of the 3.4 million registered voters in Colorado, 1.2 million are “inactive,” Earl Glynn, a special projects coordinator and researcher at the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity, concluded. The inactive names “could be borrowed by corrupt official,” Glynn explained in his report.
Judicial Watch in partnership with “True the Vote” has filed a lawsuit against Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted that alleges he is not enforcing Section 8’s anti voter fraud directives. U.S. Census data shows that the number of individuals listed on voter registration rolls exceeds the number of eligible voters in at least three Ohio counties.
Judicial Watch and True the Vote have filed a similar lawsuit against Republican officials in Indiana, which is considered a sure win for Gov. Mitt Romney. But the race remains tight in both Colorado and Ohio polls show that Romney and President Obama are relatively even. If Romney loses Ohio by a close margin he may able to fix the blame on members of his own party who declined to remove ineligible voters from the rolls.
In a formal response to Judicial Watch, Secretary Husted claimed that Ohio’s efforts to update voter rolls “have been hampered… by the restrictions and seemingly inconsistent provisions of the NVRA.” Husted also informed Judicial Watch that he had written a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder “to discuss possible solutions,” but did not receive any response. This means Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State is deferring to Obama’s AG instead of upholding the clear and unambiguous wording of Section 8.
If Mitt Romney does not prevail tonight, there is a good case that he may be able to fix the blame on some of his own Republicans.
Dery Murdock relays the mood. Hint: it’s enthusiastic for Romney.
Election fraud is occurring all over the country today. True the Vote is fighting it. If you see something suspicious, here is True the Vote’s very helpful hotline.
An Election Night Guide (Weekly Standard)
Australian Court fines S&P for a misleading AAA Credit Rating (BBC)
As Australia Pivots towards Asia, away from Anglosphere, it’s Importance as an Ally Grows (CSIS)
Biden says: Biden 2016? (LA Times)
Lame Duck Sequestration Likely, Say Defense Officials (Politico)
The Recount Rules, Just in Case (WSJ)
Wooden Boardwalk Towns Destroyed after Sandy (NYT)
Two U.S. Sailors Arrested and Indicted on Okinawa for Allegedly Raping a Japanese Woman (CNN)
I just got off the phone with Rick Santorum. He thinks Romney will win tomorrow.
“As dispassionate as I think I can be, I just think it’s such a different election than it was four years ago,” he said. “Our base is clearly more energized now than it was four years ago. Romney in the last month clearly has done a good job making people more comfortable that he’s more than up to the job of president. I keep going back to the fundamentals: The fundamentals of his campaign are really good. I don’t see any reason why Romney won’t win.”
Santorum said he thinks the polls are “way off” because they are far over-sampling Democrats. In recent days, Santorum has been doing a host of “meet and greets” in Iowa, Missouri, Ohio, and Virginia (ones scheduled in his home state of Pennsylvania were canceled because they were set for the day Hurricane Sandy hit), and of course is in frequent touch with lots of people in PA.
“What I see and feel on the ground,” he said, “is enthusiasm. We’re much, much better off than we were four years ago. I think we can make the difference.”
As for Pennsylvania, here’s his take:
“If I’m right and this really is a race where the poll numbers are a little skewed, I think he [Romney] wins Pennsylvania. Unlike other races in recent times, [this is not a mirage]. Romney is competitive because he is doing something George Bush could never do, which is appeal more to the Philly suburbs. I think he can win Bucks County, for instance, and he’s doing better in all of the Philly suburbs than [Republican presidential candidates] have done in years. So if he keeps doing that, and then energizes the western parts of the state, I really think he can win. Unlike in Ohio, 97 percent of Pennsylvanians haven’t voted yet, so there really is an opportunity here.”
Those counting on the Gallup poll of likely voters to confirm their sense of Romney’s leading Obama will no doubt be more than alarmed that numbers that had Romney ahead by 51-46 or 50-47 pre-Sandy now show him, post-Sandy, as currently played up big on Drudge, ahead only by a single point, 49-48.
UPDATE: Drudge is now playing up a 50-49 Romney advantage in the latest Gallup readings.
I rent a small office in my nearby small town, and I actually have to walk through an unrented office to get to my space.
Apparently the gentleman who owns the building has rented the office I have to walk through to the Obama campaign for the last few days of this election season. I shouldn’t be surprised: he has a “Veterans for Obama” sticker on his car and I’ve been unable to get him to change his mind even though he’s rather a moderate (and gun-owning) guy.
The office I now have to walk through, probably today and tomorrow, is full of posters and stickers and lists of areas that the Obama volunteers plan to canvas, knocking on doors, to try to turn out the vote for Dear Leader in this very liberal area.
The earnest young lady who seems to be running the show recently moved here from California. Can’t say I’m the least bit surprised by that.
Colorado is turning from a rational slightly-red state into bluish-purple because of the influx of muddle-headed liberals fleeing California and the Northeast who can’t seem to recognize the fact that they are fleeing the results of electing Democrats and now trying to bring that disease to this beautiful state. That said, I believe Romney will win Colorado by a comfortable margin despite the effort of transplanted leftists.
In the meantime, I’m trying to be polite to my temporary neighbor…though it’s hard when I see her as a co-conspirator in an effort to destroy my children’s future.
Barack Obama’s latest tactic on the campaign trail, since he can’t talk about his record, is to say that voters can believe that he, presumably unlike Mitt Romney, means what he says and says what he means, that this election is about trust.
So how about his words, on multiple occasions, on the single most expensive, most intrusive, most unpopular piece of legislation in generations in which the government imposed a health insurance mandate on individual Americans?
Really, Mr. President, if you didn’t mean what you said on something as big as this, why should anybody trust anything else you have to say?
Paul Ryan on the Obama economic agenda: “It didn’t fail because it was stopped. It failed because it was passed.”
(I assume he’s said this before, but today was the first time I heard it.)
Most of the polls call for a narrow victory for Mitt Romney tomorrow in Florida. For this reason all manner of liberal groups are laying the groundwork for lawsuits against the results on a host of nonsensical grounds. They may now have new one.
One of these groups’ favorite japes is that the new schedule of early voting in Florida, adopted last year by a Republican dominated Florida Legislature, keeps minority voters away from the polls. How this new schedule, which contains as many voting hours as the old one, keeps minority voters away from the polls more than majority ones, they never explain. But as alert political observers have noticed, there are benefits to being a liberal, including never having to give coherent reasons for your goofy positions, or admitting after your policies fail that you were wrong.
The new reason for challenging a Romney win in Florida may literally fall on Democrats (Republicans too, but this doesn’t matter). The weather gnomes the “Tampa Daily Bugle” consults with say there is a 60 percent chance of rain tomorrow in Tampa and thereabouts. As the rain is part of a front advancing on the entire state, there are doubtless similar forecasts across Florida.
History tells us that Republicans are more likely to do their civic duty on Election Day in foul weather than Democrats are (why this should be so has never been discovered, and it’s probably a hate crime now to even look into the matter). So please add the weather to the ever-lengthening list of things that liberals whine are just NOT FAIR!!
The demons for fairness in the Florida Democratic Party are not going to take this sitting down. My well-placed sources tell me the party is even now preparing a lawsuit against God if He allows the politically critical I-4 Corridor to be water-cooled tomorrow. Of course, there’s not a court high enough in this world to hear this one. But Florida’s own Debbie Wasserperson Schultz, chairwoman person of the Democratic Party, doesn’t know this.
China plans huge Iron Ore Mine in Greenland (Reuters)
Ohio Party Leaders Duke it Out in Cincinatti (LA Times)
Rollout of New Obamacare Regulations Slows in Leadup to Election (Politico)
Original Mutual Fund Facebook IPO Backers Leave (WSJ)
NY Cancelled Marathon is Run by 1000s, Without Fanfare (NYT)
Unprecedented Political Spending in 2012. What are the implications? (NPR)
More State Televsion! Chinese State-Sponsored Channel to Run in US (Foreign Policy)
They, like much of the rest of America, have severe buyer’s remorse after supporting Barack Obama four years ago:
H/T Weasel Zippers
The Hill is reporting that the Russians are being very critical of our impeding election and our entire electoral system, calling it “the worst in the world.”
It occurs to me that their biggest objection may be that the winner of the election is not known prior to voting.
One can only imagine how much Vladimir Putin is cheering for Barack “more flexibility” Obama, and how much our allies (not that Obama recognizea them as such) throughout Eastern Europe are hoping for a Romney win.
Not since Jimmy Carter, and perhaps never in our history, has the United States had a president whose every foreign policy impulse is dangerous and destabilizing.
The always-impressive former Rep. Artur Davis wrote an eloquent column last week on “The Case for Mitt Romney,” well worth a read. (I meant to post it last Monday, but with Sandy hitting the East Coast, I decided to wait a few days, and just now remembered to do it.) Davis seconded Barack Obama’s nomination at the Democratic convention in 2008 but always has had some conservative instincts and always has exhibited great personal decency (he bucked the national Democratic Party way back when, by endorsing conservative William Pryor for the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals despite massive and vicious opposition to Pryor from Davis’ then-party, the Democrats). But the longer he stayed in Washington, the more disillusioned he became with the lefty Dems, and broke with them strongly by opposing ObamaCare. Anyway, and quite significantly, Davis’ support for Romney doesn’t rely mostly on ideology, but on competence:
[R]ather than tackle the crisis with single-mindedness, Obama veered off in too many scattered directions: a stimulus whose legacy is a slew of poor returns on investments in alternative energy and uncompleted construction projects, a partisan healthcare law that drained off a year of the administration’s efforts, a massive overhaul of the carbon producing economy that was too unwieldy for even many Democrats to embrace, a financial industry bill that has not stopped excessive leveraging in the capital markets. The portfolio is one that Obama and his allies have strained to explain, much less justify.
One by one, Davis tears apart the excuses of the pro-Obama partisans. Here’s one example:
The bracing truth is not that Obama was denied a chance to govern, but that the government he produced has proved so unappealing and been so inadequate to the challenges of the times. The healthcare reform, Obama’s most notable victory, is illustrative. The law’s convoluted path, the single instance since the thirties of a party-line vote carrying landmark legislation, has contributed to Washington’s distance from Main Street. That gap will only grow more distressing as middle income Americans are subject to new taxes if they don’t purchase insurance, as small businesses minimize their work force to avoid the law’s mandates, and the estimates of higher premiums touch the pockets of ordinary families.
But this is no mere attack on the Obama administration. He merely clears out the myths of the Obamites in order to set the stage for the positive case for Romney:
[A]s Romney has come into full view, it is evident that his central virtue is experience in effectively managing complex systems, a trait rare in national politicians. As much as the President demonized it, Romney’s development of Bain Capital into a private equity model required him to master the challenge of maximizing investor earnings in extremely unfavorable circumstances: Romney’s tenure there was a consistent narrative of turning companies around and if anything, his campaign should have touted it more. His gubernatorial term in Massachusetts happens to be exactly what a successful presidency would require, from a capacity to bargain with as well as outmaneuver a hotly partisan opposition, to a willingness to experiment with the fine points of policy. Romney’s is the record of a consistent conservative, but not one who would wage his own distracting counter-revolution. His history is one of grappling with hard political questions while showing a respect for the side of a dispute that does not share his views.
And Davis endorses the idea that Romney can effectively build coalitions across the aisle for right-leaning goals, saying that Romney’s “blueprint is the basis for an authentic bipartisan compromise in 2013.” Specifically, this isn’t some fuzzy-headed, low-content compromise to which Davis refers, but rather the Romney initiatives to enforce budget discipline, cut the corporate tax rate, and “simplify the tax code.” These are reforms all good conservatives embrace.
Please do read the whole thing. Really good stuff.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?