Tuesday, November 06, 2012

Man Makes Deathbed Confession To A Murder..And Then Survives!!

Grim prospects: James Washington was having a heart attack in 2009 when he confessed to a murder dating back to 1995

This one is so funny I just have to put it up.

James Washington, pictured above had been suspected of murdering Joyce Goodener , who was found stabbed in the neck, beaten to death with a cinderblock and set on fire in an abandoned Nashville, Tennessee house 17 years ago.

But there was no evidence, so he was never convicted.

Washington was incarcerated for a different crime, and had a heart attack while in prison. Figuring he was about to meet his Maker, he decided to confess to a prison guard who was nearby:

'He kind of got as best as he could, motioned, and said "I have something to tell you. I have to get something off my conscience and you need to hear this,"' said transport guard James Tomlinson.

'He said "I killed somebody. I beat her to death,"' Mr Tomlinson added.


Only problem was, after ratting himself out,Washington survived.

He's been convicted, and could receive up to a 51 year sentence, which essentially means he would die in prison.

Who says G-d doesn't have a sense of humor?




Scenes From An Election - Dems Already Working On Voter Fraud In PA

A big story this morning concerns court appointed Republican poll watchers being evicted from polling places in Philadelphia by Democrat operatives..in some cases, forcibly with statements being made that “No Republicans will be allowed in the polling place.”

Needless to say, this is occurring in heavily black urban wards, and the New Black Panthers are again on the loose 'guarding' som eof these polling places.The idea, of course, is to stuff the ballot boxes with Obama votes when no one's watching. That's how some of these wards achieved 99-100% turnout in past elections.

The state GOP to court and obtained an order from a judge at the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas requiring the Republicans to be admitted to the polls and seated. However, there is no telling what kind of voter fraud the Democrats committed in the meantime, when no one was looking.

In another wonderful tale from the City of Brotherly Love, a far left 'activist ' group called The Community Voters Project ( CVP) is supposedly a non-partisan group who registers people to vote ala' ACORN.

They're a fairly large group with offices in 10 states and registered around 300,000 voters in 2008.

Except this time, their Philadelphia office was caught shredding the registration forms of everyone who signed one with them who wanted to register Republican.A lot of these people are going to go to the polls to vote, thinking they registered when their applications were actually tossed in the dumpster.

 

Yes, the time honored democrat sport of voter fraud. Without it, they don't win.

CBS Releases Unaired Footage Of Obama Refusing To Call Benghazi A Terror Attack



From September 12th.So I guess Mitt Romney was right after all, and President Obama lied to the American people again...while Candy Crowley backed him up.

Notice that CBS had this footage available during the controversy after the debate and is only releasing it now, on the eve of the election.

As Eric Wemple over at the Washington Post writes, had this unaired material in CBS' possession been released on October 17th the day after the second debate, it would have been a game changer with Romney being adjudged the winner hands down, just like the first one.

They deliberately sat on it to help this president's re-election, and as far as I'm concerned, that's another Benghazi scandal.

Tell me some more fairy tales about how there's no media bias in favor of Democrats and the left.

Simply disgraceful.

Monday, November 05, 2012

A Message To The Tribe, From David Mamet...And Me


An excellent piece, by noted Pulitzer Prize-winning and Tony- and Oscar-nominated playwright, essayist, screenwriter and film directo David Mamet. Surprisingly, this was printed in the very Left tilted Los Angeles Jewish Journal.

I'm reproducing it here in its entirety because its an excellent read that's very uncharacteristic of the paper (I still can't believe it got in), because they give links to a number of 'answer' screeds about the piece that defy description and because I don't feel like giving them traffic. Emphasis mine:

To those Jews planning to vote for Obama:

Are you prepared to explain to your children not the principles upon which your vote is cast, but its probable effects upon them?

Irrespective of your endorsement of liberal sentiments, of fairness and “more equal distribution,” will you explain to your children that top-down economic policies will increasingly limit their ability to find challenging and well-paid work, and that the diminution in employment and income will decrease their opportunity to marry and raise children?

Will you explain (as you have observed) that a large part of their incomes will be used to fund programs that they may find immoral, wasteful and/or indeed absurd? And that the bulk of their taxes go to no programs at all, but merely service the debt you entailed on them?

Will you tell your children that a liberal government will increasingly marginalize, dismiss and weaken the support for and the safety of the Jewish state?


Will you tell them that, in a state-run economy, hard work may still be applauded, but that it will no longer be rewarded?

Will you explain that whatever their personal beliefs, tax-funded institutions will require them to imbibe and repeat the slogans of the left, and that, should they differ, they cannot have a career in education, medicine or television unless they keep their mouths shut?

Will you explain to them that it is impossible to make a budget, and that the basic arithmetic we all use at the kitchen table is not practiced at the federal and state level, and to suggest that it should be is “selfishness?”

Most importantly, will you teach them never to question the pronouncements of those in power, for to do so is to risk ostracism?

Are you prepared to sit your children down and talk them through your vote on the future you are choosing for them?

Please remember that we have the secret ballot and, should you, on reflection, vote in secret for a candidate you would not endorse in public, you will not be alone.


Inwardly, in their heart of hearts, many Jews who would never dare voice it publicly understand that Barack Obama is no friend of Israel or Jews...he has far too many intimate associations with rabid Israel bashers and anti-semites, and his actions speak a lot louder than his words.

There is a deep seated core of Israel hatred alive and well in the Democrat party. All that's necessary to see that is to take a good look at the differences between the 2008 Democrat platform and the original 2012 one. written with the full knowledge and collaboration of this president and his campaign. That was something even a pro-Israel democrat like Chuck Schumer couldn't quite swallow.

And remember what happened at the Democrat convention when President Obama saw that the platform didn't poll well and belatedly tried to defuse the issue by ramming through some changes?


Nor is this hypocrisy limited to Barack Obama when he's not running for election.



I know there are Jews who for their own reasons simply can't vote for a Republican no matter how philosemitic or pro-Israel that candidate is.

My own parents, rabid FDR Democrats, faced that dilemma in 1972 and 1980. They weren't going to vote for Nixon or Reagan, but as passionate lovers of Israel they weren't going to vote for McGovern and especially not for Jimmy Carter.

So they simply voted for the down ticket candidates and didn't cast a vote for president that year.

If you simply can't vote for Mitt Romney no matter what, fine. Just don't vote to put someone like Barack Obama back in the White House.

You owe Israel and the Jewish people that much. And after you come out of the voting booth, you can always tell your friends anything you like.



A Must Read From Hugh Hewitt


Photobucket



Here's a slice of Hugh Hewitt's latest:


That's a shot from "Mittstock" in PA yesterday.  Not many of the pundits predicted a campaign close in Ben Franklin land.

My Washington Examiner column reviews the two stories that Manhattan-Beltway media elites are not eager to cover:  Mitt Romney's momentum and the continuing misery brought about by Sandy.
When the revenge, er, voting gets underway tonight in Dixville Notch it will be time for the MSM to drop any shyness about its boosterism and try to begin to push voters in a particular direction by calling states early for the president or late for Mitt Romney.  If Romney wins Florida and Virginia handily, for example, do you expect any of the nets to rush the call forward?  If Romney is leading significantly in Pennsylvania, will the "decision desk" folk hang back, and back, and back.
By contrast, if there is any way to get PA up on the president's board, don't expect the distant memory of Florida to hold back the embedded Obamaians.

Once the voting is over and we have a new president, then the full fledged media coveage of Sandy will begin again, just in time to see the new storm layer on the misery.  It will be more difficult to rally the country given the near "all clear" signal that has gone out in the four days.  The $23 million pulled in from the concert may have to do.  The sort of stories that ought to have dominated CNN for days will turn up with increasing frequency, but the message has gone out from the Obama-obliging anchors that "things are slowly getting back to normal," and it is very difficult to get the American attention engaged again once it has turned away.

It has been a very odd 72 hours of campaign coverage, with a faltering, sputtering Obama campaign defended by media forces led by the brave Nate Silver, almost single handedly turning back doom and gloom, and hurling fresh rounds of deadlocked polling at every attempt by the Romney forces to smile at each other.  As this media battle waxed and waned, prodicers would throw on a quick Sandy package, but nothing so dispiriting as to suggest the president shouldn't be campaigning.  Bizarre.  Another chapter in the collapse of American media.

As for the collapse of the Obama re-elect campaign, the crowds got very, very small, and Joe Biden got even more erratic.  Mitt Romney finished 1 in the Rasmussen tracking, with the president at 48%, the best sign of a very weak incumbent, and the Times ran a profile of a confident Romney, a hedge against their hopes and dreams fading Tuesday night. Don't let your lefty friends look at the internals from the CNN poll or they may not talk for the rest of the day.  (Hint: The independents are rushing to Romney.)

There isn't much to do but speculate, and I will do so with the usual suspects for an extra two hours today, joined in studio by Townhall's Guy P. Benson and Lileks as well as HotAir's Ed Morrissey as we warm up the band for tomorrow night's go-until-its-over marathon.
 
It all feels very, very good to me, like 1980 did, but it was much easier to stay optimistic in 1980 because the disinformation flow was so much more muted. The advantage of 2012 is that no MSM sneak attack like an early and wrong call of Florida will have anything like the same impact.


The rest up at the link.

Final Election Predictions, Featuring Weekend Monkey














Well this is where the pedal hits the metal as they say.It's time for me to make my final election predictions, along with the able assistance of Joshua Pundit's political guru, ace handicapper and former Democrat presidential candidate Weekend Monkey.

RM: Hello Monkey, and thanks for joining us.

WM: Your pleasure, I'm sure Rob. Howdy Doody, primates!

RM: @##!#. Always the inflated ego...

WM: Hee hee hee! Lemme tell ya, I'm feeling good about tomorrow!

RM: Let me guess. I know you've been campaigning for Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts...I take it you favor her chances tomorrow.

WM: Oh, you betcha Rob. And that translates into a lot of shekels for yours truly in election action, plus a high level staff position in DC when she gets in.

RM: I should have known. Anyway,  you want to do the Senate first or the presidential race?

WM: Let's start at the top and work down.

RM: OK, fire away.

WM: It's really too close to call, but I see it leaning towards President Obama narrowly winning a second term..probably after some controversy among the primates:




scenario_2.jpg



It's really pretty simple. I see Romney the Robot narrowly getting frozen out of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. And I mean narrowly. If even one state changes, it could go the other way. Let's call it 5-3 Obama.

Ohio is gonna be the poop storm, with a lotta weirdness in Cuyoga and Mahoning Counties that could leave us hanging on the branch for a long time, but in the end it's gonna come down to Ohio. If that goes Obama's way, he wins.Otherwise, Romney the Robot gets in.

RM: So you don't see Romney taking either Pennsylvania or Wisconsin?

WM: Y'know, anything's possible, But if I gotta make a call, I say Obama takes it overall. Especially Ohio, because a lot of the primates have jobs still, unemployment's relatively low, you got the unions and the Cleavland Machine. And they're all organized because of Governor Kasich trying to pull a Scott Walker on the public employee unions and getting his pee pee slapped.

RM: Speaking of governors, what did you think  of Chris Christie cozying up to Obama and dissing Romney, essentially telling him he wasn't welcome in Jersey to tour the storm areas?

WM: Ah hee hee hee! I got a real laugh outta that! Look, it's simple. Lardass is ticked off because he didn't run, he's looking at 2016 and the only way that opens up for him is if Romney the Robot loses. Simple as that.

RM: Makes sense. I never liked him anyway. The House?

WM: I say it stays ReThug, with maybe 3-5 seats changing hands.

RM: The Senate?

WM: Hee hee!  Worst case,  my Democrats will probably lose Virginia, North Dakota, Nebraska, Montana.  They'll make pickups in Massachusetts and Maine, where the indy guy King will caucus with us Donkeys.Maybe another pickup in Indiana, depending on turnout.And we'll keep Florida.Probably Missouri too.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin  are wild cards. If they go Democrat like I think they will,  we get those too. They might end up splitting, one apiece.

The ReThugs make pickups in Virginia, North Dakota, Montana and Nebraska. They'll keep Arizona and Nevada, maybe Indiana.They lose Massachusetts and Maine. They might get either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, depending.

Bottom line? Including two indies, my Democrats end up with 49 seats maybe 50-51 if we get Indiana and either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania. The ReThugs end up with 49, 48 if they lose Indiana.To get control of the senate, they'd have to hang on to Indiana somehow and get both Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, or maybe Missouri which I don't see happening at all.

RM: You predicted a divided Senate before.

WM: Yup. It could shake out that way. OK, whaddya got?

RM: I see Romney winning.

WM: Cheez, what a surprise!

RM: Hey now...

WM: Alright, alright.

RM: Here's how I see it, but just like with your map, mine is subject to some changes..it really is a  pretty close race to predict.


scenario_3.jpg

With the economy the way it is, and the other issues of Obama's presidency, I see Romney taking Virginia, Florida, Colorado and North Carolina pretty decisively. I also think he's going to take two  of the Big Four in the Midwest, most likely Ohio and Wisconsin, although the last polls I saw that meant anything show Pennsylvania and Michigan tied up. I think there's a very good chance that Ohio and Pennsylvania might switch columns, with Romney taking the Keystone State and Obama getting Ohio by a narrow margin because of the factors you mentioned.Especially with Obama's EPA already salivating publicly at crippling coal for good.

WM: You see Romney taking Iowa and New Hampshire?

RM: Yeah, but with this scenario if he loses them both he still wins.

WM: Yeah, I can see that.You better hope he takes Colorado then,,,,

RM: I think he will. For what it's worth I agree with you  Monkey, it's going to come down to the Big Four in the Midwest.Obama has to take both Pennsylvania and Ohio to win.

WM: You see the Elephants keeping the House?

RM: Of course, Monkey. With a  maximum loss of 3-5 seats. Which means that even if you're right and Obama does get re-elected, Darrel Issa still has subpoena powers and Obama might wish he lost tomorrow in a couple of years.

WM: Ouchie! You got a point there!

RM: Here's how I see the Senate. OK, the Dems  lose Virginia, North Dakota, Montana and Nebraska. I personally think there's an excellent chance of one or two more GOP  pickups in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Maybe Florida if Romney wins decisively enough. I think Tammy Baldwin's lunatic fringe lefty ideas don't play well in the Badger State anywhere outside Madison and Dane County, and there's also the Catholic vote to consider in both PA and Wisconsin. And with Paul Ryan on the ticket, Scott Walker surviving the recall and  Wisconsin  being RNC head Preibus' home state, I think it's looking pretty good for Romney and for Tommy Thompson.The GOP hangs on to Arizona and Nevada.

The Republicans probably lose Massachusetts and definitely lose Maine. And probably one of either Missouri or Indiana, although I think Mourdock has a shot at surviving in Indiana. So that puts us at between 49 and 52 seats for the GOP, depending on what happens in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Missouri and Indiana.

I pretty much see the  Democrats' scenario the same way you do, including the two indies. I'd like to think the people of Massachusetts  have more brains than to put someone like Elizabeth Warren in the Senate -

WM: HEY!

RM: Nothing personal Monkey.

WM: Besides, it is Massachusetts....

RM: You got that right. Anyway, I also see a split senate as a real possibility. So there it is...

WM: I gotta tell you something Rob...you know that video of that little primate crying and saying she was tired of Bronco Bama and Mitt Romney? I feel the same way. I wanna get this thing over with.

RM: Me too Monkey. I think a lot of people feel that way. Two years for a political campaign is just to damned long, and I'll be relieved when it's over and done with. You ever think of running for something again?

WM: You know me Rob. I'm a political animal and I see my opportunities and take 'em. Hee hee!

RM: Spoken like a Democrat, Monkey. Thanks for swinging by.

WM: See ya later Rob. Smell Ya later, Primates.



Weekend Monkey was a Democratic candidate for president in 2008 and is JoshuaPundit's political Guru. He can be reached at wendmonkey@yahoo.com








The Choice To Be Made

 

Tomorrow, America goes to the polls in an historic election.

What we choose tomorrow will decide our future as a nation for a generation.

America, in the last twenty years has gone through a period of great pain and uncertainty, a period that started with us emerging as the victors of the Cold War and the unquestioned sole superpower and has ended with us as a nation in debt, with our economy stagnant and our status as a superpower in doubt.

There's no question in my mind that this has occurred because of the deterioration of our politics and our leadership.The last three presidents including the current incumbent have been three of the worst in American history in terms of lasting harm done to the country.

This is an opportunity to reverse that course.

It's no secret to anyone who visits this site that I have a fairly positive view of Mitt Romney. And I have for a while, even before he got the Republican nomination. What's less well known is that I was fully prepared from the day he got elected to support President Obama,put away the rhetoric of the 2008 campaign and give him a fair chance to succeed.

When President Barack Obama said he was going to govern from the center and be the president of all the people, I was prepared to take him at his word and let him prove it to me.

He failed utterly.

He failed in terms of competency, simple decency, and what I can only call presidential demeanor. Instead of being the president of all the people, he operated in the the White House as though he was mayor of Chicago, looting the treasury to reward his political allies and appointing countless 'czars' from among his cronies.

Instead of providing an example of austerity in tough times, the president and his wife set records for their personal spending at the taxpayer's expense.Last year, with 23 million Americans unemployed, the Obamas spent a record $1.4 billion taxpayer dollars solely to maintain themselves in the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. This includes the five star vacations,(the First Lady spent over $12 million dollars personally on her vacations last year alone) the president's incessant rounds of golf, the numerous parties and junkets, the fees paid to the entertainers at the White House, the inflated staff's salaries, the whole enchilada. By contrast, Britain maintained its entire Royal Family for a mere $57.8 million during the same period.

Instead of taking advantage of his high approval ratings and a unique opportunity to promote Dr. Martin Luther King's vision of racial harmony and race neutral equality, he took every opportunity to divide America and exacerbate racial tension for his own political purposes.

Instead of putting our financial house in order, he massively increased the national debt to $15 trillion, blaming his predecessor for policies he voted for as a senator.

Instead of working to ensure America's energy independence, the president ensured the highest energy prices in America's history by a quasi-illegal moratorium on off shore drilling, a ban on oil leases on public lands, and his killing of the Keystone pipeline, which would have provided thousands of badly needed jobs as well as a flow of oil from Canada Alberta oil sands. And to add insult to injury, the president spent hundreds of millions of dollars of public monies on Department of Energy loans to 'green energy' companies run by his donors and bundlers that went bankrupt.

When Barack Obama began his presidency, he had veto proof majorities in both houses of congress and a demoralized Republican minority that was more than prepared to work with him if they'd received the slightest outreach and encouragement. Instead, we saw an arrogant president who responded to Republican concerns about the effect of the president's stimulus and ObamaCare spending and the lack of a realistic budget with a curt 'I won', followed by his literally locking Republicans out of the room when the bills were crafted and the spoils divided.

Republican Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell's famous remark about ensuring that Barack Obama became a one term president only occurred at the end of 2010, after the historic midterms, after the GOP had endured a total lack of respect by this president and his fellow Democrats, after rules that had governed the senate's procedure for decades were arbitrarily changed to avoid any GOP input.

Instead of a competent foreign policy, we saw distancing and even some hostility towards our allies ( particularly but not limited to Israel), no progress on halting Iran's progress towards nuclear weapons and the empowerment and enabling of the Muslim Brotherhood at home and abroad.

Instead of enhancing America's military, we saw it hollowed out with draconian cuts. Instead of a strengthened American deterrent. we saw a 'reset' with Russia that saw the Russians getting their long awaited goal of throttling America's missile defense and access to America's top of the line nuclear technology.

And after hearing this president claim al-Qaeda was 'on the run' after Osama bin-Laden's assassination, we see the spectacle of al-Qaeda resurgent in the Middle East and North Africa as a direct result of President Obama's policies, including his war in Libya that resulted in al-Qaeda and their affiliates getting their hands on Moamar Khaddaffi's arms supplies.

Instead of the transparency he promised, we got executive orders galore, a 2,000 page ObamaCare bill shoved down our collective throats that even the legislators voting on it had no time to read, Fast and Furious and Benghazi.

Barack Obama resembles no one so much as the modern Rehoboam, telling the people of America that if he gets a second term he's going to double down his failed policies and add to their yoke. He deserves an unequivocal rejection.

In Mitt Romney, we have a chance for a very different sort of man in the White House.

Aside from his impressive resume (after all, he's exactly the sort of person you'd hire if you needed to turn around the struggling enterprise America has become after 20 years of mismanagement), there is an opportunity to experience something very different in the Oval Office we haven't seen for quite some time....character, competence  and simple decency.

Mitt Romney's life has been marked by these qualities. After all the to do about his tax returns, when he finally released them, people were astounded at the extent of his charitable giving, and that essentially unjust Democrat talking point faded away quickly.

In spite of the Obama Media's attempt to cover them up or spin them, stories of Mitt Romney's genuine concern and kindness for others  have continued to come  out throughout the campaign.

He has lived a life marked by faith, service to others and success with difficult challenges based on his own efforts, and the contrast between him and the current occupant of the White House couldn't be more marked.

As president, he will be a pragmatist rather than an ideologue, and a great deal of how his presidency goes will depend of what kind of congress he ends up having to work with. In view of Democrat  Senate Majority leader Harry Reid's abysmal conduct towards him during the campaign and Reid's boast that a Democrat majority senate will never work with a President Romney, a lot will depend on how the down ticket races turn out.

But just as Ronald Reagan found a way to pass much of his agenda while having to work with an obstructive  Tip O'Neill, I'm convinced that Mitt Romney can accomplish the same. There's no doubt that unlike the last three presidents, he will leave the country far better off than he found it.


With Mitt Romney in the White House, we will again see a president we can respect and look up to rather than a president who looks down at us and rejects the very notion of what an exceptional nation we are.  We will see an America resurgent and respected again by both our friends, our enemies, and most of all, ourselves.

What happens tomorrow is in G-d's hands, as I'm sure Governor Romney would be the first to agree.

Is America ready to elect a competent and decent man as  president? Are we ready to reaffirm the principles of our blessed Republic, or have we decided it's an antiquated concept that no longer means anything to the majority of us? Are we still the free country our founders envisioned,  convinced of our divine destiny?

I believe we are..but tomorrow will tell the story.





This Week's Forum; Election Predictions




Every week on Monday morning , the Council and invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day. This week's question:What Are Your Predictions For Next Tuesday's Elections?

The Noisy Room: My prediction is still that Romney/Ryan will win by a landslide. Given the fact that the polls show them tied (and I don't believe the polls), the fact that the polls are heavily skewed in favor of Obama and they still show a tie (they are weighted in the swing states by a 6 to 8 point spread for Democrats) and the 'enthusiasm' factor thrown in (which shows 10s of thousands showing up for Romney and only 10s of hundreds or less showing up for Obama), I think Romney will win decisively.

At the moment, depending on which polls you hear, the "conventional wisdom" is once again tilted in favor of the Democratic candidate, despite a startling discrepancy between the attendance at rallies for the opposing candidates. Romney and Ryan are getting mobbed, while Obama can't seem to fill an auditorium. Photos taken of Romney and Ryan events invariably show long shots of huge crowds (e.g. the monster rally in Colorado), while the Obama events all seem to consist of close-in shots or "cropped" crowd shots.

It seems that the Press and polls paint a substantially different picture from that which is conveyed by eyewitness accounts and actual visuals.

Remember, Obama in 2008 was predicted to win by double digits and it came down to single digits. Still a trouncing, but not as exaggerated as they claimed. Also remember in the Senate in 2010, the spread was somewhere in the 5 to 8 point spread and it was doom, doom, doom for Conservatives until the election itself. When the political dust settled, Conservatives and Tea Party won big.

On top of this, recent events have not cast Obama's administration in a good light. The Benghazi debacle continues to see air time in the alternative media and on Fox, leading to more recent coverage in left-leaning media and more mainstream outlets attempting to frame the disaster as a failure either of the State Department or the CIA. While that kind of "context casting" may seem to work, what leaks out around it is the unavoidable conclusion that somehow this still traces back to the president; even if he, himself, didn't screw this up, he hired the people who did. Add to this the happening-right-now events following not-really-a-hurricane Sandy, and the federal government is seen, once again, as inept and feckless. While the media majority still insulates the Administration from seeming to bear any responsibility for the blundering, inadequate supplies, and rising death toll, there will be observers who can't help but recall the savage lashing given the Bush Administration during the Katrina aftermath for essentially the same results.

These most recent events may not cost Obama the EC votes from New Jersey and New York, but could well "lighten" the shade of Blue in the final outcome and, more importantly, in areas not far from there -- like Pennsylvania and Ohio -- could solidify those states for the Red side.

My predictions are this: Romney will win the popular vote by 5%-7.5% and take more than 300 votes in the EC, holding all of the states McCain won in 2008 and adding CO, NV, FL, NC, VA, NH, IA, IN, OH, WI, MI, OR and PA.

The Republicans will also take the Senate majority with somewhere between 51-53 seats. And the Republicans will overwhelmingly retain the House. This prediction is shared by a number of conservatives. And even then, there is a glimmer of hope Romney could pull a Reagan and do a massive sweep.

 Gay Patriot: Had you asked me to forecast the election outcome before Hurricane Sandy hit, I would have forecast a Romney victory similar to that in last week's Battleground poll, with him winning with a popular vote margin of about 52-47.

Romney had the momentum before the Hurricane devastated the Jersey Shore and left much of suburban New York without power. This seems to have helped burnish Obama's image as a leader.

And we're not seeing the same level of coverage of the FEMA's failures in the wake of this storm as we did seven years ago after Katrina. If these stories break into the national consciousness, it will hurt Obama, likely fatally.

Things remain too fluid to forecast with any confidence. A lot will depend on turnout. Enthusiasm clearly favors the GOP. And Romney does seem to have a much better ground game this year than McCain did four years ago.

The real issue is how late-deciders will break. In 2004, those who decided in the last three days went for John Kerry by nine points. McCain won those voters by 5 points in 2008, but lost those who decided on Election Day by 5 points.

Late-deciders tend to break against the incumbent. And with Obama increasingly negative, that does seem a most distinct possibility.

In perusing the polls and reading the accounts form the rallies, I am getting mixed signals. The enthusiasm is clearly on our side with Romney drawing rallies that dwarf those for Obama. And keep getting reports of a superabundance of Romney signs in "swing" districts, even in more liberal regions. On Facebook, a blog reader reported seeing as many Romney yard signs as he did Obama signs in Arlington County, Virginia -- a county which Obama won in 2008 with 71% of the vote. (He thinks there would be more if people weren't afraid to show their support in that very liberal jurisdiction.)

So, I'm wondering if there is a hidden Romney vote which is not showing up in polls.

But, polls do show Obama gaining, but still under 50. And early voting in Ohio shows a huge swing in the Republican direction. We're getting a lot of mixed signals at the end of the campaign.

Perhaps, we'll see a shift back toward Romney in the next forty-hours. Or perhaps those who have recently decided to back Obama won't show up at the polls. Bear in mind that lightly attached voters are less likely to vote whereas enthusiastic ones are certain to.

I think the race now is too close to call. In the end, it will depend on turnout. We should certainly see some surprises I gather that Obama's vote total will be down about 10%, possibly more from 2012. He will not get 50% of the vote -- and he may not win.

Everything right now depends on the ground game. And Mitt Romney has a pretty good operation.

Weekend Monkey: OK primates.My final, detailed projections will come out on Monday, over at Joshuapundit but here's what I see so far.

I notice that the bookies over at InTrade have Obama at 50.8, which is a bookie's ploy if I've ever seen one. What they're trying to do is get the suckers to bet on an outright Bamster win against the House taking Romney the Robot with points. That's exactly how I'm playing it, primates. Anybody who wants to lay some shekels on a Bamster win against Romney with three points, You know where to find me. I got good odds on senate races and individual states as well, so here's your chance to put your money where your mouths are, baboons, and take this Monkey's gelt.Hee hee hee!

I'll have detailed picks tomorrow over at Rob's place, but to make a long story short I see it coming down to Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania. All of them are pretty much tied and could go either way, the others I feel pretty good about calling,In fact, I predict a major knock down drag out poop throwing fight between the ReThugs and my Democrats over at least one of those states, probably Ohio. Oughta be fun to watch.

I think the ReThugs hang on to the House, but lose maybe 5 seats in places like California where my Democrats control redistricting. In the Senate, I see my Democrats taking one Rethug seats with that weird Indy guy taking the one in Maine, and I see us holding on to four  more.I see the ReThugs maybe making 4 pickups and hanging on to one, which makes it 49 Dems, 50 ReThugs, with Indiana as a wild card. If the Rethugs manage to push Mourdock through, they'll get the majority.If my Democrats win it, it's a divided senate and either Biden or Paul Ryan is gonna spend a lotta time in DC Land.

Like I said, for more detailed predictions, including my pick for your leader, swing on by tomorrow at Joshuapundit and watch me beat Rob's brains out with my wisdom. Smell ya later,primates.


The Independent Sentinel: I am not a pollster and there are far more knowledgeable people out there who can put out the numbers with the various electoral paths to the White House. I choose to take a different approach.

Almost all pollsters are now saying President Obama is the likely winner by a slight margin. That is the logical choice at this moment. The polls are, however, within the margin of error and I believe Mitt Romney will win. I have to go back to 2008 to explain.

John McCain was not an exciting candidate and he followed an unpopular president to whom he was tied. The economy crashed the month before the election. His VP choice was successfully demonized. Yet, with all of that, McCain garnered 46% of the popular vote. Do you really think Mitt Romney can’t pick up 4+% and many electoral votes with that 4+%?

President Obama roused the populace with his speeches of hope and change but he can’t duplicate that mystique and fervor because of his failed policies.

Mitt Romney is a far more exciting candidate with a more popular VP choice. He has a background as a successful entrepreneur in a country with a flailing economy.

The minorities who came out for Barack Obama in ’08 are not going to come out in droves as they did before. Pastors are telling their flocks they can’t vote for him. More Catholics and Jews will vote for Romney. Catholics are 25% of the electorate. Evangelicals, who are not affiliated and not counted in the polls, are eager to see Mitt Romney in the White House and they are 23% of the electorate. Women are now even and Independents are even or leaning Romney. Barack Obama simply does not have the overwhelming support of the special interest groups he had before.

Of course, it will be about the Electoral College in the end and, despite failed economic policies and a frightening foreign policy, Barack Obama, with the help of a biased media, is still leading. Romney must win Ohio and other key states. It could go either way. I believe he will pick up enough popular votes in key states to win the college.

Mitt Romney has been at a distinct disadvantage because of the bitter and protracted Primary battle. Barack Obama had his ground game going while Mitt Romney was fending off challengers. President Obama has had the advantage of taxpayer dollars to help fund his campaign.

Barack Obama has the bully pulpit.

He used that bully pulpit this week to tell Americans to vote for him out of revenge. He reminded the American people that he is divisive and self-centered. The revenge he speaks of is to get even with people who opposed him. He believes it is about him… “the Nation, me.” He thankfully reminded us of how divisive and uncompromising he is and he did so in a timely manner for Mitt Romney.

Whichever way this goes, it will be a decisive victory for one candidate or the other. When those electoral votes start falling, we will know quickly. I hope it will be a Romney win because I don’t want to see a Barack Obama with “more flexibility.”

JoshuaPundit: I'm going to keep this fairly brief, because Weekend Monkey and I are going to do some detailed handicapping together over at Joshuapundit  tomorrow...and I hate to admit it, but he's one savvy political animal, and he's been right on the money a lot of the time.

I'll make one point that may be of interest.

Unlike the rest of us, both Romney and Obama have a pretty decent idea of how things are going and what's likely to happen next Tuesday, because they both employ their own independent pollsters to do internals which are top secret...only the candidate and his closest aides see them. These are a lot more extensive, detailed and accurate than the sort of polls we're used to seeing, and the candidates have paid quite a bit of money for them.

I note that Governor Romney is the one who's smiling, confident and energized, while President Obama is increasingly angry, nasty in demeanor and negative.

There's an old Yiddish saying that seems to apply here; "Die gevinen lauchen and mach spas und die farliren kvetch und schrei ".

The translation? 'The winner laughs and makes jokes while the loser complains and cries.'

Based on Romney's demeanor versus Obama's. I think we may have something there.


Well, there you have it.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?






Sunday, November 04, 2012

Media Bias Anyone?

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgilrWzbi91l6CsCJT5GzbzyUDBN7nBTpAe_O3ZIjmqr2SoSg3BaxGGfihyphenhyphengtJ76YBRCKWy6U0Rxx5GGT2agghp04yyPM9jhwIQ_6fqmfl92bTxJSdC5QlGt51H2GiKoZAhimb8/s400/theo2.jpg

This pretty much says it all.

Mitt Romney At Red Rocks...Simply Amazing



I think we can say that Colorado is going Republican this year.

Friday, November 02, 2012

An Assignment For My Readers This Weekend


Four days from now, America is going to make a decision that will very much affect what kind of nation we will become.It will affect our own lives and that of our posterity.

We have always been a nation blessed by our Creator, and given a rich bounty by Him as a free country and a beacon to the world.

For the next four days, I ask you to do what our Founders did in Philadelphia when they set out to create the framework of America. I ask you to pray.

Pray to Almighty G-d and ask for His grace and mercy on our country.Ask Him to guide our hands and show us the right path in accordance to His will.

And pray for the victory of freedom and righteousness.

Pray.




Unemployment..7.9% - Epic Fail

 

Actually, if you look at the more accurate U6 rates, almost 15%.

7.9% per cent is the official U-3 rate.

When President Obama took office in January of 2009, it was actually lower, at 7.8 %.

No incumbent has ever faced voters with these kind of unemployment rates since FDR.

And by the way, the 'official' black unemployment rate is 14.3%. The real U-6 rate is over 20%.

Epic Fail.

Election Predictions Roundup

A number of interesting points of view here, worthy of a round up.

Let's start with Jay Cost, who predicts a Romney win:

When I started making election predictions eight years ago, I had a very different perspective than I do today. I knew relatively little about the history of presidential elections or the geography of American politics. I had a good background in political science and statistics. So, unsurprisingly in retrospect, I focused on drawing confidence intervals from poll averages.

Since then, I have learned substantially more history, soured somewhat on political science as an academic discipline, and have become much more skeptical of public opinion polls. Both political science and the political polls too often imply a scientific precision that I no longer think actually exists in American politics. I have slowly learned that politics is a lot more art than science than I once believed.

Accordingly, what follows is a prediction based on my interpretation of the lay of the land. I know others see it differently--and they could very well be right, and I could be wrong.

I think Mitt Romney is likely to win next Tuesday.

For two reasons:

(1) Romney leads among voters on trust to get the economy going again.

(2) Romney leads among independents.


Cost sees the economy as the issue this year, and with the expected Dem turnout and Romney's edge among independents ad being decisive. Full disclosure...I've known Jay since his old Horserace Blog days and his track record is a pretty good one.

Michael Barone, probably the dean of American political writers sees the key to the election in Romney's rise in support in affluent suburbs:

..polling shows Romney ahead in Colorado, which Obama carried by 9 points last time, and the race closing in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, which Obama carried by 14, 10 and 16 points, respectively.

That tends to validate my alternative scenario that Mitt Romney would fare much better in affluent suburbs than Republican nominees since 1992, running more like George Bush did in 1988. The only way Pennsylvania and Michigan can be close is if Obama's support in affluent Philadelphia and Detroit suburbs has melted away.

This also helps explain why Romney still narrowly trails in Ohio polls. Affluent suburban counties cast about one-quarter of the votes in Pennsylvania and Michigan but only one-eighth in Ohio.

A pro-Romney affluent swing is confirmed by the internals of some national polls. The 2008 exit poll showed Obama narrowly carrying voters with incomes over $75,000. Post-debate Pew Research and Battleground polls have shown affluent suburbanite Romney carrying them by statistically significant margins.

In particular, college-educated women seem to have swung toward Romney since Oct. 3. He surely had them in mind in the foreign policy debate when he kept emphasizing his hopes for peace and pledged no more wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.

My other alternative scenario was based on the 1980 election, when vast numbers of voters switched from Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan after their single debate one week before the election. In that debate, the challenger showed he had presidential stature and the incumbent president seemed petulant and small-minded.

We saw an even more vivid contrast between challenger and incumbent in the Oct. 3 debate. In the next two debates, Obama was definitely more focused and aggressive. But Romney held his own, and post-Oct. 16 polling showed him improving his standing even though many debate watchers thought Obama won on points.

What we may be seeing, as we drink from the firehose of multiple poll results pouring in, is a slow-motion 1980.


Karl Rove, whatever one my think of him understands retail politics. He makes his 51-48, at least 279 electoral votes prediction for a Romney win, and his analysis of Ohio is particularly interesting:

Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That's down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election.

That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama's 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.

Democrats explain away those numbers by saying that they are turning out new young Ohio voters. But I asked Kelly Nallen, the American Crossroads data maven, about this. She points out that there are 12,612 GOP "millennials" (voters aged 18-29) who've voted early compared with 9,501 Democratic millennials.

Are Democrats bringing out episodic voters who might not otherwise turn out? Not according to Ms. Nallen. She says that about 90% of each party's early voters so far had also voted in three of the past four Ohio elections. Democrats also suggest they are bringing Obama-leaning independents to polls. But since Mr. Romney has led among independents in nine of the 13 Ohio polls conducted since the first debate, the likelihood is that the GOP is doing as good a job in turning out their independent supporters as Democrats are in turning out theirs.


He also deconstructs a recent poll:

Desperate Democrats are now hanging their hopes on a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll showing the president with a five-point Ohio lead. But that survey gives Democrats a +8 advantage in turnout, the same advantage Democrats had in 2008. That assumption is, to put it gently, absurd.

CNN shows the president up by 3% in Ohio, inside the margin of error, but again the turnout assumption relies on 2008 and the mechanics reveal a +6 oversampling of Democrats.


Rasmussen
sees Ohio dead even.In fact, he sees the entire election as too close to call.

I also note that President Obama drew a measly 2,800 crowd in his last Ohio appearance..while Mitt Romney's draw in his was around 25,000.

Jim Geraghty notes that the president is spending his last campaign weekend in Wisconsin, while Mitt Romney is campaigning in Pennsylvania, which tells you the candidate's internal polls are telling them something. Or as Geraghty puts it:

Obama is in big trouble in Wisconsin. He is spending his last weekend in a state that last went Republican in the 1984 Reagan landslide.

Team Romney is going hard after Pennsylvania because both internal and public polling show significant movement toward Romney in recent days. Yesterday, Rep. Ryan and Sen. Marco Rubio drew large and enthusiastic crowds in Pennsylvania. On Sunday, Romney will hold a campaign rally in the Philadelphia suburbs. Who would have thought that Obama would spend the last days of the campaign defending a solidly blue state, while Romney makes a play for another one?


We'll see whose right in just a few days.

The Obama Administration Picks An Islamist Sympathizer To Investigate Benghazi

That's a fairly accurate way to describe former U.S. Ambassador Thomas Pickering, the Obama Administration's choice to head the official State Department 'investigate' what happened in Benghazi.

Aside from his connections with Muslim Brotherhood front group CAIR, Pickering is also co-chairman of the board of George Soros’ International Crisis Group which has ties to other Islamic organizations as well, including the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) an lobbying group for the Iranian regime.

Pickering also sits on the boards of two pro-Tehran groups, the American Iranian Council and the National Iranian American Council.

He's advocated engagement with the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, opening relations with Hamas and taking them off the official list of terrorist groups, peace talks with the Taliban,and talks with the Iranian regime with no preconditions.

And in case you had any other doubts, reporter Matthew Vadum has an account of his performance at an Oct. 23 panel discussion at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. on “what role the faith community can play in fighting Islamophobia.”

Among the other panel members were Arab American Institute president Jim Zogby, who's well known for his apologetics for Muslim terrorism, particularly by Hamas and the Palestinians. And our old friend Imam Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan, the principles behind the Ground Zero Mosque,both of whom have hard core Islamist views and backgrounds that could only be described dangerous.

You can access the details of what was said at the link, but to summarize, Pickering essentially agrees with Rauf and Zogby that Islamophobia is a mental disease that resides in a bunch of tea party rednecks and needs to be criminalized.

The choice of Pickering, a loyal Clintonista tells us that the cover up of what happened in Benghazi is going to be continued on an official level.

It also tells us how thoroughly Islamists and their appeasers have penetrated the Obama Administration.




The Council Has Spoken!! This Week's Watchers Council Winners



Alea capta est, the die is cast, The Council has spoken, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

This week, the coming election and the debacle of Benghazi and the subsequent coverup were very much on everyone's minds.


The Greeks had a word we still use, 'hubris' ( ὕβρις) that translates as overwhelming pride and arrogance that leads into a disconnect with reality and ultimately, folly.



This week's winner, Joshuapundit's Obama Agonistes: The Fiction Cracks On Benghazi is my look at this modern example of hubris, and the arrogance and shame behind it.Here's a slice:

"The words of his mouth are trouble and deceit; he has ceased to act wisely and do good." - Psalms, 36:3

More and more of what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton farcically referred to as ' the fog of war' over the Benghazi debacle has dispersed...and what it reveals is sheer ugliness.


Even some of President Obama's loyal media lackeys aren't quite able to swallow what he's doling out, as
this video clip from an MSNBC interview shows.

Here's a transcript, that mercifully leaves out the president's stammers, er-ahs and stutters:


MB: Why has it been so easy for critics to say the administration does not have its story straight on Benghazi?

BO: Well look, the fact of the matter is that this is a tragedy. There’s all kinds of legitimate questions to ask, because any time a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans who are serving our country get killed, you know, we’ve got to figure out what happened and fix it. And most importantly, we’ve got to bring those folks who carried that out to justice. That’s exactly what we’re going to do. But I do take offense, as I’ve said during one of the debates, with some suggestion that you know, in any way we haven’t tried to make sure that the American people knew as information was coming in what we believed happened. And…


JS: Was it the intel community giving you bad information early on, because that’s…the stories keep changing.


BO: Well, that’s what we’re going to find out from the investigation. But the truth is that you know, across the board, when this happened, my number one priority was secure Americans, figure out what happened, bring those folks to justice. We are in the process of doing that right now Congress has been getting the flow of information continuously from day one, and what my attitude on this is, is if we find out that there was a big breakdown and somebody didn’t do their job, they’ll be held accountable. Ultimately, as commander-in-chief, I’m responsible, and I don’t shy away from that responsibility. My number one responsibility is to go after folks who did this, and we’re going to make sure that we get them. I’ve got a pretty good track record in doing that.


Meanwhile, a number of members of Congress have been quite vocal over the fact that the administration hasn't told them anything or complied with even the most basic requests for information.

As Senator John McCain (R-AZ), the ranking Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee revealed today in an interview, not only are the recordings from the surveillance cameras that were all over the Benghazi compound now classified top secret so no one can view them, but repeated requests for information to James Clapper, the director of the National Intelligence, General Petraeus, the head of the CIA, or John Brennan, who is the White House head of counterterrorism.

I'll add to that by telling you that according to my sources, the videos sent from the drones overhead directly to the White House situation room in real time and the phone recordings of calls from the Benghazi consulate and the Benghazi CIA annex have suffered the same fate as the surveillance camera tapes. They're classified top secret so no one can get to them.A number of the e-mails that have been leaked were as well,but this president's wholesale blaming of the intelligence community for his own malfeasance has not gone without some blowback.

As for the information given to the American people, what we heard for days from this president, the Secretary of State, the White House spokesperson and our UN ambassador for days were outright lies about a video and a 'spontaneous protest' that got out of control. Because of the leaked e-mails, we know know that the State Department and the White House knew within hours that this was a planned terrorist attack by an al-Qaeda affiliate.

The other, unmistakeable fact that's leaked out is that there was no attempt made to save the trapped Americans in the consulate. When the men in the CIA annex in Benghazi, including two ex-Navy SEALS repeatedly asked for permission to put together an ad-hoc force to rescue the Ambassador and the other men trapped in the consulate, they were told to stand down three times.

There were helicopter gunships within easy range of the consulate, and F-18 fighters less than an hour away. One of those ex-Seals in the annex had a laser range finder and was actually radioing in coordinates of enemy targets. No U.S. aircraft were sent to attack.

There was even a Special OPs unit already deployed and ready to go at our airbase in Sigonella, Sicily, a little over a two-hour plane ride away from Benghazi.

This force, known as the Commander's In-extremis Force (CIF) is specifically designated and trained for exactly these kinds of missions, where Americans are endangered and quick, decisive action is called for. The CIF forces are designed to go in with a minimum of information and hit the ground running, and every military theater commander has access to one.

They never got the orders to move.



In our non-Council category, Between  Andrew McCarthy with The Real Foreign Policy Failure submitted by Joshuapundit,  a remarkably well written examination of the actual  threat to our freedom we face from Islamism that shows that it's a much larger and more prevalent problem than many people suppose and outlines the dangers of ignoring it, and The Arabist.with an interesting look at the clash between secular Arab nationalism in the form of Egypt's Nasser and the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

As Watcher, I get to break the tie on these things and in this particular case, interesting as The Arabist's post was ( an as amusing as it was to see the Rais in his full, ranting glory), I decided to go with Andrew McCarthy's piece because I felt it had more depth and dealt with some bigger issues. Do read both of them.


OK,  here are this week’s full result,. Only the Independent Sentinel, still coping with the effects of Sandy was unable to vote this week. Our hearts and good wishes go out to her and her family.

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners



See you next week! Remember to tune in for the Watcher's Council's Forum Question this Monday..the Council and their invited guest's election predictions! You won't want to miss it.And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!

Thursday, November 01, 2012

Benghazi Smoking Gun: Consulate Begged For More Security A Month Before The Attack



FOX news reporter Catherine Herridge has the story:

 "I really believe, having read it, that it is the smoking gun warning here. You've got this emergency meeting in Benghazi, less than a month before the attack. At that briefing, the people are told that there are ten, ten, Islamic militias and al-Qaeda groups in Benghazi. The consulate can not sustain a coordinated attack and they need extra help. This information goes directly to the office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. So, again, you have the culpability of the State Department. This is a very specific warning that they're in trouble, they need help and they see an attack on the horizon," FOX News' Catherine Herridge reported on FOX News' "On the Record" Wednesday night.

Read Herridge's report here.

"I believe based on this cable the point that was being made, that they wanted made publicly, not just in a classified study, is that the warning that came from Benghazi was very specific. It said 'we can not withstand an attack,' the militias are everything, al-Qaeda is here. This was known to the U.S. intelligence community as well. And that they really could not see a situation where security was going to turn around. They send that it was trending negatively," Herridge further reported.

"I can't think of anything that would be more specific than if these groups had emailed the State Department and said, 'Here's the time, here's the place, and here's the method of the attack,'" she said.

"There can be no doubt that this is really a cry for help from the people on the ground," Herridge told Greta van Susteren.

"If you couple this with the fact that we were coming up with the 9/11 anniversary and if you couple this with the statements that a videotape was somehow responsible, what you see is that is completely undercut. This cable says that, 'The militias and al-Qaeda are here, we essentially think that we are next.' So to take this attack and to suggest for such a long period of time that it was a video when you have classified cable and the intelligence, it just doesn't match up," she said.

"What I see is a growing body of evidence that the State Department has culpability for the death of the Ambassador and those three Americans," Herridge declared. "The warnings were specific, they were direct, they name the enemy and they said that this consulate needed more support. And it also indicated in the cable that the consulate should probably move long-term into the annex. We now know that is the CIA facility in Benghazi."


After the Obama Administration 'investigates' itself, look for Congress to dig deep into this no matter what happens in November. This isn't going to go away.

How The Left Views Republicans - As Evil Monsters To Be Murdered With Impunity



I don't know which is more offensive.the sanctioning of brutal violence towards those the left disagrees with or the obnoxious ethnic stereotypes they used as leftist heroes to make it OK.

Hitler and Goebbels, BTW, used exactly the same techniques against Jews and other 'enemies'.

This ad comes from RepublicanZombieDefense.com, a Democrat activist website. There's some money behind them too, based on the production values. Just imagine what a stir this would cause if say, a Tea Party group put this garbage out. That,by the way, is what chiefly annoys me, the double standard.

If a conservative group had done this, it would be screaming headlines and 80% of the media in America would be besieging Mitt Romney demanding he condemn it.

But of course  no  conservative group would put something like this out  because conservatives are the adults in the room as compared with the left's angry children and their predominant theme  'You impede me, therefore I hate you.'

To those on the right side of the spectrum, most of the left are merely misguided and wrong. But to the left, their enemies are evil and worthy only of extermination. And that's exactly how every totsalitarian leftist regime has operated throughout history.

Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, the story never changes.

And some commenter today had the nerve to suggest that I hate what he called 'liberals'. Compared to this cute lil' video above.

(h/t, Gateway)

When Women Change Their Minds...




Enough Said. From the Independent Women's Voice Super Pac.

Exit Poll: Vast Majority Of Absentee Ballots In Israel Cast For Romney

Apparently American Jews in Israel get it a lot more than Jews in America:


An exit poll of Americans who voted absentee in Israel finds Republican nominee Mitt Romney beating President Obama by a significant margin, 85 percent to 14 percent.


IVoteIsrael, a nonpartisan organization founded over the summer to encourage American absentee voting, conducted the poll among 1,572 of the approximately 80,000 people the organization registered to vote absentee. The survey has a margin of error of 2.5 percent.

Among those who said they were voting on “jobs and the economy,” Romney beat Obama 59 percent to 29 percent. Among those voting on Iran, the margin was even larger, 86 percent to 5 percent. Among those voting on Israel-related issues, such as Jerusalem and the peace process, Romney won 89 percent to 3.5 percent.

The organization estimates that the swing-state breakdown for absentee ballots cast in Israel includes 7,500 votes in Florida, 3,500 in Ohio, and 3,500 in Pennsylvania.

The exit poll showed that Romney won the Florida vote 85 percent to 15 percent and the Ohio vote 86 percent to 18 percent. No data was given for Pennsylvania.


I still say Barack Obama will only wind up with around 60% of the Jewish vote in the U.S.

We'll see...

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Diagram Ezra Klein's Brain!

WAPO bloggers Ezra Klein and Dylan Matthews have a cute little interactive piece entitled 'Make Mitt Romney’s tax plan add up!'

Go there, and they have pre-selected draconian cuts or hikes in taxes Romney 'will have to make' in order to meet their goal of $480 billion in revenues needed.

There's no way to get there without clicking on new, heavy taxes or eliminating major tax deductions.

Ahh, such loyal soldiers for Barack Obama!

You'll notice that Ezra and Dylan's cute little cartoon doesn't include increased revenues from taxes collected on the increased economic activity that results from lowering tax rates, or decreasing the amount of revenue needed by cutting spending and waste.

Horrors! We can't have any of that, can we?

Lefties never like to talk about such things, simply because steps like these diminish government control, something so dear to their little hearts and increases economic freedom.

Nothing like stacking the game beforehand to get your desired answer, is there, Journolistas?

Can you diagram Ezra Klein's brain? Can you spell 'socialism'?