PoliticsPolitics for Pros- moderated

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: FUBHO who wrote (486826)5/12/2012 2:41:08 PM
From: LindyBill
1 Recommendation   of 660729
If Romney gets and holds an 8/10 point, be afraid. Be very afraid. I don't know what the Left will do, but it will get hairy. I would rather it stay fairly close and then Romney surged at the end, when the Left had less time to come up with something.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (485903)5/12/2012 2:47:57 PM
2 Recommendations   of 660729
Chinese activist Chen's nephew charged with murder

Rick Moran
May 12, 2012

Read more:

Because of western interest in his situation, Chen himself is nearly untouchable. But that apparently doesn't hold for his family.

The Guardian:

The arrest comes as a senior lawyer defending Chen described to the Guardian how he lost his hearing in a beating by a senior state security official after he tried to visit his client in hospital last week.

Chen - a self-trained "barefoot lawyer" - has risen to international prominence since his intrepid escape last month from extrajudicial house arrest cast a harsh light on China's repressive domestic security policies and triggered a flurry of bilateral diplomacy.

But while he is now confident of his own safety, fears are growing about his family and lawyers.

The activist's nephew Chen Kegui faces a sentence ranging from 10 years in prison to the death penalty after he brandished a meat cleaver at intruders who burst into his home in Linyi, Shandong province, during the search for his uncle.

Lawyers say he acted in self-defence and only wounded the intruders, but his legal team have come under intense pressure from the local authorities to drop what looks set to become one of China's most politicised criminal cases in recent years.

Liu Weiguo, his lawyer, said he had heard about the charges from the Chen family. He said it was difficult to talk further because the authorities had forbidden him from talking to the foreign media.

Another member of the defence team, Chen Wuquan (no relation), told the Guardian he was supposed to visit Shandong on Thursday to meet his client, but his lawyer's licence had been confiscated.

Jiang Tianyong, another lawyer, said the charges were ridiculous.

"Obviously it was justifiable self-defence. What else can you call it when 10 armed, unknown men crawl over the wall, break into his house and beat him? Instead of punishing the culprits, the authorities are reversing the meaning of 'good' and 'evil'."

And so it goes in China - a place that some liberals want the US to emulate. Speak against the government and get jailed, beaten, and your family harrassed and arrested. Sounds like a paradise to me.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: FUBHO who wrote (486827)5/12/2012 3:10:13 PM
From: average joe
   of 660729
The war on terror is the real women's issue. Feminists whine about life in the West but they won't fight the bigger battle. Canada's media neglected to mention that our biggest mass murder was committed by a Muslim.

Marc Lepine kills 14 female engineering students at L’Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal

December 6, 1989, was a sad and tragic day in the history of Canadian higher education. That day, on a cold late afternoon, a young man called Marc Lepine suddenly irrupted at L’Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal, armed with a semi-automatic rifle. As soon as he entered into a classroom, he separated the women from the men, lined the women along the wall, and then killed them one by one. In addition to killing 14 female engineering students, he injured eight other women, and also four men who tried to stop him. Then, he killed himself. That horrible episode is remembered in history as the Montreal Massacre.

Marc Lepine was 25 years old, and he had a clear and disturbing idea in his mind when he entered into that classroom. For him, these young women who chose a non-traditional career deserved nothing less than death. From his notes, he seemed to be frustrated with the increasing presence of women in higher education. He wanted to reverse the clock of educational history by a hundred years, when women were largely excluded from higher education institutions; he wanted to close the doors that were opened with so much effort during the twentieth century.

Lepine was in pursuit of a deadly mission. In his pocket, police found a list of his next fifteen targets. Among them were the first woman firefighter in Quebec, the first woman police captain in Quebec, a sportscaster, a bank manager, and the president of a teachers’ union. In Lepine’s eyes, they were all guilty of the same sin. They were all women, and they all dared to be leaders in their fields.

Perhaps in the future Lepine will be portrayed as a crazy lonely lunatic possessed by feelings of hatred and sexism. Although to a great extent he was psychologically unstable, it is pertinent to remember that, unfortunately, this was not an isolated incident that occurred in a general context of gender equality and respect. Lepine was not the only person of his time who thought that gender equality was an inadmissible principle, and his barbaric rampage took place in a world in which violence against women was not an exceptional phenomenon but a trend of massive proportions. However, in spite of this context, the brutality and the motivation of Lepine’s actions were particularly repugnant and difficult to explain. Canadian universities had never witnessed anything like that in all their history, and Canadians are still mourning for those fourteen young women whose lives and hopes were suddenly cut short. Since that fatidic 1989, every December 6 a White Ribbon Campaign has been organized to help raise awareness about violence against women.

Loner, champion misogynist and Canada’s highest-count spree killer.

Marc Lepine’s father Liess Gharbi was an Algerian immigrant, a Muslim who taught his boy how to hate women. Not that he particularly cared about his son, whom he considered little more than a nuisance. People were generally shocked how Liess behaved towards his wife and children — not only the wife beatings, but also little things such as locking Marc and his sister in their bedroom (complete with portapotty), in the name of preserving "peace and quiet" of the household. It’s those little things that count.

Lepine’s story is interesting not for the massacre itself, but because it has been co-opted by special interest groups to achieve their own ends — the anti-gun lobby and women’s rights advocates. For a decade, certain critical facts escaped the attention of the Canadian public, among which were Lepine’s ancestry and upbringing.

Lepine used a Sturm Ruger Mini-14 hunting rifle to kill 14 women and wound 13 others. Since Canada’s law did not allow any gun that was "firearm of a kind commonly used for hunting or sporting purposes" — which the Mini-14 certainly was — the law had to be amended to say that guns may not be banned "if, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, the thing to be prescribed is reasonable for use in Canada for hunting or sporting purposes." In other words, Mark Lapine’s massacre was used as a pretext by the Canadian government to pass a law in which any weapon they didn’t like is subject to ban. Including the Mini-14, which by any reasonable definition, is an ordinary hunting rifle.

Mandatory gun registration also came about as a result of Lepine’s massacre. At a cost of a billion dollars, some (but by no means all) Canadian guns were placed on a list. The public was not any safer than it was before, and that billion dollars could have put 10,000 more police on the street instead. When considering this figure, note that it took police forty-five minutes to arrive on the scene at L’Ecole Polytechnic.


1964 Gamil Rodrigue Gharbi born to Algerian Liess Gharbi and former nun Monique Lepine.

1966 Sister, Nadia, born.

1972 Monique Lepine granted custody of their two children.

1977 At age 13, Gamil changes his name to Marc Lepine.

1978 Big Brother Association provides Marc with a "Big Brother."

1981 Marc Lepine applies to the Canadian Army, but is rejected as "unsuitable."

1989 Application to join faculty of University of Montreal rejected.

1989 Marc’s best friend, Erik Cossette, leaves for a year to backpack in South America. Lepine is devastated.

1989 Purchases a Ruger Mini-14 at Checkmate Sports.

1989 Begins casing Ecole Polytechnique. He is seen on the 1st, 4th, and 5th of December.

1989 Mark Lepine kills 14 women at Ecole Polytechnique, University of Montreal, and injures 15 others. It is the worst mass murder in Canadian history. On him is a suicide letter explaining his actions as being specific revenge against 19 "feminists who have ruined my life… I have decided to put an end to those viragos."

1999 The Toronto Star reports that Lepine’s original name was Gharbi, a fact which had somehow escaped the attention of the Canadian public to this point.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: LindyBill5/12/2012 3:31:02 PM
3 Recommendations   of 660729
Did anybody notice in that NYT article about schools that not one of the kids had a man living in the house? Much less a Father or a Mother with a Husband there.

“Culture matters,” Romney says
from Power Line by Paul Mirengoff
(Paul Mirengoff) I have praised Rick Santorum for articulating, better than any candidate I have heard, the connection between “cultural” and economic issues. I have also noted that Mitt Romney has mostly steered clear of discussing this connection, though I believe he understands it. In fact, having read The Real Romney, a biography of the candidate by two Boston Globe reporters, I am convinced that he does.

Today, in a commencement speech at Liberty University, Romney addressed the matter. This is what he said:

You enter a world with civilizations and economies that are far from equal. Harvard historian David Landes devoted his lifelong study to understanding why some civilizations rise, and why others falter. His conclusion: Culture makes all the difference. Not natural resources, not geography, but what people believe and value. Central to America’s rise to global leadership is our Judeo-Christian tradition, with its vision of the goodness and possibilities of every life.

The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and, at the foundation, the pre-eminence of the family.
The power of these values is evidenced by a Brookings Institution study that Senator Rick Santorum brought to my attention. For those who graduate from high school, get a full-time job, and marry before they have their first child, the probability that they will be poor is 2%. But, if those things are absent, 76% will be poor. Culture matters.

As fundamental as these principles are, they may become topics of democratic debate. So it is today with the enduring institution of marriage. Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman.

Liberty University is a fundamentalist Christian institution, so this was a natural venue for Romney to discuss the importance of “culture.” But the days when a candidate could make a pitch to a particular audience without that pitch becoming his official position are long gone.

Thus, for purposes of this election, the question is not Romney’s stance, but how much he will emphasize that stance during the campaign.

That question will be resolved by the campaign’s hard-headed assessment of the extent to which talking about culture will help or hurt the candidate. If Romney has a bias, I suspect it’s against talking much about it, except to special audiences like the one at Liberty. I know that Romney views his prospects as heavily tied to doing well with “swing voters” and not doing too badly with women voters. Thus, he is likely to err on the side of caution when it comes to hot button cultural matters.

Romney and his team can better analyze how to win this election than I can. And there is little doubt that the economy, viewed without reference to other concerns, is by far Romney’s best issue. However, I don’t consider the most prominent contested cultural issues to be losers for Romney, and I hope that he will continue to argue from time to time that, as I’m confident he believes, “culture matters.”

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: LindyBill5/12/2012 3:41:18 PM
7 Recommendations   of 660729
Another Romney Classmate Turns Up

Posted by TobyToons ( Diary)

Saturday, May 12th at 8:00AM EDT


Sponsored Content

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: LindyBill5/12/2012 3:46:22 PM
1 Recommendation   of 660729
Presidential photo op of the week
from Michelle Malkin by Doug Powers
**Written by Doug Powers

President Obama, in Nevada on an official and definitely not campaign-related trip, stopped at the Reno home of Paul and Valerie Keller to promote a program to lower mortgage interest rates. While there, Obama delivered a speech in front of the couple’s garage.

A brief setup:

As leader of the free world President Obama will be used to making speeches to millions of people around the globe.

So he might have felt the occasion was a little beneath him yesterday when he stopped off in Reno, Nevada, to deliver an address outside a couple’s garage.

In what could be a disastrous photo opportunity for the President’s campaign, Mr Obama spoke to a handful of people in the crucial swing state.

This visit gave us our presidential photo op of the week. Click the picture for full size:

Notice something? No teleprompters. The Prez was working without a net last week. Gutsy Call!™ And I can’t believe somebody didn’t think to put a Volt in the garage before the cameras rolled.

In spite of the personal visit, Valerie Keller remains uncertain if she’ll vote for Obama in November due to the economy.

The crowd from the neighborhood appeared to be roughly the same size as the one that showed up for Obama’s first official campaign rally on Tuesday.

In front of the couple’s garage, Obama once again ran down his “to do” list for Congress, and it still doesn’t include “pass a budget”:

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: LindyBill5/12/2012 3:49:38 PM
1 Recommendation   of 660729
Circling the drain.

State deficit soars to $16 billion
By Chris Megerian | 11:54 a.m.
The figure, announced by Gov. Brown on YouTube, is a massive increase over his $9.2 billion estimate in January. Brown is expected to outline his full budget proposal on Monday.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: FUBHO5/12/2012 3:50:01 PM
1 Recommendation   of 660729
Mitt uses Carter as campaign weapon
By: Reid J. Epstein
May 12, 2012 06:58 AM EDT

FORT LUPTON, Colo. — For President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney is an obvious throwback to another era — a stiff Father Knows Best-type who straps the dog to the station wagon and marries his high-school sweetheart.

But Romney is pursuing his own strategy to puncture Obama’s next-generation cool and paint the president as a retread, comparing him to Jimmy Carter and his fuzzy-headed liberal thinking. To the presumptive GOP presidential candidate, Carter is not just a former president, he’s a potent metaphor and political weapon.

“When you mention Jimmy Carter, that lightens up certain regions of the mind and brings to mind ineptness and incompetence,” said Peter Wehrer, who worked in the Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations. “That’s going to be one of the things that Romney is going to try and tie to Obama.”

Romney has mentioned Carter periodically on the campaign trail: Twice this month, he has made unflattering references to the 39th president. When asked on the anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden whether he would have green-lighted the mission, Romney told reporters on a New Hampshire rope line that “even Jimmy Carter would have given that order” to kill bin Laden.

Two days later at a rally in northern Virginia, he explicitly referred to the Carter era as better for businesspeople than the Obama years have been.

“What the president has done, and I think unknowingly, never having spent any time in the private sector himself … was one item after another make it harder and harder for small business to thrive and to grow and to start up,” Romney said.

“It was the most anti-small business administration I’ve seen probably since Carter. Who would’ve guessed we’d look back at the Carter years as the good ol’ days, you know? And you just go through the president’s agenda over … the last several years and ask yourself, did this help small business or did it hurt small business?”

The parallels between Obama and Carter — as Republicans see it — are too plentiful to ignore. There’s a first-term Democratic president dealing with an economic recession, high gas prices, a prevailing sense of malaise following the hope-and-change election of 2008 and an executive Republicans have, almost since day one, painted as in over his head.

And then there’s the best part: If you can frame yourself as Carter’s foe, you get to lay claim to becoming Ronald Reagan.

It’s unclear whether sticking Obama with a Carter label is an effective campaign tactic. A senior Romney aide said the campaign has not poll-tested Carter’s name as a campaign touchstone and warned not to put too much stock in Carter as a Republican boogeyman.

A whole generation of young voters who were born after 1980 aren’t familiar with the former Democratic president — and what they do know, they might like as Carter now works to alleviate global poverty and disease. On the other hand, middle-aged and older voters — who vote in larger numbers — might identify with the idea of Obama as a hapless president.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, Romney’s chief Capitol Hill recruiter and a key surrogate on the campaign trail, said the Carter name gives him flashbacks to tough times with his father, who was briefly married to Kitty Dukakis.

“Even though I was a little squirt, I still remember sitting in line with my dad trying to fill up our car with gas,” Chaffetz, 45, said this week. “I remember that. That’s when we started the Department of Energy. Talk about an agency that’s fundamentally failed. We had a major oil crisis, terrorism was looming, our military was getting weaker. The economy was sour. Unfortunately, it’s the ideal parallel.”

But even if voters don’t identify Obama explicitly with Carter, Romney seems to hope they see Obama as belonging to a generation of old Democrats that has been firmly rejected.

Recently, in Michigan, Romney began what aides described as an effort to cleave the Democratic vote, separating centrists — whom the Republican identified with the prosperous 1990s Clinton era — from liberals like Carter and Obama, whose reelection campaign would not comment for this story.

Before Romney’s remarks, a senior aide told reporters that the campaign aimed to “frame up the race a little bit about the past versus the future,” with Carter and Obama as emblematic of past economic policies and Romney and Clinton representing the future.

“President Clinton in 1992 ran as a New Democrat,” the aide said. “President Obama has really turned his back on all that. He’s not run as a New Democrat, he’s run as an old Democrat with old-school liberal solutions.”

The aide didn’t mention Carter during the brief conference call with the traveling press, but the implication was clear.

“There’s a very clear difference in the approach of where Clinton was taking the party back in 1992 and where President Obama has taken the country over the last four years.”

Here, at an oil-drilling site in the shadow of the Rocky Mountains, Romney twice declared that Obama’s energy policies are “of the past.”

“I happen to think that the president’s policies are shaped by a perspective that’s old and outdated,” he said. “His policies are rooted in perspectives of the past. His ideas about energy are simply out of date. His other policies flow from the thinking of the liberals from years ago.”

It’s not too hard to figure out to whom Romney is referring.

No one younger than 45 would have been even a teenager while the Georgia peanut farmer was in the White House, and five presidents have served since Carter lost the 1980 election.

But among older Republican voters — Romney’s base even in the primaries — the Carter line works.

In May 2011, after the bin Laden killing, Wehrer wrote in Commentary magazine that Obama would no longer be painted as weak like Carter.

“The specter of Jimmy Carter was beginning to haunt the Obama administration,” he wrote then. “For now, at least, that narrative is stopped in its tracks.”

But this week, Wehrer said touting a failed president from the other party is fair game in campaigns.

“Democrats ran against Herbert Hoover for decades after he had been president,” Wehrer said. “Carter mentioned Hoover as well in ’76. These things have a long half-life, failed presidents have a long half-life.”

Republicans began making unflattering comparisons of Obama to Carter almost as soon as the Chicagoan was sworn in.

In February 2009, less than a month after Obama’s inauguration, Newt Gingrich took to the “Today” show to suggest the stimulus proposal made the 44th president like the 39th.

“I think he is in real danger of becoming Jimmy Carter instead of Ronald Reagan,” Gingrich said.

Rick Tyler, a former Gingrich aide who spoke for the former House speaker’s super PAC during the presidential primary, said the allusions to the Carter years aren’t aimed at young voters, in part because they don’t matter as much as older ones.

“Not that you want to give up the under-40s, but we know that people over 50 vote five times as often as people 24 and under,” said Tyler, who is 47. “To the average Republican who does remember him, Carter is shorthand for weakness in foreign policy, appeasement and policies that lead to joblessness, inflation, higher taxes, more regulation, more government. It’s a quick shorthand, and it’s a way of saying those things failed.”

Carter’s office declined requests to comment for this story, but Leo Ribuffo, a George Washington University professor who is writing a book titled "The Limits of Moderation: Jimmy Carter and the Ironies of American Liberalism,” said it almost doesn’t matter that the most negative picture of the Carter era is embellished, just as Carter’s attempts to tether Gerald Ford to Hoover weren’t grounded in the facts.

“It’s basically partisan and wrong,” Ribuffo said. “Historians know that Hoover didn’t sit around and starve. He was an activist president. And historians know that Carter was more of a hawk, but historians don’t have cable news shows.”

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: LindyBill who wrote (486833)5/12/2012 4:04:17 PM
From: skinowski
2 Recommendations   of 660729
My wife many years ago used to be teacher in the NYC system. She quit, went back to school and became a CPA. She had fun practicing for many years, but from a financial POV her whole new career was a mistake. She was getting paid well as a teacher, and for the past many years she would be receiving a very nice pension. Not to mention that we would not be spending tons of money over the years, paying for our own healthcare insurance.

Those sweet public sector deals are very hard to beat...... :)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

From: FUBHO5/12/2012 4:09:45 PM
4 Recommendations   of 660729
Despite media obituaries proclaiming their demise, the Tea Party is alive and well. And highly energized. Like with Mark Twain, the reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated.

The resounding defeat of Indiana's six-term Senator Richard Lugar by primary challenger and Tea Party favorite Richard Mourdock is proof positive that the Tea Party has not been sleeping.


Lugar was an establishment guy. How could he not be after 36 years in the Senate? He claimed to be a conservative. But endorsements from a pro-union group and a voting record that supported both of Obama's Supreme Court choices said otherwise. Lugar was even praised by the L.A. Times, hardly the home of conservative anything. Barack Obama and Democrat Senators John Kerry and Dick Durbin thought Lugar was a wonderful senator. Good indicators, all,that Indiana voters made the right choice to send him packing.

Lugar misjudged the mood of the electorate and lost touch with the values of his constituents. He sought votes in a state where he didn't even live and was surprised when polls showed him behind. In the end, his defeat was no surprise to anyone. As November approaches, other GOP incumbents have started to notice Lugar's misfortune and wonder, " Could I be next?"

The short answer? Absolutely.

The political earthquake of November 2010 was a Tea Party-inspired event. Since then, the grassroots movement has matured from a simple protest movement into a professional coalition of local and national groups dedicated to re-establishing fiscal responsibility, constitutional rule, and accountability of elected officials. They know what they want. They've learned from their mistakes. And their political savvy is growing.

Numerous websites, blogs, and radio programs are being created every day by average Americans intent on defending their God-given rights. Writers, authors, speakers, filmmakers, musicians, actors, and artists have all added their talents and abilities to the cause. People of every background, race, profession, and religion are joining together in a vast and powerful citizens' movement to rein in our out-of-control federal government and hold unruly politicians' feet to the fire.

The Tea Party movement is no flash in the pan. It is not a fad, and it is not temporary. It is American patriotism and citizenship on fire. And it will continue to grow in strength and influence because it is born of the American people, stoked by a love of country and fanned by a deep yearning for liberty.

As the movement grows, expect to hear the same dire predictions and "woe is me" coming from liberals, progressives, media outlets, and moderate Republican policymakers. Just as they did two years ago, they'll mourn the good old days when Republicans were known for their "bipartisanship" and willingness to compromise rather than their loyalty to the Constitution.

The socialist left and the Republican establishment have a lot to lose in this election. They may even join forces as they suddenly realize that they have much more in common with each other than either would have believed.

They both seek power. They both seek wealth and influence. Their primary motivation is self-preservation. And they share a common, dreaded adversary.

A Constitution-wielding American public.

Washington political elites resent the restrictions placed upon them by those pesky, fading documents housed at the National Archives. Those Charters of Freedom: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Sacred texts of the American people. American scripture.

They're an obstacle to change. A maddening inconvenience, and a thorn in the side for many politicians. Revisit the town hall meetings held across America in 2010. Remember the shock and awe as squirming politicians were held to account by their constituents and forced to constitutionally justify their actions? Remember the look of bewilderment? The palpable sense of fear? The contempt from some of the nation's most lauded legislators?

They still feel the same way.

They fear that 2010 could happen all over again.

And rightly so.

Today, the American people remain a powerful force. Citizens' voices have immense influence. Because of the Tea Party, a more mature and seasoned citizenry will make their presence known in the halls of Congress. Their voices will be heard loud and clear in the West Wing and beyond. In state houses and local governments. In national capitals the world over. And for a long time to come.

The Tea Party did not just have a "comeback" in Indiana. The fact is that they never left in the first place. They've been working. Watching and waiting for the chance to make their wishes known. They are eager. Excited. And dedicated to their cause. The cause of a free nation and a free people.

Politicians of both parties should take notice. To ignore the Tea Party is to tempt fate and to risk being thrown overboard, like former Senator Richard Lugar, and like those 342 crates -- some 45 tons -- of English tea floating in Boston Harbor on December 16, 1773.

In 1773, tea was America's drink. Not so today. Coffee has become America's caffeinated drink of choice. Whether it's a $5 latte or an old-fashioned cup o' joe, coffee is everywhere. Fast and convenient. Gulp and go.

Tea is a different thing altogether.

Tea is a beverage of calm. Of culture. It cannot be rushed. It takes time, heat, and patience to develop its full potential. The longer it steeps, the deeper, stronger, more complex, and more robust it becomes.

Tea just takes time.

America's most pivotal presidential election since 1860 is now less than six months away.

Not long at all.

But in the world of tea, that's a long time to steep.

Read more:

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.