Category: 2012 election

  • Howard Dean; still crazy after all of these years

    Rock8 sends us this quote from Howard “The Scream” Dean who the Democrats have made their chairman of the Democrat National Committee. Anyway, says Howard about the President “This is the guy who killed Osama bin Laden. I think he can probably stand up to Mitt Romney.

    And then they wonder why the folks at Special Operations Speaks are so upset. They wonder why a SEAL publishes his book without getting edited by the Department of Defense.

    They’ll take credit for bin Laden’s death, but they’ll avoid taking responsibility for deaths of the former SEALs and an ambassador in Benghazi. They can’t even admit that it was a terrorist attack.

    I guess we should only be counting the “wins” and ignore the losses.

  • Allen West’s campaign commercials

    Poetrooper sends us link to the latest Allen West commercials;

    I almost wish I lived in Florida just to vote for him.

    And this is how the Murphy campaign responds in the Palm Beach Post;

    Murphy’s campaign responded by bringing up the 2003 incident in Iraq in which then-Lt. Col. West fired a gun near the head of an Iraqi detainee during an interrogation. Military prosecutors charged West with assault and he potentially faced 11 years in prison and dishonorable discharge. After a military hearing, he was fined $5,000 and allowed to retire as a lieutenant colonel with a full pension.

    “Allen West is shamelessly attacking Patrick Murphy for a mistake he made as a teenager, which he has discussed at length in the media as a mistake he learned from. West then goes on to discuss his tenure in the military in 2003 while failing to acknowledge that he was criminally charged that year for assault and violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice,” said Murphy for Congress communications director Erin Moffet. “The only reason he was able to escape prosecution is because he cut a deal to retire. Unfortunately, West’s unstable behavior has continued in Congress, and he continues to diminish the office and the people to which he serves.”

    Oh, I see, Murphy avoiding prosecution for his crimes nine years ago are different from West avoiding prosecution. That makes perfect sense. To a pretty-boy spoiled brat who avoided military service, I guess.

  • The phone lady thing

    Yes, a couple of you sent us the video of the woman near Cleveland who told the interviewer that she was voting for Obama because he got her a free phone. I’m sure you’ve seen the video, but here it is if you haven’t. You’ll want to turn your speakers down because she’s pretty enthusiastic about her phone;

    Well, the Left of course, is quick to defend the free phone program. Think Progress blames Bush (of course) and then doubles down with the lie that the phones are provided without tax payer support;

    Since 2009, there has been an urban myth that Obama created a program to provide free phones to low-income Americans at taxpayer expense. There is, in fact, a government program that will provide low-income people with a free or low cost cell phone. It was started in 2008 under George W. Bush.

    The idea of providing low-income individuals with subsidized phone service was originated in the Reagan administration following the break-up of AT&T in 1984. (It was expanded and formalized by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.) The program is paid for by telecommunications companies through an independent non-profit, not through tax revenue.

    Well, the Washington Examiner takes a closer look at the program, and if it’s not taxpayer supported, then why are members of Congress offering cuts to the program?

    In 2008 the program cost $772 million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion.

    A 2011 audit found that 269,000 wireless Lifeline subscribers were receiving free phones and monthly service from two or more carriers. Several websites have been created to promote “free” government cell phones, including the”The Obama Cell Phone” website at Obamaphone.net.

    Rep. Tim Griffin R-Ark. has proposed a bill to eliminate federal subsidies for free cell phones and has produced a great YouTube video highlighting the runaway cost of the program. The program has also been highlighted for reform by Senator Claire McCaskill D-Mo.

    My question to Old Trooper who sent us the link early yesterday was “Why does she need a phone at all?” If she’s out protesting Romney in the middle of the day, she obviously doesn’t have a job. People without jobs don’t need phones, unless they’re looking for work. She doesn’t seem to be burdened by that particular problem.

    Unless, of course, protesting Romney is her job, because apparently SEIU was paying protesters $11/hour for that service at that particular event;

  • If You Know Anyone Overseas Who Plans to Vote . .

    . . . you might want to tell them to check directly with their state of residence regarding absentee voting deadlines.  Or you might offer to check for them, if they’re somewhere that has poor Internet connectivity.

    Why?  Apparently the Federal Voter Assistance Program site, www.fvap.gov, doesn’t always exactly get things right.

    That was probably an isolated instance of someone having a brain cramp. But I’d still recommend checking directly with the state to be sure.

  • Soltz on that Politico article about veterans

    Yesterday we talked about a Politico article which said that veterans aren’t supporting Obama, something we already knew. But VoteVets’ Jon Soltz couldn’t let it go by without jumping the rest of the way into the bag for Obama. Apparently Soltz was upset because he spent 45 minutes interviewing with the author of the article and nothing he said was included in the piece. I’m guessing it’s because nothing Soltz said was credible. SO he lays out his case in the Huffington Post.

    After parroting the party line about how much Obama has done for veterans by trying to push us all into the VA care system and away from Tricare, he tells us how we shouldn’t believe our lyin’ eyes;

    These are issues that military troops, veterans, and their families care deeply about. While those numbers don’t break down veterans, I find it extremely hard to believe that the veterans community is so wildly out of line with the American public, at large, that they’re flooding over to Mitt Romney, as the Politico article would have you believe.

    Here’s my point. The “polling” of veterans is incredibly inconsistent and unreliable. It’s impossible to use any existing polls to show definitive veteran support for President Obama or Mitt Romney. The best we can do is guess where President Obama started with veterans, and presume veterans’ opinions don’t move in complete and utter contrast to the rest of the population. But guessing isn’t good enough to write a story on.

    So, the “polling” of veterans can’t be trusted, but just by Soltz telling us something with nothing to support him, we should just believe it. And guessing isn’t good enough for Politico, but it is for Soltz.

    Yeah, I’m starting to understand why the Politico writer didn’t include anything Soltz said in the interview in his article. It’s pure diversion based on Soltz’ feelings. I’m sure there are writers at Politico who might copy and paste Soltz’ fantasies, but luckily this wasn’t one of them.

    Thanks to Daniel for the link.

  • Senators call for Obama to return to DC and talk defense cuts

    Three Republican Senators, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John McCain of Arizona called for President Obama to return to Washington and join the discussion of the impending defense and national security cuts, according to the Washington Times;

    “We understand there’s an election going on, but the defense of our nation and the security of our country can’t wait for an election,” said Mrs. Ayotte. “We are willing to go to Washington now to resolve this, and I would hope that he would lead an effort now to resolve this, because it’s too important. It’s not about either party, it’s about making sure that our country is safe.”

    “The president of the United States was able to go on ‘The View,’ but he couldn’t meet with various world leaders today,” Mr. McCain said. “The president of the United States was in Las Vegas and also here in Colorado, and he was unable to find time in his schedule to meet with our closest ally in the Middle East, the prime minister of Israel.”

    Yeah, I’m pretty sure the President doesn’t need to be there to express his thoughts on the defense cuts. He’s been pretty clear on the fact that he wants defense on the cheap, whether it works or not.

  • Nader: Bush was stupid, but Obama is a war criminal

    I’ve always thought Ralph Nader was flaky, but today he does an interview with Politico which proves it. He gives George W Bush a pass on his “war-mongering” because Nader claims he was he was ignorant, but because Obama taught the Constitution, he should know better;

    “He’s gone beyond George W. Bush in drones, for example. He thinks the world is his plate, that national sovereignties mean nothing, drones can go anywhere. They can kill anybody that he suspects and every Tuesday he makes the call on who lives and who dies, supposed suspects in places like Yemen and Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that is a war crime and he ought to be held to account.”

    Nader called Obama “below average because he raised expectation levels. What expectation level did George W. Bush raise?… He’s below average because he’s above average in his intellect and his knowledge of legality, which is violating with abandon.”

    But, apparently a war criminal for president is better than the alternative;

    He’s the lesser of two evils when compared to GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. But he said Obama is “the more effective evil because he brings credibility, he brings the democratic heritage to it, he has legitimized the lawless war-mongering and militarism abroad of George W. Bush.”

    He’s the lesser of two evils because Romney represents the rich, plundering Wall Street types;

    As for Romney, Nader said “he’s not the old Romney, governor of Massachusetts. He’s had a character and personality makeover. He’s just bought into the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, represented by Paul Ryan, and I don’t think he’s going to be able to shake that. He’s basically a corporation running for president masquerading as a human being.”

    If Romney is from the “extreme right”, I’d hate to think how Nader would characterize me.

    The good news coming out of the interview is that Nader says he might be through with his quadrennial runs at the White House. I’m sure that’s a terrible blow to his supporter.

  • We Didn’t Leave AARP… AARP Left Us

    The report of the AARP convention booing Paul Ryan the other day made me just shake my head and smile wryly at fools who’d boo the man trying to save their bacon while they remain content to blindly follow a leftist leadership that has sold its organizational soul to liberal orthodoxy. Like millions of Americans I received my courtesy membership to AARP upon nearing fifty, some two decades ago. At the time, this free milestone membership, available to all Americans of that age, was the source of much merriment among such new members’ younger friends and colleagues. But membership did offer benefits, among them, a free monthly magazine, which back then was a rather colorless, stodgy production full of unappealing ads for drugs, insurance and esoteric health aids we new readers hoped we’d never need.

    That bland format began to change during the 1990’s to a much slicker, more professionally produced publication featuring more bright colors and dynamic graphics; it was easy to see that the AARP magazine had been taken over by an entirely new journalistic crew. Such changes would have been welcome were it not for the fact that they accompanied a change in content, from the usual, relatively neutral advice to seniors on issues that were pertinent to their specific demographic, to political advocacy regarding larger social issues that reflected a decidedly leftist sympathy. I thought of them as Newsweek in a wheelchair.

    Initially, conservative readers had to wonder if the AARP board had allowed a bunch of liberal journalists to hijack their periodical, but as time passed it became increasingly apparent that the entire organization had performed a major sidestep left. As with leftist infiltration everywhere, the takeover was implemented at a measured but unrelenting pace, but to any AARP member holding conservative political views, and there were then millions and still some remaining, the coup was obviously complete by the time of the 2008 presidential election. The organization we had foolishly believed to be representing the interests of all seniors, was by then representing only those seniors who subscribed to the increasingly politically correct views of AARP’s leadership and their masters, the Democrat Party.

    Just as we had to do with TIME, Newsweek, National Geographic, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and the Democrat Party, many conservative seniors had to accept the reality that AARP no longer made even token efforts to represent their views. Just like all those others, AARP had left us, without our having changed a thing. Those of us who realized this early were not lone voices in that hoary wilderness for long; more and more conservative seniors were waking up to the fact that they were dues-paying members of a huge, leftist, lobbying organization that was using its significant heft in Washington to push legislation not in their best interests, most specifically, Obamacare. It was AARP’s strong advocacy of that legislative monstrosity that awakened many seniors to the fact they had been sold down the river by their benevolent old buddy, AARP. Those seniors began departing in droves. Other organizations quickly came into being to provide similar services to these disaffected seniors.

    Now we learn from Kim Strassel in an article at the Wall Street Journal, that AARP was not just sympathetic to the Democrat effort to ram through universal health care legislation, it was doing much of the pushing and shoving to force this bloated atrocity through the knothole in the legislative fence. Even more disturbing is that AARP was clearly getting its marching orders directly from the White House, a fact revealed by emails just released by a congressional committee. From the WSJ article:

    The emails overall show an AARP leadership—Policy Chief John Rother, Health Policy Director Nora Super, Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond, Senior Vice President David Sloane—that from the start worked to pass ObamaCare, before crucial details pertaining to seniors had been addressed. This crew was in constant contact with Mr. Obama’s top aides, in particular Nancy-Ann DeParle and Jim Messina.

    Clearly, AARP was not advocating independently for seniors but for the Obama White House and the Democrat Congress. The emails show AARP was collaborating also with big labor leadership in this effort as well. A sellout of such huge significance should cause remaining conservative AARP members to question their continued affiliation with an obvious tool of the Democrat Party and Big Labor.

    For those reading this who retain your AARP membership solely because of their Medi-Gap insurance coverage, be advised, there are many alternatives and the AARP programs may not be the best available to you either cost-wise or benefit-wise. Shop around. You can join other senior advocacy organizations for senior discounts or simply ask for them individually. If a business offers only an AARP discount to seniors and not a broader senior discount, point out to management that they are discouraging your patronage and probably that of a significant sector of their business. And don’t be shy about it because they will listen.

    For example, I recently sent a certified letter to the CEO of a major hotel corporation pointing out that to qualify for a senior discount at a his hotels one must produce proof of AARP membership, while at Marriott, the other chain I use most frequently, any senior qualifies. That discrepancy results in my staying with Marriott far more often than with his chain. In this letter, I pointed out the dissatisfaction of many seniors with AARP and how his corporate policy could be driving away business, just as in my own case. He never responded so I have no certainty it was my letter that provided the impetus, but within a month his chain’s website began posting a senior discount separate from the AARP discount. Their IT people still don’t have the kinks worked out on the booking process but at least they’re moving in the right direction. The point is, many big corporations may not be aware of how disaffected so many senior Americans are with AARP and need wake-up calls and/or certified letters.
    As so many Republicans like to say, myself among them, we didn’t leave the Democrat Party, the party left us. The same can be said for AARP. Let them live with the results

    Crossposted at American Thinker