in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000. NOTE: That is NOT
me pictured at left. :)
| WSJ | World: Europe Girds for Greek Exit |
0 |
| Shark Tank | Developing: Wasserman Schultz On Verge of Being Cancelled at Temple Israel |
0 |
| T’graph | 0 | |
| NYT | Policy: Romney Calls Education ‘Civil Rights Issue of Our Era’ and Urges Shift |
0 |
| RCP | Campaign 2012: Why Tuesday’s Democratic Primaries Matter |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Diplomacy":
"People are saying what in the world is going on with North Carolina, we look like Mississippi." - NC Gov. Bev Perdue (D) on the passage of Amendment One, 5-11-12
NIMBY: Country club liberals say “hell no” to proposed low-income housing in CA county
Via the NYT (hat tip: Leslie – bolded emphasis added by me):
SAN RAFAEL, Calif. — In 1978, a year after “Star Wars” was released, George Lucas began building his movie production company far from Hollywood, in the quiet hills and valley of Marin County here just north of San Francisco. Starting with Skywalker Ranch, the various pieces of Lucasfilm came together over the decades behind the large trees on his 6,100-acre property, invisible from the single two-lane road that snakes through the area.
And even as his fame grew, Mr. Lucas earned his neighbors’ respect through his discretion. Marin, one of America’s richest counties, liked it that way.
But after spending years and millions of dollars, Mr. Lucas abruptly canceled plans recently for the third, and most likely last, major expansion, citing community opposition. An emotional statement posted online said Lucasfilm would build instead in a place “that sees us as a creative asset, not as an evil empire.”
If the announcement took Marin by surprise, it was nothing compared with what came next. Mr. Lucas said he would sell the land to a developer to bring “low income housing” here.
“It’s inciting class warfare,” said Carolyn Lenert, head of the North San Rafael Coalition of Residents.
Mr. Lucas said in an e-mail that he only wanted “to do something good for Marin,” waving away accusations of ulterior motives.
“I’ve been surprised to see some people characterize this as vindictive,” he said, adding that there was a “real need” for affordable housing here. “I wouldn’t waste my time or money just to try and upset the neighbors.”
Whatever Mr. Lucas’s intentions, his announcement has unsettled a county whose famously liberal politics often sits uncomfortably with the issue of low-cost housing and where battles have been fought over such construction before. His proposal has pitted neighbor against neighbor, who, after failed peacemaking efforts over local artisanal cheese and wine, traded accusations in the local newspaper.
The staunchest opponents of Lucasfilm’s expansion are now being accused of driving away the filmmaker and opening the door to a low-income housing development. That has created an atmosphere that one opponent, who asked not to be identified, saying she feared for her safety, described as “sheer terror” and likened to “Syria.”
Carl Fricke, a board member of the Lucas Valley Estates Homeowners Association, which represents houses nearest to the Lucas property, said: “We got letters saying, ‘You guys are going to get what you deserve. You’re going to bring drug dealers, all this crime and lowlife in here.’ ”
For those of you who don’t know much about Marin County, CA – it’s political make-up is not just left leaning. It is dominated by liberals:
Marin County tended to vote Republican for most of the 20th century (from 1948 to 1980, the only Democrat to win there was Lyndon Johnson in 1964). However, the county has become a stronghold of the Democratic Party in recent decades. Out of California counties, only San Francisco County and Alameda County voted more Democratic in the 2008 Presidential election, all three counties voted more heavily for Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama than Cook County, Ill., Obama’s home county.
[...]
According to the California Secretary of State, as of January 5, 2010, Marin County has 148,723 registered voters, out of 181,918 eligible (81.75%). Of those, 81,589 (54.86%) are registered Democrats, 29,088 (19.56%) are registered Republicans, 6,141 (4.13%) are registered with other political parties, and 31,905 (21.45%) have declined to state a political party.
And the city of San Rafael:
San Rafael is a stronghold of the Democratic Party. As of January 5, 2010, there were 28,169 registered voters in San Rafael, of which 15,646 (55.54%) were Democrats, 5,516 (19.58%) were Republicans and 5,932 (21.06%) declined to state a political party.
Now, speaking from a non-political perspective, I can certainly understand their concerns about the possibility for crime escalation, not to mention property values taking a hit. But looking at this from the viewpoint of a conservative Republican who has – along other conservatives across this country – been slammed for years by bleeding heart liberal Democrats as turning our noses up at the poor, I have to laugh at all the drama going on in Marin County between Democrats over the very thought (horrors!) of low income housing being built in the liberal haven of San Rafael.
What happened to the spirit of “diversity” and ”peace, love and harmony”, anyway? 
Mayor @CoryBooker rescues himself before getting thrown under the Obama bus
Here’s how the Obama 2012 campaign treats honesty from one of its staunchest, visible, and popular supporters (hat tip):
In Washington, there’s an old cliche: A gaffe is when a politician is accidentally honest.
That’s what happened to Newark (N.J.) Mayor Cory Booker during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. Booker, who is widely regarded as a fast riser in Democratic politics, veered badly off message when he defended Bain Capital — the longtime employer of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney — and described the negative tone of the campaign as “nauseating”.
You can watch Booker’s performance for yourself here:
Not surprisingly, Republicans immediately seized on Booker’s comments as a way to push back on the attacks launched by President Obama’s campaign on Romney’s record in the private sector. The Republican National Committee quickly distributed the Booker comment to reporters via e-mail, Twitter and even Tumblr.
Meanwhile, Democrats scrambled to contain the damage.
Booker, one of the most tech- and social media-savvy politicians in the country — he has more than a million Twitter followers — posted a video on You Tube that attempted to re-frame his comments as broadly supportive of the president and said he “encouraged” Obama to make an issue out of Romney’s record at Bain.
Booker did, however, re-iterate his belief that the tone of the campaign was “nauseating” and “calls to our lowest common denominators.”
What Booker tweeted out Sunday afternoon was a nearly four-minute long video. But, as Politico’s Dylan Byers pointed out Sunday night, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt later tweeted out an edited, 35-second version that included only Booker’s comments on Romney. And, on Monday, the RNC launched an “I stand with Cory” online petition drive designed to keep the mayor’s comments in the news.
Given all of that, it’s pretty clear what happened here. The Obama team saw Booker equating attacks on Bain Capital with attacks on Rev. Jeremiah Wright — he said almost exactly those words — and knew they had a political mess to clean up.
You better believe it, which is why the so-called “hostage” video of Booker “clarifying” his remarks came out later …
In case you didn’t or don’t want to watch the video of Booker’s original remarks, here’s a brief transcript:
Earlier Sunday, on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press,’ Booker strongly criticized an Obama campaign ad that attacked presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s tenure at private-equity firm Bain Capital.
“This kind of stuff is nauseating to me on both sides,” Booker said.
“It’s nauseating to the American public. Enough is enough. Stop attacking private equity. Stop attacking Jeremiah Wright,” he added, also referring to a proposal floated and quickly rejected by a pro-GOP super-PAC to attack Obama over his connection to his controversial former pastor the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
On ‘Meet the Press,’ Booker went further, saying he would not “indict private equity.”
“It’s just we’re getting to a ridiculous point in America, especially that I know I live in a state where pension funds, unions and other people are investing in companies like Bain Capital. If you look at the totality of Bain Capital’s record, they’ve done a lot to support businesses, to grow businesses. And this to me, I’m very uncomfortable with.”
LOL! Preach it, Mayor Booker. The RNC and the Romney camp need to run Booker’s original comments in ads from now until November. Milk them for all they are worth. Here’s the ad the Romney campaign put up not long after Booker’s remarks. Heh.
As noted earlier, Booker is one of the higher profile Democrats to come out against the Obama campaign’s anti-capitalism strategy, but he’s not the only Democrat who has done so recently. Via ABC News:
Booker is not the only Democrat to question the aggressive, negative portrayal of Romney’s work in private equity. Former Tennessee Rep. Harold Ford Jr. said today he agreed with “the substance” of Booker’s comments and “would not have backed out.”
“I agree with him, private equity is not a bad thing. Matter of fact, private equity is a good thing in many, many instances,” the Democrat said in a separate appearance on MSNBC earlier in the day.
Former Obama administration economic adviser Steven Rattner made similar comments last week, calling a new Obama campaign TV ad attacking Romney’s role in the bankruptcy of a Bain-owned steel company “unfair.”
“Bain Capital’s responsibility was not to create 100,000 jobs or some other number. It was to create profits for its investors,” Rattner said. ”‘It did it superbly well, acting within the rules, acting very responsibly. … This is part of capitalism, this is part of life. I don’t think there’s anything Bain Capital did that they need to be embarrassed about.”
It’s very clear going into the 2012 general election campaign season that the Obama campaign is directly targeting what is considered Romney’s chief strength over our celebrity President: His business experience in the private sector. It’s both a bold and risky attack strategy, considering President Obama’s staggeringly awful record on the economy, but the administration is betting on an American electorate being too distracted with persistent day to day kitchen table issues to understand the dishonest, dangerous nature of such attacks on the free enterprise system. RomneyCo. needs to hammer this point home every single bleeping chance they get, because the attacks on Romney’s business record are going to be relentless (case in point).
And lastly, Ed Morrissey notes an interesting bit of hypocrisy regarding Team Obama’s attacks on Bain (bolded emphasis added by me):
Actually, I agree that Mitt Romney’s record at Bain is fair game in the presidential election — as long as we’re talking about Romney’s record. The first Bain attack ad talked about something that took place two years after Romney had already left, but during the tenure of a current Obama bundler who worked at Bain later. The same day that Team Obama launched the Bain attack, Obama held a fundraiser hosted by Tony James of Blackstone, another private-equity firm that occasionally partnered with Bain on projects.
The problem with these attacks is both accuracy and hypocrisy. Obama has no trouble raising money from private-equity firms (or perhaps he does have trouble doing so), but then demonizes and demagogues the private-equity industry. That’s what Booker found “nauseating” during his brief moment of candor, and what bothers Ford and everyone else.
Democrats. You can always depend on them to talk out of both sides of their mouths. Toldjah so. Again and again and again …
Update – 8:40 PM: And without fail, one of the more popular liberal blogs has a hit piece out with Booker’s ties to Bain. Like clockwork! Also – via Newsbusters: Furious Chris Matthews Explodes: Cory Booker ‘Betrayed’ and ‘Sabotaged’ Obama.
Democrats seeking to disenfranchise Arkansas voters, and PA in play?
**Posted by Phineas
A few days ago, I wrote about the possibility, albeit it an unlikely one, that President Obama could lose the Arkansas Democratic primary to a little-known challenger. Well, now it seems the Arkansas Democrats, with perhaps a little push from the DNC, are trying to tell angry Arkansans that their votes don’t count, if they’re the wrong votes:
After a poll released this week showed President Barack Obama only beating his Democratic primary opponent John Wolfe Jr. by seven points, 45 percent to 38 percent, in Arkansas’s Fourth Congressional District, state Democrats moved to practically disenfranchise Arkansas voters. “[D]elegates Wolfe might claim won’t be recognized at the national convention,” national party officials are telling state Democrats. Wolfe is being accused of not following the party rules.
“They want a coronation,” Wolfe tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD. “They’re conflating [Obama] with the party. Are we supposed to call him ‘Dear Leader’? Is this some kind of North Korea thing?”
Wolfe insists he’s done the due diligence to qualify for delegates and that the state party is making decisions ad hoc to get the results they desire. “This is ridiculous,” he says. “These guys are trying to tamp down voter enthusiasm.”
Bear in mind that this comes after Obama gave up 41% of the vote and ten counties to a federal prisoner in West Virginia, while, in North Carolina, he gave up 20% of the vote to “Mr. No Preference.” At Breitbart.com, John Nolte explains why the Democrats are so worried:
As I mentioned in my interview with Wolfe earlier this week, Wolfe’s story is one the media doesn’t want to tell. The Narrative is supposed to be about presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney having trouble consolidating his base, not the Democrat incumbent who is also the media’s chosen candidate.
If the exact same scenario were in play but with players who each had an “R” after their name as opposed to a “D,” I suspect the media would’ve done everything in their power to turn Wolfe into a folk hero by now in an effort to undermine the sitting Republican. Thus far, however, the media’s reaction to Wolfe has been one of almost total radio silence — a position that will be difficult to maintain should Wolfe achieve a respectable showing in a couple of days.
Nolte also points out that Wolfe is on the Texas primary ballot, and the DNC is worried that a good showing by him in Arkansas could lead to more embarrassment in the Lone Star State.
But it isn’t just in the South that Obama has problems, which Obama apologists will no doubt spin as “racism.” (Insert eye-roll as needed.) As I speculated in that same piece last week, the troubles in WV, NC, AR, and possibly TX could be adumbrations of real danger in Pennsylvania, where the Average White Guy/Jacksonian Democrat voter is none too happy right now.
Well, now we’re starting to get some confirmation. From Roll Call:
Pennsylvania is also well-known as a state with a large number of working-class whites, particularly in northeastern (Scranton, Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton, for example) and western Pennsylvania (Erie, Johnstown and Pittsburgh) — the kind of people one GOP strategist says “have their names on their shirts when they are at work.”
Candidate Obama had problems with those kinds of voters in 2008 — county-level data shows he did worse than Kerry in 2004 in a swath of counties running from southwestern Pennsylvania and West Virginia through extreme southwestern Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee, and into Arkansas and southeastern Oklahoma. If anything, he seems weaker in those areas this year.
These voters don’t have an automatic cultural connection to Obama (or to presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney), and the president’s recent announcement supporting same-sex marriage isn’t likely to be a plus with them. Jobs, of course, remain a big issue with these voters, and whatever hope they had that Obama would turn the economy around has almost certainly evaporated.
Potentially, Romney could outperform most national Republicans in the southeastern corner of the state, as he is a better “cultural fit” there, particularly in Philadelphia’s upscale suburbs (Montgomery, Bucks and Delaware counties).
(…)
Given these considerations, is there enough reason to include Pennsylvania in a short list of swing states? Not yet, for me. But there certainly is enough reason to treat Pennsylvania as a potential battleground and to continue to monitor the presidential numbers in the state.
There’s a lot more in this article, and Stuart Rothenberg is a very experienced analyst. Well-worth reading.
Meanwhile, if I were in the Obama campaign inner circle, I’d be very worried.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
Sunday Humor: American Crossroads on Obama – our “fourth greatest President” (VIDEO)
The video was done in response to our celebrity President’s insertion of himself and his “accomplishments” into several WH online presidential biographies. It was infuriating to read about that, but the video calls him out on it on a way that is both on-point and hilarious:
American Crossroads, a Karl Rove-affiliated Super PAC, has some other great parody videos of this administration and other Democrats here. Make sure to check them out.
AUDIO: NC high school teacher angrily lectures student on “disrespecting” Obama
Apparently, according to this pro-Obama teacher at North Rowan High School in North Carolina, not only were people “arrested for saying bad things about President Bush” but Mitt Romney does not deserve the same respect as President Obama in terms of how discussions on him should go … because he is not the President:
After criticizing Mitt Romney, a North Carolina high school teacher yelled at a student for asking a question about Barack Obama, telling him that he could be arrested for criticizing Barack Obama.
Sarah Campbell wrote at the Salisbury Post Saturday that the heated exchange began “with a classroom conversation about a recent news story detailing Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney allegedly bullying a classmate in prep school. It turns into a heated, sometimes confrontational debate.”
“Didn’t Obama bully someone though,” one student asked, referring to an incident in Obama’s memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” in which Obama admitted pushing a girl when other students called him her boyfriend.
“Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” the teacher said.
According to the teacher, Romney is “running for president,” and therefore does not deserve the same respect as Obama, who “is the president.”
“Listen, let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom,” she said.
She went on to tell the student that he “will not” say what he wants about Obama, and asserted that it was a crime to “slander” the President. The student responded by recalling that many spoke ill of George W. Bush while he was President, and such arrests would violate the Constitutional right to free speech.
The teacher asked: “Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush?”
But Michael Bitzer, a political science professor at Catawba College, told the Post he had “no idea” what the teacher was talking about when she claimed people “were arrested for saying bad things about Bush.”
[...]
Bitzer went on to say the student was more correct than the teacher.
“Her point about not being able to say anything ‘disrespectful’ about the president does fly in the face of the First Amendment, and while she may wish to enforce that edict about ‘respecting’ the president, the issue seems to have gotten personal on her part,” he added, saying that her attempt to make a point seems to have been overshadowed by her personal feelings toward Obama.
“Granted, she apparently tried to ensure that a respectful conversation was had about the president, but she seems to have taken things a bit too personally — and it appears the student was set on making a confrontation in the guise of raising a question about ‘who bullied who — both Romney and Obama’,” he wrote.
Bitzer said the teacher was a “bit overboard in being rude towards the student,” but added that the student “was also trying to pick a fight.”
The school system said it could not comment on the incident publicly, but said the social studies teacher – who was not identified – is still working for the district.
I listened to the audio. I think it’s pretty obvious the student was not “trying to pick a fight” nor was the teacher trying to encourage “respectful” conversation. It’s not very long into the audio after the student asks about Obama allegedly being a bully in response to the teacher’s assertion about the “Romney bullying” that the teacher gets extremely agitated and starts yelling about respecting the office of the Presidency, etc. From that point on, it was a test of wills and clearly the teacher was determined it would only be a one-sided discussion. Her voice sounds far off to start with, but around the 3:13 mark it sounds like she has walked directly up to the student to confront him about how he will not “disrespect the President” – when all he was doing was offering counterpoints to what she was asserting about Romney.
But hey, don’t take my word for it. Listen for yourself:
A shorter version of her point: I can and will be critical of Republican presidential nominees, but if you counter my criticisms with similar criticisms about President Obama, it is “disrespectful” and you can “get arrested for it.”
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard liberals assert that public school teachers should be allowed to discuss current events, including political events, in the classroom in an effort to assist students with the “critical thinking skills” they will need later on in life. The point is understandable, yet at the same time I’ve always pushed back on it because of my concern that the political leanings of the teachers, who I assume are mostly liberal Democrats, will eventually come out in some way. It’s pretty clear from this audio that not only is the teacher a liberal Democrat and strongly supportive of Obama, but that the only “critical thinking” going on in the “discussion” is her being highly annoyed of any thinking that includes believing you have the right to criticize the current President of the United States without fear of being verbally beat down by a teacher you should feel you should be able to trust, much less being “arrested” by the feds.
Sound familiar in this state? It should.
Bain vs. Bane
**Posted by Phineas
The Obama campaign, including their allies in the media, have tried their best to make Mitt Romney’s time at turnaround investment company Bain Capital a negative for him, portraying him as a heartless, greedy capitalist. (1)
The IBD’s Michael Ramirez parries those attacks with one simple cartoon that compare Romney’s record as a CEO to Obama’s as president:
(Click Michael’s name for a larger version)
As they say, ’nuff said.
And be sure to check out Michael’s archive at IBD; he’s the best conservative political cartoonist in the business these days and one of the best, ever.
Footnote:
(1) Sadly, some Republicans helped give them ammunition. And let’s not speak of Obama’s corporate donors and the rewards they get; that would be racist.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
#DNC2012 caught going against “we won’t take corporate donations” pledge
Via Charlotte TV station WSOC-TV:
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The Democratic Party vowed not to take any corporate donations for this year’s convention in Charlotte, but a special fundraising group is taking corporate dollars for the DNC.
Charlotte’s mayor is the president of the group.The host committee website makes the claim that it does not accept monetary contributions from corporations, but a nonprofit group called New American City is raking in corporate dollars.
According to the group’s filing with the Federal Elections Commission, the group was created a year ago and listed Anthony Foxx as its president.
Its listed purpose is to welcome attendees with receptions, tours and promotional materials. The filing also states it is charged with paying the salaries of host committee employees.
With a mandate from the party that limits individual contributions and outright bans contributions from corporations, is the DNC breaking its own rules by using money from New American City that has accepted donations from Charlotte companies including Duke Energy and Wells Fargo?
The DNC denies this breaks their pledge in any way, of course, but a local political expert believes differently:
But political expert Michael Bitzer said that’s a distinction that may be lost on voters.
“You made this promise this would be the people’s convention. Now you’re taking money to support auxiliary activities. Where is the difference?” Bitzer asked.
He added that the ban on corporate funding could be a short-lived experiment.
“I think they tied one arm behind their back they really didn’t intend to. And in four years, I think we will see, very quietly, corporations giving money back to the campaigns,” he said.
I should note for the record that there is no such pledge for the RNC2012.
The issue here isn’t that the DNC is doing anything illegal but rather how, once again, the party says one thing to “the people” but behind the scenes does another. And anyone who thinks this is just a “party” thing and not something Barack Obama himself would endorse, DON’T MAKE ME LAUGH. This guy – from day one of campaigning back in 2007/2008 – promised a campaign “for and by the people” and largely persuaded, in concert with a willing and complicit mainstream media, a majority of voters in America to put him into the White House based on that pledge. The word games he repeatedly played with terms like “lobbyists” were also a huge help. But it was a lie then, as I repeatedly pointed out during the 2008 primary and general election campaign seasons.
And IT IS A LIE TODAY.
The Obama campaign is going to spend a considerable amount of time trying to hit Mitt Romney on his flip flops and double-speaking during the course of the campaign. If Team Romney brings their A-Game to the general election - and I pray they do – they’ll creatively hit back suggesting the Obama campaign really doesn’t want to make the focus of the campaign an issue which Obama himself is just as guilty of as Mitt Romney – or perhaps even more so.
Read more about New American City and the conflicts it presents with the “official” DNC2012 pledge at The Charlotte Business Journal, and the Wall Street Journal – which first reported on New American City late last week.
Joe Biden: The gift that keeps on giving – PLUS: Obama’s NC problem
Gotta love this guy:
Vice President Biden said he understood the frustration that led many West Virginia Democrats to vote for a felon over President Obama in the state’s presidential primary.
Asked what he made of a felon sitting in a Texas prison who won four out of 10 Democratic primary voters in West Virginia, Biden told Ohio television station WTOV that he doesn’t blame people who are frustrated and angry over the economy.
[...]
Biden said a lot of Americans are still hurting because of the recession the Obama administration inherited.
“And so I don’t blame people. They’re frustrated, they’re angry,” Biden said.
He added that Americans would eventually decide that the path back to employment and prosperity would lead them to Obama’s approach rather than Mitt Romney’s.
Here’s video of the interview:
Maybe Americans in other states will ultimately turn to Barack Obama in November but not West Virginia. I mean, seriously, you’ve got more problems than just the economy when four in ten Democrat voters in a state primary pick a convicted felon over you. And West Virginia isn’t the only state Obama’s having issues with in terms of primary voters, as my co-blogger recently noted. And as far as the general election goes, Obama’s already running into problems in North Carolina – the state he won (and flipped) in 2008 by the smallest margin of those in which he was victorious (14,000 votes). The problems he’s run into here are so glaring as to have some suggest picking Charlotte for the DNC as part of a strategic goal might have been a big mistake for the Obama campaign. Jay Cost writes:
For starters, you win the presidency with 270 electoral votes. If you rank Obama’s 2008 statewide victories from biggest to smallest, and take into account the changes to the Electoral College because of the latest census, North Carolina provided the 344th electoral vote for Obama–meaning, it was just gravy. The state that put him over the top was actually Colorado, and Iowa was a close second in that regard.
So if he was looking to hold a minimum of 270 electoral votes by using 2008 results as his baseline, either of those two states would have been better than North Carolina. In fact, any other state that he won in 2008 would have been better. His margin in North Carolina was just 0.32 percent, smaller than his margin of victory even in Indiana, smaller even than his margin of victory in Nebraska’s Second Congressional District.
Worse, putting the convention in Charlotte frustrates multiple clients of the Democratic party. The gay marriage ballot initiative in North Carolina is only one such example, which obviously aggravates high-profile gay donors to Obama-Biden. But also problematic is that North Carolina is a right to work state and the unions are having a hard time swallowing that one.
If polling numbers in this state are any indication of things to come, Obama’s in for another battle in North Carolina come fall. His chances of winning here, as they did in 2008, will rely heavily on black voter turn out. Here in North Carolina, black voter turnout in 2008 was 6% higher than it had been in previous presidential election years. As I’ve said before, if he loses even one or two percent of the black vote that came out for him in 2008 – and he very well could as a result of his “coming out” in support of gay marriage, that will make the battle for NC even tougher for him.
Ultimately, though, people in this state – as they will in all others – will vote based largely on the economy, and privately some Democrat strategists are worried about the polling numbers from independents in several key states who look to be turning towards Romney on the issue of the economy:
One senior North Carolina Democrat, who insisted on anonymity because of involvement in multiple statewide and legislative campaigns, said private polling in a variety of state races shows that white voters and independents are trending toward Republicans in an alarming way.
“The biggest thing Obama has got to overcome here is his problems with white independent voters, those middle-of-the-road voters,” the Democrat said. “If he doesn’t, we are going to get our asses whipped like I have never seen in my 20 years of doing politics.”
The Democrat predicted a “bloodbath” for the party in November if those numbers fail to tighten.
Holding the convention in Charlotte, this person said, might make for an exciting week but will do little to push the state in Obama’s direction: “I’m glad that it’s here for sheer state pride, but is it going to make much difference at Wilber’s Barbecue in Goldsboro?”
As they say, stay tuned ….
(Videos) 23 million out of work
**Posted by Phineas
The Romney campaign has a new series of videos focusing on the 23,000,000 Americans out of work. I think they’re both pretty good:
While the video is way too long for TV, it can easily be edited into 30-second spots. Bonus points to anyone who noticed the tombstone in the graveyard shot with the name “CARTER” on it. Well played, Romney-ites. Well-played. 
Next…
This one reminds the viewers of the non-union workers at auto-parts maker Delphi who were screwed out of much of their pensions by Barack Obama in the GM and Chrysler bailouts, so he could pay off his UAW benefactors. This one still galls me. Expect it to get a lot of play in Ohio.
Overall, these videos represent good strategy: while people on the outside of the campaign, from super-PACs to bloggers, engage in direct fights against the Obama campaign’s latest attempts at distraction via class and cultural warfare, Team Romney stays focused like a laser on the economy, the one thing Obama does not want to talk about.
And with 23 million Americans out of work (and so many giving up on finding any), you can bet Romney will have plenty more stories to tell between now and election day.
PS: Romney 2012.
PPS: Did you know Obama made “old Mexican ladies” cry in college? (Just a little push-back on the “Romney was a bully” attempted distraction.)
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
Another reason to dig ABC News’ @JakeTapper
Great story via Yahoo’s The Ticket:
Jimmy Kimmel delivered a barrage of edgy jokes at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner (WHCD) late last month in Washington. But after consulting with ABC News senior White House correspondent Jake Tapper, Kimmel decided several were too over-the-top to make the cut.
“I had some jokes about Rick Santorum,” Kimmel told Howard Stern in an interview on Sirius radio. “I said something like—well, I didn’t say it, but, ‘Newt Gingrich’s campaign is so dead Mitt Romney wants to baptize it and Rick Santorum wants to put it in a jar and show it to his kids.’ People went, ‘Uh-oh.’ I ran it by people who go to this thing.” (The joke made reference to the Santorums’ decision to bring their dead baby son home following a miscarriage.)
“Who do you run it by?” Stern asked, according to the transcript published on Romenesko.com.
“There’s a guy named Jake Tapper at ABC News,” Kimmel said. “I ran jokes by him. He’s been there a lot of times,” the comedian said, referring to the annual event.
“I tried to help Jimmy with the temperature of the room,” Tapper wrote in an email to Yahoo News. “And yes, I thought that joke would cause the room to turn against him, perhaps even causing a stampede, with the Hilton getting in on the tar and feather concession. Seeking to spare him a Rich Little-like reception, I offered my suggestions—such as they are—as to which jokes might bomb.”
I don’t know much about Kimmel, but even with that it surprises me he would consider putting the Santorum “joke” in his WHCD routine. In fact, it surprises me that ANY quality comedian would even consider it. I figure most seasoned comedians have lines even they wouldn’t cross during the course of their comedy acts – and “jokes” about someone’s deceased baby most definitely meet that “do not cross this line” qualification.
Hats off to Jake Tapper, who not only does what few veteran DC journalists do by way of keeping this administration accountable for its words and actions, but who also knows how to keep wayward comedians from straying too far out of bounds. Next thing you know, we’ll find out Jake rescues stray puppies and kittens in his spare time. (Hah!)
